Omg are you serous dude? No, guild wars will not be the top MMO. I may be the Best, but it wont be the top.
WoW is the top because it dumped millions of dollars into advertising. Its the only MMO to advertise on television in North America. Its one of the most generic MMOs ever. Look at Mafia Wars and Farmville. Browser games that came before them were much better. It has nothing to do with how good a game is. You have to be a complete idiot to think that better quality wins in this industry when you look at the games that come out on top and compare them to the games they dominate.
WoW appeals to people that aren't gamers. Its dumbed down so that anyone can get into it, just like farmville or mafia wars. There are far more "regular" people out there than there are "gamers". Guild Wars appeals to "gamers" not regular people, or rather, "casual" people.
How is this not common knowledge. Come on people.
Dude you really don't know what your talking about. Me and like some others are casual gamers and I have seen alot of MMo's out there a few I have tried even done the free-trial to see if you Like it. WoW didn't even compare to some of the ones I tried but GW(Guild Wars) got me. Loved the graphics of it the ambience of it was nice compared to some of the others nice mix and match of class and skills yes they could be some added implements in to like crafting and stuff but Over-all for a non-monthly fee game. This one I went and bought even got the expansion packs and I don't regret buying it and playing GW. So Why Would I want to Pay a monthly fee to play a game? Especially when there are so many out there that are Free to play and have way better interaction than WoW.
I can name so many more monthly fee games that are way better than WoW and have a better story-line also so there are quite a few games MMo's and MMORPG's out there for both the "gamers" and the "casual" players you just gotta find the right one that suits you.
GW can't wait for GW2 just to see what improvements are really made and what type of interactions are implemented into the game. There is plenty of room for some improvement to where you could add like crafting smithing etc plus even making dyes not just buying the premade ones so many different aspects that can be added who knows maybe they will or then again maybe not.
Another thing dude television is slowly fading out everything is going to be on the net and the advertising is there seen many places advertise GW and alot of others sometimes word of mouth id the best advertisement you can get with so many people having blogs out there the word gets around
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
I think that the article brings up some strong pro points for success. I do not think the game has to produce WoW numbers to be considered successful. I am sure for Arenanet profitability is one of the main measurements, with that store coming it would be complimentary to the games model and not as a replacement for a monthly sub. In terms of money WoW has the guaranteed monthly $$$.
In terms of success for the next decade, the amount of time these games take to make might very well see GW2 successful. I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzards new IP has been in the works for a while now. I can only see SW:TOR and a competitor from a financial perspective at the moment.
I see some creativity with GW2 and some new ideas, mainly I see implementations sold as big selling points from other games included with spin, spit & polish. There is a lot of evolution. This shouldn't be confused with "new ideas" totally, they are new for GW2 compared to GW1, but nearly all previously discussed or seen before.
Guild wars has proven staying power, bolstered by 3 other additions to the original in a relatively short time. What these guys do well is refine. I think that GW2 will be captivating enough to have lasting appeal for a long time.
The content and approach so far obviously impacted the author enough with the article, but we are still a few classes short, PVP hands on seriously lacking ( which some say is the backbone of the original) as well as plenty of other systems. To early to call it an outright winner but definitely a game for the next decade. Many people play more than one mmo, this games model is a perfect compliment so long as it's fun!
.... people on this forum forget this EVERY SINGLE TIME A NEW GAME GETS ANNOUNCED. Everytime there are people who are like "Oh this time will be the time that WoW gets killed." No it won't. It wasn't last time, it won't be this time, and it won't be next time.
A)The problem with the "12 million" figure is that, although Blizzard claims these are all active accounts, they are not. They do count inactive accounts & "honorably" closed accounts. The only ones they don't count are banned accounts.
Between the the GW2 website and the link that was posted here at the convention, I'm very impressed.. Many of these ideas I've been wanting to see for years.. It's about time a dev starts looking at MMOs as being social games.. I love the idea of scaling, soft grouping, etc etc.. GW2 appears to find reasons to INCLUDE people into group or raid activities then exclude them.. KUDO's to Arenanet.. Keep up the work.. Now to keep my fringers crossed that it works as intended..
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
What phasing system? I didn't see any sort of phasing in any of the videos. Are you thinking of the personal instances?
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
Just let me /facepalm a little bit....
I agree that GW1 might be bad for a lot of people. It's a different game after all and it's not even an mmo. But about GW2...
So, you are saying that the traits system, the personal storyline that no MMORPG had before, the home instance, the capacity to have a personality since the beguinning and changed by your choices while you play, the skill bar, the end of the holy trinity, the almost impossibility to grief, the lack of reasons to camp, the new skills system, the sidekick system, the different kind of rewards, the dynamic combat, the lack of reasons to make a build using a specific race, the lack of necessity to team up to lvl up faster or get better rewards, the possibility to work with others and be a solo player or not be in the same team, the capacity to really see villages beeing destroyed, turned into mob forts for later be saved and rebuilded but still need protection, the no more "mobs are attacking the city althought they are picking daysies outside and waiting for you to kill them", the capacity to do every event (like quest) you wanna do without talking to any npc (you just are walking your way and see someone need help or a city beeing attacked or players trying to get a city back and just go there to help)...... you are saying all of this isn't innovative???
AND you are saying that the Dynamic Events System is like the "phasing system sorta like WoW"?
I don't know what you have been playing besides WoW, but for the last decade there wasn't even 1 game that could do 1/5 of what GW2 is doing. And since WoW got out, probably only 2 or 3 games tried something different and innovative. Let me tell you something: this game has more innovation than the last 10y of the mmorpg genre all together. WoW included.
Just read well the articles and the interviews before posting. Unless you want to be called troll by others, that is (which I doubt).
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
What phasing system? I didn't see any sort of phasing in any of the videos. Are you thinking of the personal instances?
Sorry for the confusion, I did not mean they actually used a phasing system, I meant to say it is really no different that a phasing system.
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
What phasing system? I didn't see any sort of phasing in any of the videos. Are you thinking of the personal instances?
Sorry for the confusion, I did not mean they actually used a phasing system, I meant to say it is really no different that a phasing system.
Explain. I don't see this at all. Phasing isolates you, dynamic events don't, phasing is a one time change, dynamic events are a constant change. So could you explain how it is similar?
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
Just let me /facepalm a little bit....
I agree that GW1 might be bad for a lot of people. It's a different game after all and it's not even an mmo. But about GW2...
So, you are saying that the traits system, the personal storyline that no MMORPG had before, the home instance, the capacity to have a personality since the beguinning and changed by your choices while you play, the skill bar, the end of the holy trinity, the almost impossibility to grief, the lack of reasons to camp, the new skills system, the sidekick system, the different kind of rewards, the dynamic combat, the lack of reasons to make a build using a specific race, the lack of necessity to team up to lvl up faster or get better rewards, the possibility to work with others and be a solo player or not be in the same team, the capacity to really see villages beeing destroyed, turned into mob forts for later be saved and rebuilded but still need protection, the no more "mobs are attacking the city althought they are picking daysies outside and waiting for you to kill them", the capacity to do every event (like quest) you wanna do without talking to any npc (you just are walking your way and see someone need help or a city beeing attacked or players trying to get a city back and just go there to help)...... you are saying all of this isn't innovative???
AND you are saying that the Dynamic Events System is like the "phasing system sorta like WoW"?
I don't know what you have been playing besides WoW, but for the last decade there wasn't even 1 game that could do 1/5 of what GW2 is doing. And since WoW got out, probably only 2 or 3 games tried something different and innovative. Let me tell you something: this game has more innovation than the last 10y of the mmorpg genre all together. WoW included.
Just read well the articles and the interviews before posting. Unless you want to be called troll by others, that is (which I doubt).
Just about everything you have mentioned has been done before in some form or another
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
What phasing system? I didn't see any sort of phasing in any of the videos. Are you thinking of the personal instances?
Sorry for the confusion, I did not mean they actually used a phasing system, I meant to say it is really no different that a phasing system.
Explain. I don't see this at all. Phasing isolates you, dynamic events don't, phasing is a one time change, dynamic events are a constant change. So could you explain how it is similar?
See that is the part I don't believe, constant change! The programmers would have to constantly code new scenarios for that to happen. It would have to revert back eventually.
Just about everything you have mentioned has been done before in some form or another
LMAO and /facepalm, again.
You clearly don't know nothing about the mmorpg past, you don't know nothing about GW2 and you clearly haven't read what I said in the post before, starting with the traits system. BTW, innovation can be created by doing things in different and original forms in order to get things done with success and/or with more efficiency.
I gave the benefit of the doubt to you about trolling and warned you about posting without previous knowledge, but that doubt is gone now, good work.
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
What phasing system? I didn't see any sort of phasing in any of the videos. Are you thinking of the personal instances?
Sorry for the confusion, I did not mean they actually used a phasing system, I meant to say it is really no different that a phasing system.
Explain. I don't see this at all. Phasing isolates you, dynamic events don't, phasing is a one time change, dynamic events are a constant change. So could you explain how it is similar?
See that is the part I don't believe, constant change! The programmers would have to constantly code new scenarios for that to happen. It would have to revert back eventually.
Well it does but it does so by the players actions. While the events will have a cycle, it is a player driven cycle. At any one point in time that event could be in a different state. This is where I say it is a constant change. While phasing is just a one time action.
That's fine if you don't think there is anything new that GW2 is bringing to the table; you are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, I think your comparisons are wrong.
Just about everything you have mentioned has been done before in some form or another
LMAO and /facepalm, again.
You clearly don't know nothing about the mmorpg past, you don't know nothing about GW2 and you clearly haven't read what I said in the post before, starting with the traits system. BTW, innovation can be created by doing things in different and original forms in order to get things done with success and/or with more efficiency.
I gave the benefit of the doubt to you about trolling and warned you about posting without previous knowledge, but that doubt is gone now, good work.
Ok, let's take 2 of your innovations:
"the lack of reasons to make a build using a specific race " (EQ2 took out racials when it first came out, don't know about now though)
"the lack of necessity to team up to lvl up faster or get better rewards" (solo-gameplay any game has)
If these are innovations then we are in trouble. I could pick apart the rest if you like.
Just about everything you have mentioned has been done before in some form or another
LMAO and /facepalm, again.
You clearly don't know nothing about the mmorpg past, you don't know nothing about GW2 and you clearly haven't read what I said in the post before, starting with the traits system. BTW, innovation can be created by doing things in different and original forms in order to get things done with success and/or with more efficiency.
I gave the benefit of the doubt to you about trolling and warned you about posting without previous knowledge, but that doubt is gone now, good work.
Ok, let's take 2 of your innovations:
"the lack of reasons to make a build using a specific race " (EQ2 took out racials when it first came out, don't know about now though)
"the lack of necessity to team up to lvl up faster or get better rewards" (solo-gameplay any game has)
If these are innovations then we are in trouble. I could pick apart the rest if you like.
TBF you picked by far the easiest to pick apart, I implore you to continue as you'd probably have more trouble with the others. BTW the second one IS innovation as it occurs all over the persistant world not in specific areas like WAR's PQ etc.
Anyway the argument about innovation is moronic at best, since it basically just means a change compared to what currently exists. What each person considers "true" change can differ vastly from person to person. A small alteration and a vast alteration can still be both technically considered innovation hence the confusion.
I think what people need to understand is that change simply for the sake of change is not neccessarily a good thing. In order for an mmo to survive it's featutre's don't just need to be different but better than what currently exists. Rather than looking at something and seeing the originality of such a feature it's far more useful to see how much or little an improvement said feature is.
"the lack of reasons to make a build using a specific race " (EQ2 took out racials when it first came out, don't know about now though)
"the lack of necessity to team up to lvl up faster or get better rewards" (solo-gameplay any game has)
If these are innovations then we are in trouble. I could pick apart the rest if you like.
Those are good examples. But as I said before, innovation is done by doing things in different and original forms.
In other mmorpgs, I saw them having builds needing a specific races in order to have the best gameplay (but you are right, maybe this was done before, I myself played at least 2 mmorpgs that had this. I'll give you for that).
About your 2nd example, your assumption is leading to the way that all other mmorpgs are.
In those games, the solo-gameplay leads to have things more difficult and more time playing the game than other players do, you can't play with others and not be in their team in order to get the same rewards, if you try looking for a team (because there are always quests or dungeons that you can't do alone) they probably will tell you that you don't have "that skill" or "that stats" and so you can't join them or are a bad player in your role. Not to mention that you can't got to the same place full of other players and kill mobs to end your quest might become almost impossible because higher lvl players camping there will one-hit the mobs when spawned, leaving you no time to kill them. Most of those games force most soloers to leave games before reached cap-lvl or to become less soloers, because it almost forces players to have a team or go to harder places where it will take more time to lvl up.
In GW2, because of the sidekick system, the scaling of the events, and the different reward given by the quantity of contribution to the event, none of what I said before matters. You can be a solo player, go to whatever place you want to be without having KS or players camping there, you don't need to be in a team to participate in the events where other players are, you chose whether or not you help those players even if you're in the same place doing the same thing, you are the one that chose your traits and skills without anyone telling you what is the "required skill build", and much more. All of this only because they have the Dynamic Even System, which was never done before as the main feature of PVE, instead of quests.
Try picking apart all of the other innovations yourself, my friend, by reading the articles and the interviews. You can read and understand things on your own, I think. But if you can't, I can explain to you the GW2 innovations if you have doubts about any of them. But please, read things first. Explainning everything is too difficult -.-"
As far as I know, sidekicks in GW2 are reserved only for story runs when it comes to dungeons, ANet took them out for regular gameplay because they didn't mesh well with dynamic events.
Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.
Originally posted by Nazgol Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
What phasing system? I didn't see any sort of phasing in any of the videos. Are you thinking of the personal instances?
Sorry for the confusion, I did not mean they actually used a phasing system, I meant to say it is really no different that a phasing system.
Explain. I don't see this at all. Phasing isolates you, dynamic events don't, phasing is a one time change, dynamic events are a constant change. So could you explain how it is similar?
See that is the part I don't believe, constant change! The programmers would have to constantly code new scenarios for that to happen. It would have to revert back eventually.
Phasing and dynamic events are completely different. Phasing has to be triggered by a programmer. Dynamic events, once implemented responds to a player's action and the end result is change that you see. They can also be influenced by other events in the event chain (but those events are also player triggered). An event can transform from event A into event B then C, then B then back to A or back to C depending on the outcome of event B. That in itself is constant change. An event cannot move without player input. It will stay like that unless someone does something.
Maybe not the best analogy...You're getting ready for work. You put on socks on your feet. Then you put on your working boots. When you come home from work, naturally you first have to take your boots off then pull your socks off before you are barefoot. Now this can branch off just like dynamic events. When you go to the park or the gym, you'd have sneakers on your feet instead. Dynamic events also flow back. When you come home from the gym, you'd take off your sneakers, now you're barefoot again. You may not have endless pairs of shoes or socks but this is still change.
Playing now: Cities: Skyline / Ori and the Blind Forest / Banished
Originally posted by Methos12 As far as I know, sidekicks in GW2 are reserved only for story runs when it comes to dungeons, ANet took them out for regular gameplay because they didn't mesh well with dynamic events.
I think by Sidekick people are talking about the sidekick system, a higher level player becomes your sidekick and boosts your level. Your right about NPC allies
Comments
In terms of success for the next decade, the amount of time these games take to make might very well see GW2 successful. I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzards new IP has been in the works for a while now. I can only see SW:TOR and a competitor from a financial perspective at the moment.
I see some creativity with GW2 and some new ideas, mainly I see implementations sold as big selling points from other games included with spin, spit & polish. There is a lot of evolution. This shouldn't be confused with "new ideas" totally, they are new for GW2 compared to GW1, but nearly all previously discussed or seen before.
Guild wars has proven staying power, bolstered by 3 other additions to the original in a relatively short time. What these guys do well is refine. I think that GW2 will be captivating enough to have lasting appeal for a long time.
The content and approach so far obviously impacted the author enough with the article, but we are still a few classes short, PVP hands on seriously lacking ( which some say is the backbone of the original) as well as plenty of other systems. To early to call it an outright winner but definitely a game for the next decade. Many people play more than one mmo, this games model is a perfect compliment so long as it's fun!
it will fail, simply because you can't satisfy todays gamers.
It doesnt need to satisfy all of them to be successful.it will get the stamp of "failed" tho, as those unsatisfied are the loudest
Source?
Between the the GW2 website and the link that was posted here at the convention, I'm very impressed.. Many of these ideas I've been wanting to see for years.. It's about time a dev starts looking at MMOs as being social games.. I love the idea of scaling, soft grouping, etc etc.. GW2 appears to find reasons to INCLUDE people into group or raid activities then exclude them.. KUDO's to Arenanet.. Keep up the work.. Now to keep my fringers crossed that it works as intended..
Am I the only one who hated GW1? I was part of those 6 million people that bought it and I wished I could have got my money back. GW2 looks good, but really does it have anything innovative? From what I can tell, all they did was take the yellow question marks off the quest giver's heads and added a phasing system sorta like WOW. Not really innovative at all if you ask me.
In Bioware we trust!
What phasing system? I didn't see any sort of phasing in any of the videos. Are you thinking of the personal instances?
Just let me /facepalm a little bit....
I agree that GW1 might be bad for a lot of people. It's a different game after all and it's not even an mmo. But about GW2...
So, you are saying that the traits system, the personal storyline that no MMORPG had before, the home instance, the capacity to have a personality since the beguinning and changed by your choices while you play, the skill bar, the end of the holy trinity, the almost impossibility to grief, the lack of reasons to camp, the new skills system, the sidekick system, the different kind of rewards, the dynamic combat, the lack of reasons to make a build using a specific race, the lack of necessity to team up to lvl up faster or get better rewards, the possibility to work with others and be a solo player or not be in the same team, the capacity to really see villages beeing destroyed, turned into mob forts for later be saved and rebuilded but still need protection, the no more "mobs are attacking the city althought they are picking daysies outside and waiting for you to kill them", the capacity to do every event (like quest) you wanna do without talking to any npc (you just are walking your way and see someone need help or a city beeing attacked or players trying to get a city back and just go there to help)...... you are saying all of this isn't innovative???
AND you are saying that the Dynamic Events System is like the "phasing system sorta like WoW"?
I don't know what you have been playing besides WoW, but for the last decade there wasn't even 1 game that could do 1/5 of what GW2 is doing. And since WoW got out, probably only 2 or 3 games tried something different and innovative. Let me tell you something: this game has more innovation than the last 10y of the mmorpg genre all together. WoW included.
Just read well the articles and the interviews before posting. Unless you want to be called troll by others, that is (which I doubt).
Sorry for the confusion, I did not mean they actually used a phasing system, I meant to say it is really no different that a phasing system.
In Bioware we trust!
Explain. I don't see this at all. Phasing isolates you, dynamic events don't, phasing is a one time change, dynamic events are a constant change. So could you explain how it is similar?
Just about everything you have mentioned has been done before in some form or another
In Bioware we trust!
See that is the part I don't believe, constant change! The programmers would have to constantly code new scenarios for that to happen. It would have to revert back eventually.
In Bioware we trust!
LMAO and /facepalm, again.
You clearly don't know nothing about the mmorpg past, you don't know nothing about GW2 and you clearly haven't read what I said in the post before, starting with the traits system. BTW, innovation can be created by doing things in different and original forms in order to get things done with success and/or with more efficiency.
I gave the benefit of the doubt to you about trolling and warned you about posting without previous knowledge, but that doubt is gone now, good work.
Well it does but it does so by the players actions. While the events will have a cycle, it is a player driven cycle. At any one point in time that event could be in a different state. This is where I say it is a constant change. While phasing is just a one time action.
That's fine if you don't think there is anything new that GW2 is bringing to the table; you are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, I think your comparisons are wrong.
Ok, let's take 2 of your innovations:
"the lack of reasons to make a build using a specific race " (EQ2 took out racials when it first came out, don't know about now though)
"the lack of necessity to team up to lvl up faster or get better rewards" (solo-gameplay any game has)
If these are innovations then we are in trouble. I could pick apart the rest if you like.
In Bioware we trust!
TBF you picked by far the easiest to pick apart, I implore you to continue as you'd probably have more trouble with the others. BTW the second one IS innovation as it occurs all over the persistant world not in specific areas like WAR's PQ etc.
Anyway the argument about innovation is moronic at best, since it basically just means a change compared to what currently exists. What each person considers "true" change can differ vastly from person to person. A small alteration and a vast alteration can still be both technically considered innovation hence the confusion.
I think what people need to understand is that change simply for the sake of change is not neccessarily a good thing. In order for an mmo to survive it's featutre's don't just need to be different but better than what currently exists. Rather than looking at something and seeing the originality of such a feature it's far more useful to see how much or little an improvement said feature is.
Those are good examples. But as I said before, innovation is done by doing things in different and original forms.
In other mmorpgs, I saw them having builds needing a specific races in order to have the best gameplay (but you are right, maybe this was done before, I myself played at least 2 mmorpgs that had this. I'll give you
for that).
About your 2nd example, your assumption is leading to the way that all other mmorpgs are.
In those games, the solo-gameplay leads to have things more difficult and more time playing the game than other players do, you can't play with others and not be in their team in order to get the same rewards, if you try looking for a team (because there are always quests or dungeons that you can't do alone) they probably will tell you that you don't have "that skill" or "that stats" and so you can't join them or are a bad player in your role. Not to mention that you can't got to the same place full of other players and kill mobs to end your quest might become almost impossible because higher lvl players camping there will one-hit the mobs when spawned, leaving you no time to kill them. Most of those games force most soloers to leave games before reached cap-lvl or to become less soloers, because it almost forces players to have a team or go to harder places where it will take more time to lvl up.
In GW2, because of the sidekick system, the scaling of the events, and the different reward given by the quantity of contribution to the event, none of what I said before matters. You can be a solo player, go to whatever place you want to be without having KS or players camping there, you don't need to be in a team to participate in the events where other players are, you chose whether or not you help those players even if you're in the same place doing the same thing, you are the one that chose your traits and skills without anyone telling you what is the "required skill build", and much more. All of this only because they have the Dynamic Even System, which was never done before as the main feature of PVE, instead of quests.
Try picking apart all of the other innovations yourself, my friend, by reading the articles and the interviews. You can read and understand things on your own, I think. But if you can't, I can explain to you the GW2 innovations if you have doubts about any of them. But please, read things first. Explainning everything is too difficult -.-"
As far as I know, sidekicks in GW2 are reserved only for story runs when it comes to dungeons, ANet took them out for regular gameplay because they didn't mesh well with dynamic events.
Phasing and dynamic events are completely different. Phasing has to be triggered by a programmer. Dynamic events, once implemented responds to a player's action and the end result is change that you see. They can also be influenced by other events in the event chain (but those events are also player triggered). An event can transform from event A into event B then C, then B then back to A or back to C depending on the outcome of event B. That in itself is constant change. An event cannot move without player input. It will stay like that unless someone does something.
Maybe not the best analogy...You're getting ready for work. You put on socks on your feet. Then you put on your working boots. When you come home from work, naturally you first have to take your boots off then pull your socks off before you are barefoot. Now this can branch off just like dynamic events. When you go to the park or the gym, you'd have sneakers on your feet instead. Dynamic events also flow back. When you come home from the gym, you'd take off your sneakers, now you're barefoot again. You may not have endless pairs of shoes or socks but this is still change.
Playing now: Cities: Skyline / Ori and the Blind Forest / Banished
I think by Sidekick people are talking about the sidekick system, a higher level player becomes your sidekick and boosts your level. Your right about NPC allies
EQ2?
±MeDiC±