Levels seperate how long a character has been playing, nothing else really. So by making it easier(read: More Fun) to get to the max level GW2 will have to offer different ways to show who's put in the most effort. Becuase ultimately thats what most players want - recognition for their time (and for being OMWAWESOME!!! yadda yadda)
It'll be interesting to see how they work gear into the game, seeing as low level gear will be obsolete quickly and a high number of players will be wanting the same max level equipment....
This is the type of backwater thinking that needs to be crushed A.S.A.P.! Why do we need to stroke egos in a 1up fashion? I grow tired of thinking of my fellow gamer as a rival (friendly or not). What I want is a group of companions that are as unique as the people playing them. I want rangers that look completely different, yet are equally skilled. I want healers and warriors that base their appearrance on how their characters make them feel, not what their gear dictates.
This was touched on by someone earlier that mentioned how GW1's gear was mostly superficial and runes gave gear it's usefulness. I hope they continue this tradition in GW2. Role playing is what gives a gaming world it's charm. When I watch any fantasy movie I love the look of each of the characters. I don't have to have a costume change every 20 minutes. When you think of characters like Darth Vader, Indiana Jones, Batman, Gandalf or Drizzt do'urden you get an idea in your head of how these characters look and form a clear picture of how they act or what they are like.
This uniqueness is what draws us to wanting to learn more about them. This is what we need more of in MMORPGs. We need players to grow more attached to their avatars because their avatars are a manifestation of their desire to make deep, rich, thoughtful characters to populate these worlds. Inside and out.
NOW THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKIN ABOUT!!! Well said friend! Put the RPG back in the MMORPG!!! And by RPG I don't mean just playing the role, I mean immersion, story, imact, and the impact our characters have on the story!
Cause guess what kiddies, when Cataclysm launches....the Lich King...will still be there....in ICC...waiting for all the people to famr him more so then they do now....just like Illidan, even though the Lich King should trully be dead, and the new one crowned should take over and be a compeltely different encounter, for all of ICC, but will that happen????? No....
Originally posted by ZeroxinIf you played GW1 you would know that any level can wear any gear and all that remains after that is if you have enough money to purchase the gear as well as buying runes to raise your armour stats. And once you hit a certain pace, you will almost always have money to improve your gear. The thing you should remember is gear in general is aesthetic (at least in GW1) with only a minor buff to some damage types, it is how you fit your runes that make your gear what it is.
That's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it but you might have mistakenly left out reality. And by that I mean take a look at anything in our modern culture that is considered the most "High End" material posessions. They're ALWAYS an Aesthetic or a piece of rare "Art". Guildwars embraced this at every level and made its focus about owning Scenery to the point it trumped customization which in a game where even your skills could be respec'd & switched on the fly, is really saying something.
Originally posted by sadeyx
Leveling in guildwars was never a grind in the first place. But you can bet your ass they put in hundreds of other grinds in.
This is a lot more realistic expectation and I agree with it.
Originally posted by Aganazer
OMG a game on the interweb has hype! I'll go ahead and estimate that the odds of GW2 living up to the hype and expectations to be exactly 0.0%.
*COUGH* ...sort by Rating... It, and its 2 other chapters are still in the top 20, above EQ and WoW I'll point out... on a site it has absolutely no business even being on b/c it was always categorized as a CoRPG or whatever, not a MMORPG. It sold 6 million. How many studios do you know that sold 6 million copies on their first release? If anything, I'd say their attempts to call its Sequel a true MMORPG without any of the old mechanics that define an MMORPG (forced grouping / healers / level equaliing dedication / gear equaling power) is the biggest thing deflating its Hype level b/c so many MMORPG players just don't want something that different. They just don't...
It is like my first post here, I am owner of a Brazilian MMORPG Blog O Meu Game (omeugame.com.br). As a great enthusiast of GW2 it is wonderful that someone finally decided to left grid aside. While you are griding you lose too much that on a game where you could spend it in other actions inside it like raiding, pvping or what else.
In my site I have wrote and article about "How would be my MMO" and inside it I would even take away the level system to change it by a system where you have to complete tasks to unlock new skills and attributes to your character. Originally it is in Portuguese, but I used Google Translator to make an English Version available to you all. You can check it if you want.
The maximum character level has been increased to 80 lvl, however the developers emphasize they wish "to avoid forcing players into the grind-based gameplay that too often accompanies a high level cap."
I hope they realize the amount of ambitious hype they are spreading by saying things like what's in the article. I obviously don't know because I haven't seen it, but I think it's a bad idea to say they are going to make it fun for everyone from moment-to-moment. That's like saying they just discovered what everyone considers 'fun' and they're using this secret power to uncover the lost Atlantis of video games.
I have no doubt it will be a good game to a lot of people that liked the first. I just think it's hyping it way too much to say it's going to revolutionize the industry by overcoming the grindy feel of other MMOs. My guess is it will just feel less like an MMO and be classified as something in between genres kinda like the heavy instancing did to the first one. i.e. Multiplayer action RPG instead, but we'll see soon enough. Either way, I'm going to buy it and play it so don't think I'm hating on it. I'm just not a fan of too much hype pre-release. I think that does more harm then good.
I'm also a big fan of games with a grind - not even being sarcastic lol. Ultima Online and Lineage 2 are probably my favorite MMOs so far from the industry - both total grinds with very minimum distraction or quests. As an earlier poster said, it's a type of achievement to overcome it with patience and perseverance. Unlike that poster however, I'm not saying anyone that doesn't like that grind is impatient or lazy. It's only what I personally get from that type of difficulty that causes me to enjoy it, unlike other people's preferences or idea of a challenge. So if GW2 does away with that as a factor, I'm sure I'll stick with another MMO on the side like L2, Aion, UO, etc. that still offers a grind to overcome.
Gotta say, I have my doubts, but I do like their focus. If there's a trial, I just might pick this up.
It's GW there won't be a trial. The game doesn't have a subscription fee so the free trial is meaningless. They probably will have at some point where players can invite friends to play for a period then if they like they can buy the game but I doubt they will have the typical 14day trial like P2P games.
"You think this "A" stands for France?" Captain America
Gotta say, I have my doubts, but I do like their focus. If there's a trial, I just might pick this up.
It's GW there won't be a trial. The game doesn't have a subscription fee so the free trial is meaningless. They probably will have at some point where players can invite friends to play for a period then if they like they can buy the game but I doubt they will have the typical 14day trial like P2P games.
Guild Wars Trilogy had a trial disc sold at most retailers. I think it's very likely they will do the same with GW2.
Edit: Actually, it might have been just Prophecies. I forget what version it was, but they definitely had a trial disc out for awhile.
I just do not understand the people saying the having a short levelling curve is going to mean an easy game, or a game with no content. I feel like they either are not reading what ArenaNet is posting, they do not understand the information, or they have been brainwashed by years of games with massive grinds.
The challenge of a game lies in the difficulty of each individual encounter, not in how long it takes for you to reach the maximum level, or achieve some arbitrary goal of number of kills of <whatever>. The challenge lies in difficult strategies and complex encounters, not in trinity-style tank and spanks. The challenge lies in the attempt to achieve a difficult goal, not in being punished by failing with a loss of items or experience.
Perhaps this game is not for you, but if you think it is going to be easy because it does not have a massive level grind, the holy trinity of roles, or a harsh death penalty, I assert that you do not understand the meaning of the words difficult and easy.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I just do not understand the people saying the having a short levelling curve is going to mean an easy game, or a game with no content. I feel like they either are not reading what ArenaNet is posting, they do not understand the information, or they have been brainwashed by years of games with massive grinds.
The challenge of a game lies in the difficulty of each individual encounter, not in how long it takes for you to reach the maximum level, or achieve some arbitrary goal of number of kills of . The challenge lies in difficult strategies and complex encounters, not in trinity-style tank and spanks. The challenge lies in the attempt to achieve a difficult goal, not in being punished by failing with a loss of items or experience.
Perhaps this game is not for you, but if you think it is going to be easy because it does not have a massive level grind, the holy trinity of roles, or a harsh death penalty, I assert that you do not understand the meaning of the words difficult and easy.
As I mentioned in my post, people define challenge and fun differently. You're falling in to the common mistake of thinking everyone should have the same definition, otherwise people that don't agree with your idea of fun or challenging must not understand the correct definition. Knowing the meaning of the words has nothing to do with it. Knowing what those words mean to you is everything. Both sides of the coin can argue about it but it's really irrelevant because both sides can be right about what it means to them, and I happen to like a grind as a form of challenge. You don't. There is no argument there. Guild Wars 2 can still be a good game to both of us though, in different ways.
I have searched the forums and posts from Arena Net, and I can't seem to find the answer to this question anywhere:
How do the dynamic events respond to a grouping situation wherein not all of the group members have followed the same path during the game?
For instance, if I decide to help a village, and my friend decides not to help the same village, when we group, will the village be intact because I helped them, or destryed, because my group-mate didn't help them?
Originally posted by Dubhlaith I just do not understand the people saying the having a short levelling curve is going to mean an easy game, or a game with no content. I feel like they either are not reading what ArenaNet is posting, they do not understand the information, or they have been brainwashed by years of games with massive grinds. The challenge of a game lies in the difficulty of each individual encounter, not in how long it takes for you to reach the maximum level, or achieve some arbitrary goal of number of kills of . The challenge lies in difficult strategies and complex encounters, not in trinity-style tank and spanks. The challenge lies in the attempt to achieve a difficult goal, not in being punished by failing with a loss of items or experience. Perhaps this game is not for you, but if you think it is going to be easy because it does not have a massive level grind, the holy trinity of roles, or a harsh death penalty, I assert that you do not understand the meaning of the words difficult and easy.
As I mentioned in my post, people define challenge and fun differently. You're falling in to the common mistake of thinking everyone should have the same definition, otherwise people that don't agree with your idea of fun or challenging must not understand the correct definition. Knowing the meaning of the words has nothing to do with it. Knowing what those words mean to you is everything. Both sides of the coin can argue about it but it's really irrelevant because both sides can be right about what it means to them, and I happen to like a grind as a form of challenge. You don't. There is no argument there. Guild Wars 2 can still be a good game to both of us though, in different ways.
I said nothing about whether this game will be fun for others or not; that is up to them to decide when and if they play it (i.e., we should not be deciding now, whatever we think), but you do not get to decide what words mean.
Difficult already has a meaning, and it is not "time-consuming." "Time-consuming" already means that. "Difficult" means something else. That is why we have different words: to express different ideas. Words have meaning in languages, and you do not get to decide what they mean "to you." That is ridiculous. If that were the case, the inherent trappings of communication would fall apart. If that were the case, you would not be able to accurately determine what I am saying to you right now.
If you like for your games to be time-consuming that is fine. This game may not be for you. But do not make the mistake of equating that with difficult. For example, I could (in theory, not practice) design a game in which you have to kill 1,000,000,000,000 mobs to ready max level. And each of these mobs would require only a small effort on your part, and unless you were fighting dozens at once, they would require no skill or effort on your part. The game I have just described would be time-consuming, but not difficult.
I am not saying this game will be difficult. That will be determined by the monsters in the world, and how hard they are to kill, among other things. What Anet has said is that it will not be time-consuming.
Please, if this does not appeal to you, say so, but do not use words to express ideas that those words do not actually express.
EDIT:
The point of this post is not to be confused with subjectivity. Difficult is a subjective concept, and therefore what I think is difficult, you may see as easy, and vice versa. That is not the same thing as misappropriating the meaning of the word.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I have searched the forums and posts from Arena Net, and I can't seem to find the answer to this question anywhere:
How do the dynamic events respond to a grouping situation wherein not all of the group members have followed the same path during the game?
For instance, if I decide to help a village, and my friend decides not to help the same village, when we group, will the village be intact because I helped them, or destryed, because my group-mate didn't help them?
I thought I remember reading somewhere that you can choose to port yourself to the leader of the group's current location, in their version of the world, but I might be confusing that with another MMO.
I just do not understand the people saying the having a short levelling curve is going to mean an easy game, or a game with no content. I feel like they either are not reading what ArenaNet is posting, they do not understand the information, or they have been brainwashed by years of games with massive grinds.
The challenge of a game lies in the difficulty of each individual encounter, not in how long it takes for you to reach the maximum level, or achieve some arbitrary goal of number of kills of . The challenge lies in difficult strategies and complex encounters, not in trinity-style tank and spanks. The challenge lies in the attempt to achieve a difficult goal, not in being punished by failing with a loss of items or experience.
Perhaps this game is not for you, but if you think it is going to be easy because it does not have a massive level grind, the holy trinity of roles, or a harsh death penalty, I assert that you do not understand the meaning of the words difficult and easy.
As I mentioned in my post, people define challenge and fun differently. You're falling in to the common mistake of thinking everyone should have the same definition, otherwise people that don't agree with your idea of fun or challenging must not understand the correct definition. Knowing the meaning of the words has nothing to do with it. Knowing what those words mean to you is everything. Both sides of the coin can argue about it but it's really irrelevant because both sides can be right about what it means to them, and I happen to like a grind as a form of challenge. You don't. There is no argument there. Guild Wars 2 can still be a good game to both of us though, in different ways.
I said nothing about whether this game will be fun for others or not; that is up to them to decide when and if they play it (i.e., we should not be deciding now, whatever we think), but you do not get to decide what words mean.
Difficult already has a meaning, and it is not "time-consuming." "Time-consuming" already means that. "Difficult" means something else. That is why we have different words: to express different ideas. Words have meaning in languages, and you do not get to decide what they mean "to you." That is ridiculous. If that were the case, the inherent trappings of communication would fall apart. If that were the case, you would not be able to accurately determine what I am saying to you right now.
If you like for your games to be time-consuming that is fine. This game may not be for you. But do not make the mistake of equating that with difficult. For example, I could (in theory, not practice) design a game in which you have to kill 1,000,000,000,000 mobs to ready max level. And each of these mobs would require only a small effort on your part, and unless you were fighting dozens at once, they would require no skill or effort on your part. The game I have just described would be time-consuming, but not difficult.
I am not saying this game will be difficult. That will be determined by the monsters in the world, and how hard they are to kill, among other things. What Anet has said is that it will not be time-consuming.
Please, if this does not appeal to you, say so, but do not use words to express ideas that those words do not actually express.
Yes, actually I do get to decide what words mean to me, just as you do. For example, do you think steak tastes good? Do you think going to watch a ballet is fun? Do you like to listen to pop music or rock? Certain words in any language are not defined by their dictionary description but by what an individual associates with that word, the same with 'challenging', 'difficult', 'easy', 'hard', 'fun', 'good' and dozens of other adjectives. My point still stands. Your definition of the words are not the same as everyone else's, and therefore a grind can be fun for me when it is not fun for you.
Time consuming is a factor of what I find fun - not a direct definition of what I find fun about grinding. For me, the fun is derived from different factors of grinding then your idea of it, which is just that it is time consuming and nothing else. That's obviously not the same for me because who would think time-consuming alone is fun? Maybe someone does, but I sure don't.
Other games make it take longer and longer to level because they want that subscription money. GW2 won't have a subscription so arenanet doesn't really care about the time it takes to level.
I have searched the forums and posts from Arena Net, and I can't seem to find the answer to this question anywhere:
How do the dynamic events respond to a grouping situation wherein not all of the group members have followed the same path during the game?
For instance, if I decide to help a village, and my friend decides not to help the same village, when we group, will the village be intact because I helped them, or destryed, because my group-mate didn't help them?
The event happens for everyone, so did someone have sucessfully help the village. That your friend have decided to help or not does'nt matter, it's wasn't a quest, he didn't fails something, he just didn't help.
I have searched the forums and posts from Arena Net, and I can't seem to find the answer to this question anywhere:
How do the dynamic events respond to a grouping situation wherein not all of the group members have followed the same path during the game?
For instance, if I decide to help a village, and my friend decides not to help the same village, when we group, will the village be intact because I helped them, or destryed, because my group-mate didn't help them?
The personal story decisions are decided purely by the leader, it does not affect or advance the personal story person whose grouping you, however the person who is helping you progress your personal story will gain rewards (like items unlocked in home instance and karma) that you do not. Think of it like the class story in swtor except all choices are decided by the leader.
The event system is completely different. Just because you choose to help the village doesn't mean you'll actually save it. It depends completely on whether you actually defeat the enemy or not. It's all real time there is no quest to gain it's simply you see a village burning you help and get rewarded. If your friend decides to just stand there they get no rewards. Hope that clears things up for you
The point of this post is not to be confused with subjectivity. Difficult is a subjective concept, and therefore what I think is difficult, you may see as easy, and vice versa. That is not the same thing as misappropriating the meaning of the word.
There are a lot of people that think everything is relative in the mind's eye. There are entire religions and philosophies devoted to that concept, so your idea of 'the trappings of communication' falling apart because of people having different definitions is inaccurate. It's only our conditioning towards a certain word being what it is that drops.
You were continuing to argue that a grind does not make something challenging. I think it does. An element of grind in an MMO not only makes that a particular challenge to me, but it also makes it fun for me. I don't find it any more "time-consuming" than what other people do for fun, like watching movies or reading books. Technically, everything is time-consuming and that's completely irrelevant to what is fun. There is no arguing what I find fun or challenging, yet you persist in saying that a grind is something else. You're not seeing the fact that these words are defined by an individual - not a dictionary. I also can still find fun in GW2 for different reasons then you do.
Gotta say, I have my doubts, but I do like their focus. If there's a trial, I just might pick this up.
It's GW there won't be a trial. The game doesn't have a subscription fee so the free trial is meaningless. They probably will have at some point where players can invite friends to play for a period then if they like they can buy the game but I doubt they will have the typical 14day trial like P2P games.
Guild Wars Trilogy had a trial disc sold at most retailers. I think it's very likely they will do the same with GW2.
Edit: Actually, it might have been just Prophecies. I forget what version it was, but they definitely had a trial disc out for awhile.
Seems like I got one for GW1 when TR went under. Either way, a time limited trial makes perfect sense in this digital download world...
There seems to be a LOT of confusion, so I will just say this: Dynamic events will occur in REAL TIME in a PERSISTANT WORLD. A destroyed village will be destroyed for EVERY SINGLE PERSON THE SERVER. Dynamic events can have one person participating, or several hundred. The number of enemies will increase/be buffed as the number of players participating increases. If only one person is present at a village for example, only a few centaur will attack. If one hundred people are there, a massive group of powerful centaurs will attack.
One thing I know for a fact that even if GW2 will be F2P, players are willing to fork up the cash that most of the time they are spending more than what they pay in a month for P2P game. That's why GW1 is still running and players are still playing.
But the great thing about this business design is that those who don't have the extra cash aren't left behind since all purchaseable items don’t affect the game play at all, unlike other MMOs with micro-payments, the items they sell sometimes breaks the gameplay.
I'm personally holding off from buying new games and reserving all my cash for GW2. And yes, I do have a stash that is solely reserved for GW2. And no I didn't buy SC2 nor planning to but the next WoW expansion or any other games before GW2 or even afterwards.
I just never had seen such commitments from the developer and their ability to actually deliver.
Comments
That's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it but you might have mistakenly left out reality. And by that I mean take a look at anything in our modern culture that is considered the most "High End" material posessions. They're ALWAYS an Aesthetic or a piece of rare "Art". Guildwars embraced this at every level and made its focus about owning Scenery to the point it trumped customization which in a game where even your skills could be respec'd & switched on the fly, is really saying something.
This is a lot more realistic expectation and I agree with it.
*COUGH* ...sort by Rating... It, and its 2 other chapters are still in the top 20, above EQ and WoW I'll point out... on a site it has absolutely no business even being on b/c it was always categorized as a CoRPG or whatever, not a MMORPG. It sold 6 million. How many studios do you know that sold 6 million copies on their first release? If anything, I'd say their attempts to call its Sequel a true MMORPG without any of the old mechanics that define an MMORPG (forced grouping / healers / level equaliing dedication / gear equaling power) is the biggest thing deflating its Hype level b/c so many MMORPG players just don't want something that different. They just don't...
Hi Everyone,
It is like my first post here, I am owner of a Brazilian MMORPG Blog O Meu Game (omeugame.com.br). As a great enthusiast of GW2 it is wonderful that someone finally decided to left grid aside. While you are griding you lose too much that on a game where you could spend it in other actions inside it like raiding, pvping or what else.
In my site I have wrote and article about "How would be my MMO" and inside it I would even take away the level system to change it by a system where you have to complete tasks to unlock new skills and attributes to your character. Originally it is in Portuguese, but I used Google Translator to make an English Version available to you all. You can check it if you want.
B.Regards,
Sully
You need install Adobe Flash Player 9 by www.adobe.com.
Okay just one question......
Can we jump yet?
The maximum character level has been increased to 80 lvl, however the developers emphasize they wish "to avoid forcing players into the grind-based gameplay that too often accompanies a high level cap."
Yeah, It already can jump. Can't you see the trailers???
I hope they realize the amount of ambitious hype they are spreading by saying things like what's in the article. I obviously don't know because I haven't seen it, but I think it's a bad idea to say they are going to make it fun for everyone from moment-to-moment. That's like saying they just discovered what everyone considers 'fun' and they're using this secret power to uncover the lost Atlantis of video games.
I have no doubt it will be a good game to a lot of people that liked the first. I just think it's hyping it way too much to say it's going to revolutionize the industry by overcoming the grindy feel of other MMOs. My guess is it will just feel less like an MMO and be classified as something in between genres kinda like the heavy instancing did to the first one. i.e. Multiplayer action RPG instead, but we'll see soon enough. Either way, I'm going to buy it and play it so don't think I'm hating on it. I'm just not a fan of too much hype pre-release. I think that does more harm then good.
I'm also a big fan of games with a grind - not even being sarcastic lol. Ultima Online and Lineage 2 are probably my favorite MMOs so far from the industry - both total grinds with very minimum distraction or quests. As an earlier poster said, it's a type of achievement to overcome it with patience and perseverance. Unlike that poster however, I'm not saying anyone that doesn't like that grind is impatient or lazy. It's only what I personally get from that type of difficulty that causes me to enjoy it, unlike other people's preferences or idea of a challenge. So if GW2 does away with that as a factor, I'm sure I'll stick with another MMO on the side like L2, Aion, UO, etc. that still offers a grind to overcome.
Gotta say, I have my doubts, but I do like their focus. If there's a trial, I just might pick this up.
It's GW there won't be a trial. The game doesn't have a subscription fee so the free trial is meaningless. They probably will have at some point where players can invite friends to play for a period then if they like they can buy the game but I doubt they will have the typical 14day trial like P2P games.
"You think this "A" stands for France?" Captain America
Guild Wars Trilogy had a trial disc sold at most retailers. I think it's very likely they will do the same with GW2.
Edit: Actually, it might have been just Prophecies. I forget what version it was, but they definitely had a trial disc out for awhile.
I'm starting to think people ask this question to troll.
I just do not understand the people saying the having a short levelling curve is going to mean an easy game, or a game with no content. I feel like they either are not reading what ArenaNet is posting, they do not understand the information, or they have been brainwashed by years of games with massive grinds.
The challenge of a game lies in the difficulty of each individual encounter, not in how long it takes for you to reach the maximum level, or achieve some arbitrary goal of number of kills of <whatever>. The challenge lies in difficult strategies and complex encounters, not in trinity-style tank and spanks. The challenge lies in the attempt to achieve a difficult goal, not in being punished by failing with a loss of items or experience.
Perhaps this game is not for you, but if you think it is going to be easy because it does not have a massive level grind, the holy trinity of roles, or a harsh death penalty, I assert that you do not understand the meaning of the words difficult and easy.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
WTF? No subscription fee?
As I mentioned in my post, people define challenge and fun differently. You're falling in to the common mistake of thinking everyone should have the same definition, otherwise people that don't agree with your idea of fun or challenging must not understand the correct definition. Knowing the meaning of the words has nothing to do with it. Knowing what those words mean to you is everything. Both sides of the coin can argue about it but it's really irrelevant because both sides can be right about what it means to them, and I happen to like a grind as a form of challenge. You don't. There is no argument there. Guild Wars 2 can still be a good game to both of us though, in different ways.
I have searched the forums and posts from Arena Net, and I can't seem to find the answer to this question anywhere:
How do the dynamic events respond to a grouping situation wherein not all of the group members have followed the same path during the game?
For instance, if I decide to help a village, and my friend decides not to help the same village, when we group, will the village be intact because I helped them, or destryed, because my group-mate didn't help them?
I said nothing about whether this game will be fun for others or not; that is up to them to decide when and if they play it (i.e., we should not be deciding now, whatever we think), but you do not get to decide what words mean.
Difficult already has a meaning, and it is not "time-consuming." "Time-consuming" already means that. "Difficult" means something else. That is why we have different words: to express different ideas. Words have meaning in languages, and you do not get to decide what they mean "to you." That is ridiculous. If that were the case, the inherent trappings of communication would fall apart. If that were the case, you would not be able to accurately determine what I am saying to you right now.
If you like for your games to be time-consuming that is fine. This game may not be for you. But do not make the mistake of equating that with difficult. For example, I could (in theory, not practice) design a game in which you have to kill 1,000,000,000,000 mobs to ready max level. And each of these mobs would require only a small effort on your part, and unless you were fighting dozens at once, they would require no skill or effort on your part. The game I have just described would be time-consuming, but not difficult.
I am not saying this game will be difficult. That will be determined by the monsters in the world, and how hard they are to kill, among other things. What Anet has said is that it will not be time-consuming.
Please, if this does not appeal to you, say so, but do not use words to express ideas that those words do not actually express.
EDIT:
The point of this post is not to be confused with subjectivity. Difficult is a subjective concept, and therefore what I think is difficult, you may see as easy, and vice versa. That is not the same thing as misappropriating the meaning of the word.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
WTF? No subscription fee?
I thought I remember reading somewhere that you can choose to port yourself to the leader of the group's current location, in their version of the world, but I might be confusing that with another MMO.
Yes, actually I do get to decide what words mean to me, just as you do. For example, do you think steak tastes good? Do you think going to watch a ballet is fun? Do you like to listen to pop music or rock? Certain words in any language are not defined by their dictionary description but by what an individual associates with that word, the same with 'challenging', 'difficult', 'easy', 'hard', 'fun', 'good' and dozens of other adjectives. My point still stands. Your definition of the words are not the same as everyone else's, and therefore a grind can be fun for me when it is not fun for you.
Time consuming is a factor of what I find fun - not a direct definition of what I find fun about grinding. For me, the fun is derived from different factors of grinding then your idea of it, which is just that it is time consuming and nothing else. That's obviously not the same for me because who would think time-consuming alone is fun? Maybe someone does, but I sure don't.
Other games make it take longer and longer to level because they want that subscription money. GW2 won't have a subscription so arenanet doesn't really care about the time it takes to level.
Rift
The event happens for everyone, so did someone have sucessfully help the village. That your friend have decided to help or not does'nt matter, it's wasn't a quest, he didn't fails something, he just didn't help.
The personal story decisions are decided purely by the leader, it does not affect or advance the personal story person whose grouping you, however the person who is helping you progress your personal story will gain rewards (like items unlocked in home instance and karma) that you do not. Think of it like the class story in swtor except all choices are decided by the leader.
The event system is completely different. Just because you choose to help the village doesn't mean you'll actually save it. It depends completely on whether you actually defeat the enemy or not. It's all real time there is no quest to gain it's simply you see a village burning you help and get rewarded. If your friend decides to just stand there they get no rewards. Hope that clears things up for you
There are a lot of people that think everything is relative in the mind's eye. There are entire religions and philosophies devoted to that concept, so your idea of 'the trappings of communication' falling apart because of people having different definitions is inaccurate. It's only our conditioning towards a certain word being what it is that drops.
You were continuing to argue that a grind does not make something challenging. I think it does. An element of grind in an MMO not only makes that a particular challenge to me, but it also makes it fun for me. I don't find it any more "time-consuming" than what other people do for fun, like watching movies or reading books. Technically, everything is time-consuming and that's completely irrelevant to what is fun. There is no arguing what I find fun or challenging, yet you persist in saying that a grind is something else. You're not seeing the fact that these words are defined by an individual - not a dictionary. I also can still find fun in GW2 for different reasons then you do.
Seems like I got one for GW1 when TR went under. Either way, a time limited trial makes perfect sense in this digital download world...
There seems to be a LOT of confusion, so I will just say this: Dynamic events will occur in REAL TIME in a PERSISTANT WORLD. A destroyed village will be destroyed for EVERY SINGLE PERSON THE SERVER. Dynamic events can have one person participating, or several hundred. The number of enemies will increase/be buffed as the number of players participating increases. If only one person is present at a village for example, only a few centaur will attack. If one hundred people are there, a massive group of powerful centaurs will attack.
One thing I know for a fact that even if GW2 will be F2P, players are willing to fork up the cash that most of the time they are spending more than what they pay in a month for P2P game. That's why GW1 is still running and players are still playing.
But the great thing about this business design is that those who don't have the extra cash aren't left behind since all purchaseable items don’t affect the game play at all, unlike other MMOs with micro-payments, the items they sell sometimes breaks the gameplay.
I'm personally holding off from buying new games and reserving all my cash for GW2. And yes, I do have a stash that is solely reserved for GW2. And no I didn't buy SC2 nor planning to but the next WoW expansion or any other games before GW2 or even afterwards.
I just never had seen such commitments from the developer and their ability to actually deliver.
I can't wait.
Ready for GW2!!!