The thief is being destroyed constantly by the Elite mobs because the player who played the thief is a retard. A thief is a mobile and squishy class.
Which means, Enemies attacks have RIGHT of way. If you want to play statically, play a warrior.
Right, I'm not arguing this.
What I'm arguing is what you have already pointed out. So there are tanks, then? Is that what you're saying?
Cause everyone else says there is no trinity. But I guess just tanks and dps are only two sides of it. No trinity would mean that everybody takes roughly the same amount of damage from all sources given various forms of mitigation.
For warriors that's armor, thief-types that's dodging, mage types that's using magic shields.
The thief didn't appear to have a 'dodge' stat. Every time a mob swung, she took damage. And there was clearly a form of auto-targeting for mobs because even though she kept running around the mobs would just auto turn and keep hitting her except when she actually used one of her dash abilities.
So with that in mind....isn't this, in essence, how warrior and rogue-types work right now? Warrior types stand at the front while rogue-types have to flip around all over the place. How is this new? Isn't this what tanks and dps have always done?
In regards to the whole "TOR vs GW2 People" and creation of threads and those that flock to threads such as these.
There seems to be a lot of People that want to play TOR/GW2. They may favor TOR a little more. I would consider myself one of those. GW2 will be a fun game, no doubt. I'll enjoy it. But, I personally, will enjoy tor a little more.
There seems to be some people who want to play GW2/TOR, with a favor of GW2.
I see very few people that want to play TOR, but don't want to play GW2.
I see MANY people who want to play GW2, but will not play TOR. These people run to threads such as this, and make sure to scream how great their game is, and everything bad about TOR. This thread starts out like that. Other people in this catagory do the same.
And of course, there are those that hate mainstream, and hate them both, but favor GW2 since it's not as mainstream or as themeparkish.
Great Job!
Saying GW2 has no weakness is just silly. Of course, some might say these "weaknesses many see" are nothing of the sort. Portals between zones. One AREA (4 zones I think total) for PvP, locked inside instances. Some like the trinity, some do not.
The last thing, is someone is criticizing GW2. That's great. I agree that some people seem to be blindly following Anet to whatever they want, and aren't thinking, maybe the should improve this, or change that. There is plenty of criticisim of TOR.
One final thought. I played Warhammer and Rift. Both had the Event system in it. Both started out with tons of people doing them. They went stale. it quickly became the same thing. They became empty, except when required to do something else. I expect to see DEs required to do certain things, ie dungeons, quests, etc. It's going to be hard to change something like that. They should have reasons for people to keep doing DEs, but not be FORCED to do them. So you save the 10th village again, you get a small discount on crafting stuff. Not huge that you HAVE to call your guild to help you beat 7 stages of the DE over a long time so you can all save tons of money.
And it's not a holy trinity of heal/tank/dps in GW2. It's Control/Support/DPS. lol
Everything has a weakness. Even Superman, everybody and their grandma was packing kryptonite. As we should all know by now that even strength and weakness can be subjective, so they should be taken with a grain of salt.
List them.
I want to see bad previews of the game itself.
I have seen only one bad preview, which it complains how GW2 isn't a LOTRO clone.
I think the only people who deserve to list the weakness are people who actually read everything about GW2.
Everything has weaknesses or weak points. Saying that something hasn't got them is blindness or fanboism. Maybe to someone there aren't weaknesses - or the more appropriate term is maybe 'dislikes' - as far as he can perceive, but that doesn't mean that a product doesn't have any.
Here's a list of things that can be perceived as weaknesses (to others):
1. no open, seamless world: there will be portals ('zoning) between areas, also the outside ones.
2. no mounts, only teleportation.
3. no extensive crafting, nor is it something new
4. no healer classes: even if there's support roles, the changed mechanic can make this less appealing to those players who loved to be the healer in MMO's groups and raids
5. no FFA or open world pvp
6. no player houses and cities that you can build everywhere
7. no raid content, at least not as is seen in other MMO's. Some players loved that content.
Ok, those were the things that came up right away in my mind. The point is that there'll always be weaknesses even if those may not be a weakness to you. I myself have no problem with those points I mentioned, they won't prevent me from enjoying GW2 to the fullest. But then again, I'm easy with MMO's having features that I like less while still having great fun in them.
On a sidenote, this once again has turned into a GW2 vs SWTOR pingpong game thread, so I'm going to leave it at this
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Uhhhh, you do realize this was captured at some kind of event, right?
You do realize that Anet likely intentionally shoved a number of people together in the same room, into the same zone, right?
There is a 30 minute video out there of TOR that is prefaced by someone saying that these people grouped up to go do stuff together. I'm not sure this is any different than the GW2 video. Both captured at events where people are right beside each other so they can talk to each other about doing stuff in the game.
The true test of how 'social' a game is isn't how it looks at or near release. This is because everybody is the same level and they're in roughly the same zones. Grouping up is common because there are tons of people running around.
The true test comes in a year after release. How many people are still running around in the open world actually randomly finding people?
Nobody can say how either game has done on this test because neither is released yet. So talking about this particular point is completely moot.
Everything has a weakness. Even Superman, everybody and their grandma was packing kryptonite. As we should all know by now that even strength and weakness can be subjective, so they should be taken with a grain of salt.
List them.
I want to see bad previews of the game itself.
I have seen only one bad preview, which it complains how GW2 isn't a LOTRO clone.
I think the only people who deserve to list the weakness are people who actually read everything about GW2.
Everything has weaknesses or weak points. Saying that something hasn't got them is blindness or fanboism. Maybe to someone there aren't weaknesses - or the more appropriate term is maybe 'dislikes' - as far as he can perceive, but that doesn't mean that a product doesn't have any.
Here's a list of things that can be perceived as weaknesses (to others):
1. no open, seamless world: there will be portals ('zoning) between areas, also the outside ones.
2. no mounts, only teleportation.
3. no extensive crafting, nor is it something new
4. no healer classes: even if there's support roles, the changed mechanic can make this less appealing to those players who loved to be the healer in MMO's groups and raids
5. no FFA or open world pvp
6. no player houses and cities that you can build everywhere
7. no raid content, at least not as is seen in other MMO's. Some players loved that content.
Ok, those were the things that came up right away in my mind. The point is that there'll always be weaknesses even if those may not be a weakness to you. I myself have no problem with those points I mentioned, they won't prevent me from enjoying GW2 to the fullest. But then again, I'm easy with MMO's having features that I like less while still having great fun in them.
On a sidenote, this once again has turned into a GW2 vs SWTOR pingpong game thread, so I'm going to leave it at this
LOL. I guess I have to take the blame huh? lol
Anyways, this is all fun and games. No hard feeling. I know we won't know how much we like GW2 or TOR until we actually play ourselves.
And this guy who is trying to argue that GW2 does not have weakness... IDK what to say to him. I thought I was GW2 fanboi and I'm not saying that GW2 does not have weakness. So IDK what he is...
Sure it applies to ANET too. But I've seen the first 60 minutes of the gameplay. I've seen exactly how the DE and personal story works. But have we seen anything other than few flash points? Yes, we have. At least the ones among us who've been paying attention to all the footage. I might provide links if you like, that is, if I still have some of them. Have we seen people meeting random people in TOR? We have seen as much of this in SWTOR as we have seen in GW2, besides that, the reports regarding SWTOR gameplay by demo players have been far more extensive than the ones regarding GW2. Other than exploration, what else is there in TOR for the open world that would lead to meeting random people and sharing same goals?
Heroic Quests, World Quests that can be done together, open world pvp, all the regular stuff that you see in other MMO's as well.
Maybe you're right that its psychology. Maybe. But I don't remember seeing anything other then some flash points.
Then you have clearly not been looking. Besides, what you see is only 1 small segment of gameplay, which provided nice footage, sure. But what I found far more interesting are the reports of actual players who played SWTOR for 6-15 hours continuously, and not only the same hour of gameplay again and again.
I'm waiting for TOR too lol. My heart is 55% for GW2 and 45% for TOR, not a big difference. I'm just putting out what I think, just discussing away until anything comes out.
Sure, no problem at all, in discussions after all things become clearer. I've learnt a lot about some other MMO's by following the debates held on mmorpg.com and impressions given plus the source links that people provided
Originally posted by nomss
And this guy who is trying to argue that GW2 does not have weakness... IDK what to say to him. I thought I was GW2 fanboi and I'm not saying that GW2 does not have weakness. So IDK what he is...
It's a personal viewpoint and I think it should be taken like that.
I can very well imagine that for him and some other people GW2 might as well have no weaknesses to be found, like if the things that I mentioned aren't seen as negative but as positive. No open world pvp is for 1 person a weakness in a game and for another not, just as well as having no healer can be both positive or negative to different people, a strength or a weakness.
Matter of perspective and personal starting point of view, I guess.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I honestly don't think either game will really create much of an atmosphere for community- even with GW2's dynamic events. We've gotten to a point where players just don't type to talk that much anymore due to players being used to ventrilo and teamspeak (or other such programs). I see it every day in Rift; I'll do an invasion or just warfronts and no one will say a thing (except possibly to criticize).
Even in the guild of RL friends I've been playing games with for years guild chat has pretty much gone away since we started paying for our own vent server. I think this is one of the reasons players are advised to look toward a guild if they seek community or socializing. It's not an issue with the games or whether they foster an atmosphere, it's a problem with players that have just grown lazy.
This. No amount of game mechanics will force players to socialize if they don't want to. I remember these arguments in PRE-CU SWG all the time, and that game was built specifically for the sandbox and social crowd. Entertainers would complain that players would just come in, pay for their buff and leave. The combat players argued that they only went into the cantina because the game forced them to and didn't pay a monthly fee for chat. In STO where you can get thrown into a group at random I rarely see people chatting. Hard to type a bunch of jibberish when you have ships shooting at you.
I must admit that I've never been much for chatting in a game. Facebook and Twitter fill all my social needs and they're free. If I'm going to pay a monthly fee to play a game then it better offer more than a chat box in a Star Wars setting.
What it really ends up being is that GW2 is as much a faux multiplayer focused game as any other regular themepark title.
For one, events scale based on how many people participate, and not a single one of them has to be grouped to participate.... ALL of them receive equal rewards, so there is NO benefit to grouping AT ALL. IN fact you have more of a benefit to not group and just run around doing a mediocre job and getting the same rewards as everyone else.
SWTOR ultimately has a similar concept utilizing a different design. You will not get credit for certain things if you are not in a specific group that is currently doing the content, however, you will have more than enough chances to start a group with players doing similar types of content. That being said, you will run into plenty of open world content that you cannot do alone, plenty of other world content that requires grouping, and open world PvP on planets shared by both factions where it won't be practical to fight off hordes of enemies without a little army on your side.
Both games actually cater to solo play, just GW2 lays a foundation of blanket world quests that allow players to just walk into an area with a kill 10 rats scenario and do it with or without others doing the same quest, and SWTOR requires you to make specific choices regarding each quest you embark on and gives you the option to receive help from others in the area or shun them in a traditional MMO manner.
At the end of the day the results are the same, but both games change the presentation of questing. The only major difference in that, is that one game (GW2) is based around cyclical questing and the other (TOR) gives you a number of quests with persistent repercussions.
1. Because in a virtual world, there should be more classes than just the ones that can kill stuff.
2. Name a crafting profession that doesnt cater to combat mechanics. Weapons, armor, and combat buffs, thats all you create in this game.
3. Your personal preference differs from mine. I prefer persistent housing in a virtual world.
4. Again personal preference. Id rather see cities built up in a persistent game world and not in an instance or as some sort of resetting pvp objective.
5. Name a single DE where two players can walk up to the same event at the same time and complete them in different ways. I'll give you a hint: there are none because Anet doesnt want any player conflict or greifing. I call that a weakness simply because it lacks sporadic interaction, which is something i like in an mmorpg.
6. Dyes and stones change stats and appearance of weapons and armor. They can be purchased in a cash shop or earned in game. Id rather have them implemented into the actual crafting process but to each their own i guess.
try not to let your emotions take over your writing.
I'd just like to point out that there ARE different ways to complete an event.. in the demo, when the bandits (or were they pirates.. dunno) were attacking a village, one could put out the fires while the other would fight the bandits. So, yeah.
Also, how can you expect persistent housing and player cities? This isn't a sandbox..
And to the OP.. *sigh* another bait thread.. you could at least make this thread in the general discussion area. -.-
What I'm arguing is what you have already pointed out. So there are tanks, then? Is that what you're saying?
Cause everyone else says there is no trinity. But I guess just tanks and dps are only two sides of it. No trinity would mean that everybody takes roughly the same amount of damage from all sources given various forms of mitigation.
For warriors that's armor, thief-types that's dodging, mage types that's using magic shields.
The thief didn't appear to have a 'dodge' stat. Every time a mob swung, she took damage. And there was clearly a form of auto-targeting for mobs because even though she kept running around the mobs would just auto turn and keep hitting her except when she actually used one of her dash abilities.
So with that in mind....isn't this, in essence, how warrior and rogue-types work right now? Warrior types stand at the front while rogue-types have to flip around all over the place. How is this new? Isn't this what tanks and dps have always done?
Tanking usually means that you get the mob to attack you all the time (or sharing it between 2 or more tanks in raids). What we are talking about here is that different characters wear different types of armor and therefor can't take the same amount of punishment.
With the thief is that balanced by giving them a lot more moveability and active dodges. The heavier armor the less you can move around, I don't see what that have to do with the triad.
The thief do have a dodge stat, there are several vids around of people that actually can play the class even if most of them are of people trying it out for the first time in a demo. This class will take some time to learn how to play since it is pretty different from usual MMO combat but I seen vids of all classes except engineer dodge so far including warrior, the thief were just dodging a bit more spectacular than the rest.
What is new is the active dodge, the only game close to a MMO I played who used that is DDO and they didn't use it close to this.
1. Because in a virtual world, there should be more classes than just the ones that can kill stuff.
2. Name a crafting profession that doesnt cater to combat mechanics. Weapons, armor, and combat buffs, thats all you create in this game.
3. Your personal preference differs from mine. I prefer persistent housing in a virtual world.
4. Again personal preference. Id rather see cities built up in a persistent game world and not in an instance or as some sort of resetting pvp objective.
5. Name a single DE where two players can walk up to the same event at the same time and complete them in different ways. I'll give you a hint: there are none because Anet doesnt want any player conflict or greifing. I call that a weakness simply because it lacks sporadic interaction, which is something i like in an mmorpg.
6. Dyes and stones change stats and appearance of weapons and armor. They can be purchased in a cash shop or earned in game. Id rather have them implemented into the actual crafting process but to each their own i guess.
try not to let your emotions take over your writing.
I'd just like to point out that there ARE different ways to complete an event.. in the demo, when the bandits (or were they pirates.. dunno) were attacking a village, one could put out the fires while the other would fight the bandits. So, yeah.
Also, how can you expect persistent housing and player cities? This isn't a sandbox..
And to the OP.. *sigh* another bait thread.. you could at least make this thread in the general discussion area. -.-
I didn't even think of that. You know Nomms, you may not be as pro GW2 as you think. You say you're 55% GW2 and 45% TOR, but where did you post, TOR forums! Busted! You secretly love TOR more, you just don't want to admit it!
Originally posted by CookieTime Originally posted by Foomerang
1. Because in a virtual world, there should be more classes than just the ones that can kill stuff. 2. Name a crafting profession that doesnt cater to combat mechanics. Weapons, armor, and combat buffs, thats all you create in this game. 3. Your personal preference differs from mine. I prefer persistent housing in a virtual world. 4. Again personal preference. Id rather see cities built up in a persistent game world and not in an instance or as some sort of resetting pvp objective. 5. Name a single DE where two players can walk up to the same event at the same time and complete them in different ways. I'll give you a hint: there are none because Anet doesnt want any player conflict or greifing. I call that a weakness simply because it lacks sporadic interaction, which is something i like in an mmorpg. 6. Dyes and stones change stats and appearance of weapons and armor. They can be purchased in a cash shop or earned in game. Id rather have them implemented into the actual crafting process but to each their own i guess.
try not to let your emotions take over your writing.
I'd just like to point out that there ARE different ways to complete an event.. in the demo, when the bandits (or were they pirates.. dunno) were attacking a village, one could put out the fires while the other would fight the bandits. So, yeah. Also, how can you expect persistent housing and player cities? This isn't a sandbox..
And to the OP.. *sigh* another bait thread.. you could at least make this thread in the general discussion area. -.-
I dont care that GW2 isnt a sandbox, i never wanted it to be. In fact I dont think I even want a sandbox going by some people's definition anymore. What I do know is that Ive played mmos 10 years ago that have more features than tor and gw2 combined. So that, in my book, counts as a weakness.
1. Because in a virtual world, there should be more classes than just the ones that can kill stuff.
2. Name a crafting profession that doesnt cater to combat mechanics. Weapons, armor, and combat buffs, thats all you create in this game.
3. Your personal preference differs from mine. I prefer persistent housing in a virtual world.
4. Again personal preference. Id rather see cities built up in a persistent game world and not in an instance or as some sort of resetting pvp objective.
5. Name a single DE where two players can walk up to the same event at the same time and complete them in different ways. I'll give you a hint: there are none because Anet doesnt want any player conflict or greifing. I call that a weakness simply because it lacks sporadic interaction, which is something i like in an mmorpg.
6. Dyes and stones change stats and appearance of weapons and armor. They can be purchased in a cash shop or earned in game. Id rather have them implemented into the actual crafting process but to each their own i guess.
try not to let your emotions take over your writing.
I'd just like to point out that there ARE different ways to complete an event.. in the demo, when the bandits (or were they pirates.. dunno) were attacking a village, one could put out the fires while the other would fight the bandits. So, yeah.
Also, how can you expect persistent housing and player cities? This isn't a sandbox..
And to the OP.. *sigh* another bait thread.. you could at least make this thread in the general discussion area. -.-
I didn't even think of that. You know Nomms, you may not be as pro GW2 as you think. You say you're 55% GW2 and 45% TOR, but where did you post, TOR forums! Busted! You secretly love TOR more, you just don't want to admit it!
LOL. I was wondering the same. The guy above is right, I should posted this in general. Bait thread, yea. But while I was posting, I was thinking where should this go, GW2, TOR or genral.... I decided with TOR.
What are these heroic quests? Lets find out more about these. And another guy said we've seen some more vidoes other then flash points, links weould be nice. And as for the previews, or whatever you want to call, the people wrote who actually played the game, TOR that is, I've read some of them that were posted here.
FIrst, I have no problem with you sharing that Nomss. I will state before hand if i want something left just to emails
Second you wanted info about Heroic quests
Here is some.
Some clarification on story choices: On your personal class story quests only your dialogue choices matter, even if grouped. Outside of Class Story instances, we have World Quests, Flashpoints and Heroic Quests. In those, if grouped, your choices will be dictated by the decision the group makes. - Bioware
Which basically means while your in these quests, you and your party can make decisions on how that quest will go. as in when your talking a dialog wheel pops up for you and your party. You click a option for which way you want to go, for ease puproses, you want to kill the farmer while your group wants to save the farmer.
Once all of the party has picked an option, then a roll is made for each player via a RNG system and influenced by social armor, which as i stated before you get by doing these types of quests.
Whoever wins (gets the highest number) get their option picked and the quest goes in that direction.
Second quote
Quote: Heroic quests are of higher difficulty than normal quests, potentially require a group, and might be phased areas -Darth Hater
Which means the Heroic quests are harder versions, instead of running into a pack of say level 10 wolfs (for ease sake again) you might run into a pack level 13 Heroic/elite versions which might have abilities that wolfs wouldn't normally have like lunge or tear.
They might also be phased, so as once the wolf is dead it remains dead to you, so you simply don't see that said wolf pop up again and you got huh? i just killed that guy and the game never said there was more then one.
Heroic Quests: Heroic Quests are quests of higher difficulty that provide a challenge to groups - Bioware
Basically this just reinforces that Heroic quests are group encounters. You can as they are out in the open world out level them and simply solo them but they aren't designed that way.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
World Quests are not public quests. We use the term to separate them from class-specific content. So Heroic Quests, World Arcs, these are all World Quests. Basically if it’s not a Class Quest or a Flashpoint, it’s a World Quest. Heroic Quests are World Quests that require more than one player and often a full party to complete. They tend to be much more dramatic enemies and are always optional.
i know its not much in terms of dev quotes but there have been descriptions of them from the fansite summits and press immersion days. they start as early as your homeworld and are out in the open world. from what i understand, they sound kinda like elite mob areas in lotro(freaking dol dinen ><). I was going to link an epsidoe of gamebreakertv's The Republic in which one of the guys that attended a press immersion event. one of the things he talks about was some heroic quests his group did but the episode won't work. actually i will link the episode and maybe it will work for someone else but i cant say what time in the episode he talks about it.
ill also add an old post from last year from daniel erickson on quest type breakdown. this was made before we knew about heroic quests so they werent included
This one can get confusing as there is a great deal of content in the game, all geared for slightly different experiences. So let's get to it, yes?
--There is no repeated content across factions. Easy enough.
--Every Class has a completely unique storyline with their own companion characters and quests that takes them from the very first level through the very last and leads them naturally into the end game content. We call these Class Quests.
Now the questions and ideas that can be harder to get your head around if you haven't yet been one of the few lucky ones to actually play the game.
--"Is all your faction specific content Class Quests?"
Absolutely not. It's a multiplayer game, built for multiplayer storytelling. Which means all classes in a faction will have access to all of the same content except the Class Quests.
--"What is the breakdown between Class Quests and multiplayer quests?"
On the Origin worlds it's about 60% Class Quests, dropping to about 40% on the Capital worlds and then even lower for the rest of the game. The whole idea is to get you into the game, teach you about your class and your story, then get you out there playing with other people. We need to meet Obi-Wan, get our lightsaber and learn about the rest of the galaxy, but then it's time to get the gang together and go to war. We're still going to take breaks and run off to Dagobah but that's now the minority of our story. So the game very purposefully starts with more single player content and then moves strongly towards content that can be played multiplayer.
--"What are all the different types of multiplayer quests?"
Whew, that one's a big list but I can hit the major stuff. 1) World Quests: One-offs or short chains built for easy pick up and play. Grab a PUG or your friends and have a short adventure together. 2) World Arcs: Epic quest arcs that go from four to ten quests or more and follow a storyline across an entire planet. Big decisions and branching questlines you may have to play multiple times (in different playthroughs, they're not repeatable) to see all the content. Built for long play sessions or a series of short sessions where you and your group want a huge adventure that may stretch over tens of hours. Also very PUGable as long as you're grabbing like minded folks. 3) Flashpoints: Instanced, heavily scripted major story and action pieces built for groups to go in and get the very best of BioWare's multiplayer storytelling. Built to be played in a single sitting.
Now here's the fun part. Our multiplayer content has lines, choices and content that is specific to each class and content that is only there if you're in a group. Did the Jedi Consular really just convince the Sith boss to stand down and not fight us? Did the Bounty Hunter really just shake down the Moff for more money? Did the Smuggler just leave the group with that attractive quest giver? Um...are they coming back? It's fun to replay the game and see all the different content but it's also a blast to play with friends and be completely surprised by what they say. Often you'll find yourself saying "Okay, that clearly was not one of my dialogue options!"
FIrst, I have no problem with you sharing that Nomss. I will state before hand if i want something left just to emails
Second you wanted info about Heroic quests
Here is some.
Some clarification on story choices: On your personal class story quests only your dialogue choices matter, even if grouped. Outside of Class Story instances, we have World Quests, Flashpoints and Heroic Quests. In those, if grouped, your choices will be dictated by the decision the group makes. - Bioware
Which basically means while your in these quests, you and your party can make decisions on how that quest will go. as in when your talking a dialog wheel pops up for you and your party. You click a option for which way you want to go, for ease puproses, you want to kill the farmer while your group wants to save the farmer.
Once all of the party has picked an option, then a roll is made for each player via a RNG system and influenced by social armor, which as i stated before you get by doing these types of quests.
Whoever wins (gets the highest number) get their option picked and the quest goes in that direction.
Second quote
Quote: Heroic quests are of higher difficulty than normal quests, potentially require a group, and might be phased areas -Darth Hater
Which means the Heroic quests are harder versions, instead of running into a pack of say level 10 wolfs (for ease sake again) you might run into a pack level 13 Heroic/elite versions which might have abilities that wolfs wouldn't normally have like lunge or tear.
They might also be phased, so as once the wolf is dead it remains dead to you, so you simply don't see that said wolf pop up again and you got huh? i just killed that guy and the game never said there was more then one.
Heroic Quests: Heroic Quests are quests of higher difficulty that provide a challenge to groups - Bioware
Basically this just reinforces that Heroic quests are group encounters. You can as they are out in the open world out level them and simply solo them but they aren't designed that way.
Thx.
Sounds just like DCUO's world boss' quests. These could be fun. I guess similar to GW2's DE. We'll see. No doubt the game looks fun. But then again, they all do lol.
FIrst, I have no problem with you sharing that Nomss. I will state before hand if i want something left just to emails
Second you wanted info about Heroic quests
Here is some.
Some clarification on story choices: On your personal class story quests only your dialogue choices matter, even if grouped. Outside of Class Story instances, we have World Quests, Flashpoints and Heroic Quests. In those, if grouped, your choices will be dictated by the decision the group makes. - Bioware
Which basically means while your in these quests, you and your party can make decisions on how that quest will go. as in when your talking a dialog wheel pops up for you and your party. You click a option for which way you want to go, for ease puproses, you want to kill the farmer while your group wants to save the farmer.
Once all of the party has picked an option, then a roll is made for each player via a RNG system and influenced by social armor, which as i stated before you get by doing these types of quests.
Whoever wins (gets the highest number) get their option picked and the quest goes in that direction.
Second quote
Quote: Heroic quests are of higher difficulty than normal quests, potentially require a group, and might be phased areas -Darth Hater
Which means the Heroic quests are harder versions, instead of running into a pack of say level 10 wolfs (for ease sake again) you might run into a pack level 13 Heroic/elite versions which might have abilities that wolfs wouldn't normally have like lunge or tear.
They might also be phased, so as once the wolf is dead it remains dead to you, so you simply don't see that said wolf pop up again and you got huh? i just killed that guy and the game never said there was more then one.
Heroic Quests: Heroic Quests are quests of higher difficulty that provide a challenge to groups - Bioware
Basically this just reinforces that Heroic quests are group encounters. You can as they are out in the open world out level them and simply solo them but they aren't designed that way.
Thx.
Sounds just like DCUO's world boss' quests. These could be fun. I guess similar to GW2's DE. We'll see. No doubt the game looks fun. But then again, they all do lol.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
One big misunderstanding with TOR's story arc quests is the instancing. Most of these quests will take place in the open game world with many other players. The quest hub area will be instanced, as in a room with a green film door that you just walk through without delay. There is no jumpind to a room at all, just walking in and out. You go through your dialogue wheele and make your choices, then leave the hub back out into the open world.
Most of these class story quests will be sending you to open world areas. You may have to kill x or pick up y as in most MMO quests. And can group up to do most of this. And many side quests and open world quests will all be in the same area. So again, grouping up will be normal.
There will be areas that will be instanced to help with the story telling, but it won't be a big part of your class quests. One example I have seen is a Sith entering a public open world dungeon. Killing mobs along with everyone else. Then finding his quest area with the green film over the opening. He walks through and into his personal story instance. He is chalenged by his instructor and has to make choices as to who to kill. Once he is done, he leaves back into the open area dungeon and back out into the open world. It was a very small part of the overall quest. Most of it took place in the open world.
So there will not be much difference from other themepark MMO's and socializing or grouping for other than falshpoints (dungeons) PvP and Operations (Raids). If you are in an area and others are killing the same thing, you can group. But this has been declining in most games as others have said. So this will continue for both TOR and GW2.
GW2 IMO will make it even easier to not group ever. You don't even have to talk to anyone at all and still have just as much fun. The DE's will make it very easy to just run in and start killing stuff without any regard for any other player there. The same for GW2's personal story instance area. It will be for your character and other PvE dungeon runs that will be for grouping. But just as in most current MMOs and both TOR and GW2. You will be doing these dungeons with players you know more than a PUG. But that is just the way gaming is going at the moment.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them? R.A.Salvatore
I'm not sure it's been mentioned; but one thing I think could take away from GW2's multiplayer focus, is map based fast travel. With everyone porting around at their leisure and in and out of instanced PVP, the game world won't be the same as your typical MMO IMO.
I also really don't remember the GW playerbase as being overly soicial, I think the above had a lot to do with that. WIll the greater portion of GW2 players (who I would assume would be GW1 players) change that habit simply because there is now a more open world? That remains to be seen.
This is also something I saw in WAR, with it's instanced PVP focus and it's PQ system there was no reason to form groups unless it was inter-guild premades for Tactical PVP. PQ's took away the reason to form groups on a social level as it was more or less drop in, drop out based co-op. No reason to build freindships and the like as you could find a group regardless of that.
That's just my two cents .
Edit- Art right above me hit at this I see, so consider this a reinforcement of that ideal.- sorry for not reading first Art , I'm tired just had this idea pop in my head out of no where.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I'm not sure it's been mentioned; but one thing I think could take away from GW2's multiplayer focus, is map based fast travel. With everyone porting around at their leisure and in and out of instanced PVP, the game world won't be the same as your typical MMO IMO.
I also really don't remember the GW playerbase as being overly soicial, I think the above had a lot to do with that. WIll the greater portion of GW2 players (who I would assume would be GW1 players) change that habit simply because there is now a more open world? That remains to be seen.
This is also something I saw in WAR, with it's instanced PVP focus and it's PQ system there was no reason to form groups unless it was inter-guild premades for Tactical PVP. PQ's kinda made there be no reason to form groups on a social level as it was more or less drop in, drop out based co-op. No reason to build freindships and the like as you could find a group regardless of that.
That's just my two cents .
Edit- Art right above me hit at this I see, so consider this a reinforcement of that ideal.- sorry for not reading first Art , I'm tired just had this idea pop in my head out of no where.
I totally agree. It's one of the biggest beefs I have with GW2. IMO, if you aren't forced to travel in some way, then it doesn't feel like immersion. Popping in and out of places you've already visited makes it feel more like an arcade game than an MMO.
As far as mulitplayer, I think that GW2 will have the same pros and cons as Warhammer. If the population is high, you experience the best of the game. If the population is low, large scale events will scale down to the low population and you will never see the full wrath of whatever it is you are attacking thus taking away some of the fun.
I also think with so many events that kick off other events chained together coupled with the game somehow tracking who is close or far enough from the event to be part of the event when so many events are nearby that the potential for bugs and balancing issues is enormous. I guess only time will tell.
Regardless, my thoughts are GW2 is that it has the potential to be an extremely fun game for the casual fans based on the videos I have seen and as long as you are not playing in off hours, but I think SWTOR will provide much more depth and game play options in the long run. For PVE I prefer small groups of 2-4 rather than solo because you actually interact with people and strategize. I prefer solo over 30 people grouped together on a screen randomly spamming buttons with no one really having any clue who is doing what like in Rift and large Raids. I could be wrong, because neither game has been released yet.
Holy trinity isn't in the game. Maybe once you realize the combat doesn't revolve around meathshields "taunting" mobs and negating their AI and healbots keeping the tanks alive you will understand how the game will work. Until you realize that their is no point in you posting about anything that has to do with combat in GW2 due to your misunderstanding of the game.
This right here is what I'm talking about. Have you actually watched high level content with 'elite' mobs in GW 2?
If there are no tanks, then goodluck actually completing anything. The footage they've shown has displayed REALLY tough mobs that hit really hard and I'm not talking about boss mobs. The boss mobs I've seen basically sit there with tons of people blasting away at them while their health bar barely moves. The one DE video I've seen showed a guardian up close with a boss, then a thief got in close to do more damage and ended up dying after three or four hits. Oh wait...I'm sorry, going into a COD-styled last-ditch mode.
No trinity? That's cool. That's really cool when the basics of mob encounters are designed around a trinity to begin with. If you design boss mobs and the like with the idea of the trinity in mind, but then you remove that trinity all you've done is create a broken game.
OF COURSE, the game is designed without the trinity, they did it with GW1 why wouldn't they do it with GW2? GW1 had a dedicated healing class but the warriors didn't have taunting mechanics, the prrimary way to tank was body blocking and controlling mobs and if that worked for GW1 why wouldn't it work for GW2? The only difference now between GW1 combat and GW2 combat is the lack of a dedicated healer, almost all the classes have abilities to heal the entire group. Even the warrior can heal the group with the right set-up.
The trinity can only be removed if you create some other way of fighting bosses. That might be health drops that pop up. That might be action-styled mechanics like something you might see in God of War.
Like I said before they did it in GW1, they can do it in GW2.
That might mean creating a system where there are no classes, just characters. Though as long as there are skills, then there will be 'classes' and 'builds'.
But this is all besides the point. Some form of the trinity likely still exists in GW 2, buried under their shiny veneer. You have Guardians that have multiple tank-like abilities. You have en Elementalist aspect that is reported to have more than one 'heal'. Sure sounds like there is no trinity to me!
They never said there was no trinity, they only said there was NO TRADITIONAL HOLY trinity.
"Instead of the traditional trinity, every Guild Wars 2 profession is self reliant--not only can they all help each other by reviving in combat, but all professions have ways to build their characters differently to make them more versatile for group play."
"Ultimately, DPS/heal/tank just didn't cut it in our book...er, game. Our players demand more from Guild Wars 2 and we intend to deliver on that demand instead of delivering more of the same. Not only is the trinity very formulaic, but it leaves out a lot of gameplay elements that make many other games so much fun. Instead, we break these trinity categories down into a cooler, more versatile system:"
"You could say instead of DPS/heal/tank, we have our own trinity of damage, support, and control, but we prefer to think of them as the variety of elements that create a diverse and dynamic combat system that gives each player a toolbox to work with to solve any encounter we might throw their way. If that sounds like the kind of combat you are interested in, Guild Wars 2 is going to be a great place for you and your friends to fight together for many years to come."
I'm criticizing GW 2 because it needs to be criticized. Too many people are just accepting what Anet is offering without really looking at HOW they're doing it and the problems that their execution can/will create.
You're criticizing areas of the game that you have failed to fully understand. The people on GW2guru are waaaay ahead of you on tangible criticisms.
On a sidenote, it's interesting to see how much more GW2 fans keep popping up in SWTOR threads with those 'SWTOR vs GW2' comparison threads and posts, a lot more than SWTOR fans are doing this in the GW2 section. Seems to me that SWTOR fans are more respectful towards other people's choice and taste in the games they like than vice versa GW2 fans (or sandbox fans for that matter) are wont to do. Food for thought?
Nah, it's not that SW:ToR fans are more respectful, it's that for most of them, GW2 doesn't even really register.
It might help if you look at it as if SW:ToR is the US, and GW2 is Canada.
Most people from the US only have a vague idea of what Canada is (That's... the state to the north, right?), and could care less about it. They rarely feel a need to compare themselves to Canada, or mention their superior points to Canada.
On the other hand, Canadians often tell me how much better their country is than the US.
This doesn't apply to ALL Canadians and people from the US, but the same basic principle holds.
If you don't want to compare countries, look at it as the Chicago vs. New York City rivalry.
New York City is, by and large, completely unaware that there is a rivalry. When you're in the superior position (In terms of size and being mainstream, not saying the US is better than Canada or NYC is better than Chicago), there's no need to even think about who is #2, or #3, or whatever.
People in the underdog position are painfully aware of people in the better off position though.
On a side note, I'd like to point out that MOST of the activity I see in threads like this isn't GW2 people bashing SW:ToR, it's GW2 people trying to explain what they consider misconceptions.
I certainly never visit these threads to trash talk SW:ToR, and I'd be impressed if you can find a post by me saying anything negative about SW:ToR, despite some random people insisting I'm a GW2 troll. (Very impressed, since they don't exist)
Oh. Wait. I did say the ground textures in SW:ToR are a bit cheap, but I say the same thing about GW2, and heck, every MMORPG ever. Generally speaking, ground textures are the bastard unwanted stepchild of graphics.
I've read a lot about the game, but apparantly I'm the only one who is actually smart enough to think ahead and see the glaring problems that will arise out of what Anet is talking about.
Nice job insulting everybody who disagrees with you by saying they're insufficiently smart.
Have you ever considered that the problem might simply be that you're a little ignorant when it comes to GW2? Not stupid, mind you... just ignorant. As in you are not fully possessed of all the pertinent facts.
I plan on playing TOR with a group of friends multiplayer first then I will go through the game the way I want to when I get bored playing that character. I think that was how Bioware ment you to play the multiplayer, with a group of friends. But then again playing with PUG's all the time could be fun.. I't would always be random so you never know if somone is gonna be a jerk to an npc.
I don't want to get into a "which is better TOR or GW2" debate as that strikes me as just silly, on top of being flame-bait. They are different games with different design focuses and are each intended to appeal to thier own target audience.
I will say that one of the things I'm (personaly) most excited about for upcoming MMO's is GW2's Dynamic Events system....and I believe the people who are simply stating that it's a dressed up public quest...are off-base and really don't understand the implications of the design well.
Public Quest works like this
Quest Starts -> Que Wave1 -> Que Wave2 -> Que Wave3 -> Quest End.... 8 hours later repeat cycle.
The DE system is much more like a World State Engine.
Event Chain Trigger (Can either be to player action or random or timer, etc) -> Event object starts in Phase 1.... Player Actions can push Event object anyware from Phase 1-10, IF Event pushed to Phase 7 then player Actions can push event anyware from Phase 8-14, IF Event object pushed to Phase 12 THEN trigger whole OTHER even chain with it's own set of phases, etc.
The fact that GW2 is going to have litteraly THOUSANDS of such Event Chains and that they can EFFECT each other....means that the world as whole or any given area is unlikely to be exactly the same every single time you login. It also means that the world will actualy be able to change and respond to the players actions.
As far as I'm concerned, with the current level of game technology this is as close as a fully automated system can get to feeling like a real GM driven campaign world, that is dynamic and interactive. YMMV.
Comments
Right, I'm not arguing this.
What I'm arguing is what you have already pointed out. So there are tanks, then? Is that what you're saying?
Cause everyone else says there is no trinity. But I guess just tanks and dps are only two sides of it. No trinity would mean that everybody takes roughly the same amount of damage from all sources given various forms of mitigation.
For warriors that's armor, thief-types that's dodging, mage types that's using magic shields.
The thief didn't appear to have a 'dodge' stat. Every time a mob swung, she took damage. And there was clearly a form of auto-targeting for mobs because even though she kept running around the mobs would just auto turn and keep hitting her except when she actually used one of her dash abilities.
So with that in mind....isn't this, in essence, how warrior and rogue-types work right now? Warrior types stand at the front while rogue-types have to flip around all over the place. How is this new? Isn't this what tanks and dps have always done?
Couple things I noticed in the thread.
In regards to the whole "TOR vs GW2 People" and creation of threads and those that flock to threads such as these.
There seems to be a lot of People that want to play TOR/GW2. They may favor TOR a little more. I would consider myself one of those. GW2 will be a fun game, no doubt. I'll enjoy it. But, I personally, will enjoy tor a little more.
There seems to be some people who want to play GW2/TOR, with a favor of GW2.
I see very few people that want to play TOR, but don't want to play GW2.
I see MANY people who want to play GW2, but will not play TOR. These people run to threads such as this, and make sure to scream how great their game is, and everything bad about TOR. This thread starts out like that. Other people in this catagory do the same.
And of course, there are those that hate mainstream, and hate them both, but favor GW2 since it's not as mainstream or as themeparkish.
Great Job!
Saying GW2 has no weakness is just silly. Of course, some might say these "weaknesses many see" are nothing of the sort. Portals between zones. One AREA (4 zones I think total) for PvP, locked inside instances. Some like the trinity, some do not.
The last thing, is someone is criticizing GW2. That's great. I agree that some people seem to be blindly following Anet to whatever they want, and aren't thinking, maybe the should improve this, or change that. There is plenty of criticisim of TOR.
One final thought. I played Warhammer and Rift. Both had the Event system in it. Both started out with tons of people doing them. They went stale. it quickly became the same thing. They became empty, except when required to do something else. I expect to see DEs required to do certain things, ie dungeons, quests, etc. It's going to be hard to change something like that. They should have reasons for people to keep doing DEs, but not be FORCED to do them. So you save the 10th village again, you get a small discount on crafting stuff. Not huge that you HAVE to call your guild to help you beat 7 stages of the DE over a long time so you can all save tons of money.
And it's not a holy trinity of heal/tank/dps in GW2. It's Control/Support/DPS. lol
Everything has weaknesses or weak points. Saying that something hasn't got them is blindness or fanboism. Maybe to someone there aren't weaknesses - or the more appropriate term is maybe 'dislikes' - as far as he can perceive, but that doesn't mean that a product doesn't have any.
Here's a list of things that can be perceived as weaknesses (to others):
1. no open, seamless world: there will be portals ('zoning) between areas, also the outside ones.
2. no mounts, only teleportation.
3. no extensive crafting, nor is it something new
4. no healer classes: even if there's support roles, the changed mechanic can make this less appealing to those players who loved to be the healer in MMO's groups and raids
5. no FFA or open world pvp
6. no player houses and cities that you can build everywhere
7. no raid content, at least not as is seen in other MMO's. Some players loved that content.
Ok, those were the things that came up right away in my mind. The point is that there'll always be weaknesses even if those may not be a weakness to you. I myself have no problem with those points I mentioned, they won't prevent me from enjoying GW2 to the fullest. But then again, I'm easy with MMO's having features that I like less while still having great fun in them.
On a sidenote, this once again has turned into a GW2 vs SWTOR pingpong game thread, so I'm going to leave it at this
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
For the 50 minutes of GW2.
Uhhhh, you do realize this was captured at some kind of event, right?
You do realize that Anet likely intentionally shoved a number of people together in the same room, into the same zone, right?
There is a 30 minute video out there of TOR that is prefaced by someone saying that these people grouped up to go do stuff together. I'm not sure this is any different than the GW2 video. Both captured at events where people are right beside each other so they can talk to each other about doing stuff in the game.
The true test of how 'social' a game is isn't how it looks at or near release. This is because everybody is the same level and they're in roughly the same zones. Grouping up is common because there are tons of people running around.
The true test comes in a year after release. How many people are still running around in the open world actually randomly finding people?
Nobody can say how either game has done on this test because neither is released yet. So talking about this particular point is completely moot.
LOL. I guess I have to take the blame huh? lol
Anyways, this is all fun and games. No hard feeling. I know we won't know how much we like GW2 or TOR until we actually play ourselves.
And this guy who is trying to argue that GW2 does not have weakness... IDK what to say to him. I thought I was GW2 fanboi and I'm not saying that GW2 does not have weakness. So IDK what he is...
Guild Wars 2's 50 minutes game play video:
http://n4g.com/news/592585/guild-wars-2-50-minutes-of-pure-gameplay
Everything We Know about GW2:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/287180/page/1
Sure, no problem at all, in discussions after all things become clearer. I've learnt a lot about some other MMO's by following the debates held on mmorpg.com and impressions given plus the source links that people provided
It's a personal viewpoint and I think it should be taken like that.
I can very well imagine that for him and some other people GW2 might as well have no weaknesses to be found, like if the things that I mentioned aren't seen as negative but as positive. No open world pvp is for 1 person a weakness in a game and for another not, just as well as having no healer can be both positive or negative to different people, a strength or a weakness.
Matter of perspective and personal starting point of view, I guess.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
This. No amount of game mechanics will force players to socialize if they don't want to. I remember these arguments in PRE-CU SWG all the time, and that game was built specifically for the sandbox and social crowd. Entertainers would complain that players would just come in, pay for their buff and leave. The combat players argued that they only went into the cantina because the game forced them to and didn't pay a monthly fee for chat. In STO where you can get thrown into a group at random I rarely see people chatting. Hard to type a bunch of jibberish when you have ships shooting at you.
I must admit that I've never been much for chatting in a game. Facebook and Twitter fill all my social needs and they're free. If I'm going to pay a monthly fee to play a game then it better offer more than a chat box in a Star Wars setting.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
What it really ends up being is that GW2 is as much a faux multiplayer focused game as any other regular themepark title.
For one, events scale based on how many people participate, and not a single one of them has to be grouped to participate.... ALL of them receive equal rewards, so there is NO benefit to grouping AT ALL. IN fact you have more of a benefit to not group and just run around doing a mediocre job and getting the same rewards as everyone else.
SWTOR ultimately has a similar concept utilizing a different design. You will not get credit for certain things if you are not in a specific group that is currently doing the content, however, you will have more than enough chances to start a group with players doing similar types of content. That being said, you will run into plenty of open world content that you cannot do alone, plenty of other world content that requires grouping, and open world PvP on planets shared by both factions where it won't be practical to fight off hordes of enemies without a little army on your side.
Both games actually cater to solo play, just GW2 lays a foundation of blanket world quests that allow players to just walk into an area with a kill 10 rats scenario and do it with or without others doing the same quest, and SWTOR requires you to make specific choices regarding each quest you embark on and gives you the option to receive help from others in the area or shun them in a traditional MMO manner.
At the end of the day the results are the same, but both games change the presentation of questing. The only major difference in that, is that one game (GW2) is based around cyclical questing and the other (TOR) gives you a number of quests with persistent repercussions.
I'd just like to point out that there ARE different ways to complete an event.. in the demo, when the bandits (or were they pirates.. dunno) were attacking a village, one could put out the fires while the other would fight the bandits. So, yeah.
Also, how can you expect persistent housing and player cities? This isn't a sandbox..
And to the OP.. *sigh* another bait thread.. you could at least make this thread in the general discussion area. -.-
Eat me!
Tanking usually means that you get the mob to attack you all the time (or sharing it between 2 or more tanks in raids). What we are talking about here is that different characters wear different types of armor and therefor can't take the same amount of punishment.
With the thief is that balanced by giving them a lot more moveability and active dodges. The heavier armor the less you can move around, I don't see what that have to do with the triad.
The thief do have a dodge stat, there are several vids around of people that actually can play the class even if most of them are of people trying it out for the first time in a demo. This class will take some time to learn how to play since it is pretty different from usual MMO combat but I seen vids of all classes except engineer dodge so far including warrior, the thief were just dodging a bit more spectacular than the rest.
What is new is the active dodge, the only game close to a MMO I played who used that is DDO and they didn't use it close to this.
I didn't even think of that. You know Nomms, you may not be as pro GW2 as you think. You say you're 55% GW2 and 45% TOR, but where did you post, TOR forums! Busted! You secretly love TOR more, you just don't want to admit it!
Also, how can you expect persistent housing and player cities? This isn't a sandbox..
And to the OP.. *sigh* another bait thread.. you could at least make this thread in the general discussion area. -.-
I dont care that GW2 isnt a sandbox, i never wanted it to be. In fact I dont think I even want a sandbox going by some people's definition anymore. What I do know is that Ive played mmos 10 years ago that have more features than tor and gw2 combined. So that, in my book, counts as a weakness.
LOL. I was wondering the same. The guy above is right, I should posted this in general. Bait thread, yea. But while I was posting, I was thinking where should this go, GW2, TOR or genral.... I decided with TOR.
What are these heroic quests? Lets find out more about these. And another guy said we've seen some more vidoes other then flash points, links weould be nice. And as for the previews, or whatever you want to call, the people wrote who actually played the game, TOR that is, I've read some of them that were posted here.
Guild Wars 2's 50 minutes game play video:
http://n4g.com/news/592585/guild-wars-2-50-minutes-of-pure-gameplay
Everything We Know about GW2:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/287180/page/1
FIrst, I have no problem with you sharing that Nomss. I will state before hand if i want something left just to emails
Second you wanted info about Heroic quests
Here is some.
Some clarification on story choices: On your personal class story quests only your dialogue choices matter, even if grouped. Outside of Class Story instances, we have World Quests, Flashpoints and Heroic Quests. In those, if grouped, your choices will be dictated by the decision the group makes. - Bioware
Which basically means while your in these quests, you and your party can make decisions on how that quest will go. as in when your talking a dialog wheel pops up for you and your party. You click a option for which way you want to go, for ease puproses, you want to kill the farmer while your group wants to save the farmer.
Once all of the party has picked an option, then a roll is made for each player via a RNG system and influenced by social armor, which as i stated before you get by doing these types of quests.
Whoever wins (gets the highest number) get their option picked and the quest goes in that direction.
Second quote
Quote: Heroic quests are of higher difficulty than normal quests, potentially require a group, and might be phased areas -Darth Hater
Which means the Heroic quests are harder versions, instead of running into a pack of say level 10 wolfs (for ease sake again) you might run into a pack level 13 Heroic/elite versions which might have abilities that wolfs wouldn't normally have like lunge or tear.
They might also be phased, so as once the wolf is dead it remains dead to you, so you simply don't see that said wolf pop up again and you got huh? i just killed that guy and the game never said there was more then one.
Heroic Quests: Heroic Quests are quests of higher difficulty that provide a challenge to groups - Bioware
Basically this just reinforces that Heroic quests are group encounters. You can as they are out in the open world out level them and simply solo them but they aren't designed that way.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
here is what i have found regarding heroic quests in TOR:
http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=5729571#edit5729571
GeorgZoeller
Joined: May 2010
03.15.2011 , 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caanon
Is "Heroic Quests" the new name for what was previously referred to as "World Arcs", or something different?
Heroic Quests are quests of higher difficulty that provide a challenge to groups.
http://tor-talk.com/category/editorials/interviews/
World Quests are not public quests. We use the term to separate them from class-specific content. So Heroic Quests, World Arcs, these are all World Quests. Basically if it’s not a Class Quest or a Flashpoint, it’s a World Quest. Heroic Quests are World Quests that require more than one player and often a full party to complete. They tend to be much more dramatic enemies and are always optional.
i know its not much in terms of dev quotes but there have been descriptions of them from the fansite summits and press immersion days. they start as early as your homeworld and are out in the open world. from what i understand, they sound kinda like elite mob areas in lotro(freaking dol dinen ><). I was going to link an epsidoe of gamebreakertv's The Republic in which one of the guys that attended a press immersion event. one of the things he talks about was some heroic quests his group did but the episode won't work. actually i will link the episode and maybe it will work for someone else but i cant say what time in the episode he talks about it.
http://www.gamebreaker.tv/swtor-the-republic-38-hands-on/
ill also add an old post from last year from daniel erickson on quest type breakdown. this was made before we knew about heroic quests so they werent included
http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=4414944#post4414944
This one can get confusing as there is a great deal of content in the game, all geared for slightly different experiences. So let's get to it, yes?
--There is no repeated content across factions. Easy enough.
--Every Class has a completely unique storyline with their own companion characters and quests that takes them from the very first level through the very last and leads them naturally into the end game content. We call these Class Quests.
Now the questions and ideas that can be harder to get your head around if you haven't yet been one of the few lucky ones to actually play the game.
--"Is all your faction specific content Class Quests?"
Absolutely not. It's a multiplayer game, built for multiplayer storytelling. Which means all classes in a faction will have access to all of the same content except the Class Quests.
--"What is the breakdown between Class Quests and multiplayer quests?"
On the Origin worlds it's about 60% Class Quests, dropping to about 40% on the Capital worlds and then even lower for the rest of the game. The whole idea is to get you into the game, teach you about your class and your story, then get you out there playing with other people. We need to meet Obi-Wan, get our lightsaber and learn about the rest of the galaxy, but then it's time to get the gang together and go to war. We're still going to take breaks and run off to Dagobah but that's now the minority of our story. So the game very purposefully starts with more single player content and then moves strongly towards content that can be played multiplayer.
--"What are all the different types of multiplayer quests?"
Whew, that one's a big list but I can hit the major stuff. 1) World Quests: One-offs or short chains built for easy pick up and play. Grab a PUG or your friends and have a short adventure together. 2) World Arcs: Epic quest arcs that go from four to ten quests or more and follow a storyline across an entire planet. Big decisions and branching questlines you may have to play multiple times (in different playthroughs, they're not repeatable) to see all the content. Built for long play sessions or a series of short sessions where you and your group want a huge adventure that may stretch over tens of hours. Also very PUGable as long as you're grabbing like minded folks. 3) Flashpoints: Instanced, heavily scripted major story and action pieces built for groups to go in and get the very best of BioWare's multiplayer storytelling. Built to be played in a single sitting.
Now here's the fun part. Our multiplayer content has lines, choices and content that is specific to each class and content that is only there if you're in a group. Did the Jedi Consular really just convince the Sith boss to stand down and not fight us? Did the Bounty Hunter really just shake down the Moff for more money? Did the Smuggler just leave the group with that attractive quest giver? Um...are they coming back? It's fun to replay the game and see all the different content but it's also a blast to play with friends and be completely surprised by what they say. Often you'll find yourself saying "Okay, that clearly was not one of my dialogue options!"
Hope that helps!
edit: lol whilan got to it first
Thx.
Sounds just like DCUO's world boss' quests. These could be fun. I guess similar to GW2's DE. We'll see.
No doubt the game looks fun. But then again, they all do lol.
Guild Wars 2's 50 minutes game play video:
http://n4g.com/news/592585/guild-wars-2-50-minutes-of-pure-gameplay
Everything We Know about GW2:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/287180/page/1
Or before those, City of Heroes.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
One big misunderstanding with TOR's story arc quests is the instancing. Most of these quests will take place in the open game world with many other players. The quest hub area will be instanced, as in a room with a green film door that you just walk through without delay. There is no jumpind to a room at all, just walking in and out. You go through your dialogue wheele and make your choices, then leave the hub back out into the open world.
Most of these class story quests will be sending you to open world areas. You may have to kill x or pick up y as in most MMO quests. And can group up to do most of this. And many side quests and open world quests will all be in the same area. So again, grouping up will be normal.
There will be areas that will be instanced to help with the story telling, but it won't be a big part of your class quests. One example I have seen is a Sith entering a public open world dungeon. Killing mobs along with everyone else. Then finding his quest area with the green film over the opening. He walks through and into his personal story instance. He is chalenged by his instructor and has to make choices as to who to kill. Once he is done, he leaves back into the open area dungeon and back out into the open world. It was a very small part of the overall quest. Most of it took place in the open world.
So there will not be much difference from other themepark MMO's and socializing or grouping for other than falshpoints (dungeons) PvP and Operations (Raids). If you are in an area and others are killing the same thing, you can group. But this has been declining in most games as others have said. So this will continue for both TOR and GW2.
GW2 IMO will make it even easier to not group ever. You don't even have to talk to anyone at all and still have just as much fun. The DE's will make it very easy to just run in and start killing stuff without any regard for any other player there. The same for GW2's personal story instance area. It will be for your character and other PvE dungeon runs that will be for grouping. But just as in most current MMOs and both TOR and GW2. You will be doing these dungeons with players you know more than a PUG. But that is just the way gaming is going at the moment.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?
R.A.Salvatore
I'm not sure it's been mentioned; but one thing I think could take away from GW2's multiplayer focus, is map based fast travel. With everyone porting around at their leisure and in and out of instanced PVP, the game world won't be the same as your typical MMO IMO.
I also really don't remember the GW playerbase as being overly soicial, I think the above had a lot to do with that. WIll the greater portion of GW2 players (who I would assume would be GW1 players) change that habit simply because there is now a more open world? That remains to be seen.
This is also something I saw in WAR, with it's instanced PVP focus and it's PQ system there was no reason to form groups unless it was inter-guild premades for Tactical PVP. PQ's took away the reason to form groups on a social level as it was more or less drop in, drop out based co-op. No reason to build freindships and the like as you could find a group regardless of that.
That's just my two cents .
Edit- Art right above me hit at this I see, so consider this a reinforcement of that ideal.- sorry for not reading first Art
, I'm tired just had this idea pop in my head out of no where.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I totally agree. It's one of the biggest beefs I have with GW2. IMO, if you aren't forced to travel in some way, then it doesn't feel like immersion. Popping in and out of places you've already visited makes it feel more like an arcade game than an MMO.
As far as mulitplayer, I think that GW2 will have the same pros and cons as Warhammer. If the population is high, you experience the best of the game. If the population is low, large scale events will scale down to the low population and you will never see the full wrath of whatever it is you are attacking thus taking away some of the fun.
I also think with so many events that kick off other events chained together coupled with the game somehow tracking who is close or far enough from the event to be part of the event when so many events are nearby that the potential for bugs and balancing issues is enormous. I guess only time will tell.
Regardless, my thoughts are GW2 is that it has the potential to be an extremely fun game for the casual fans based on the videos I have seen and as long as you are not playing in off hours, but I think SWTOR will provide much more depth and game play options in the long run. For PVE I prefer small groups of 2-4 rather than solo because you actually interact with people and strategize. I prefer solo over 30 people grouped together on a screen randomly spamming buttons with no one really having any clue who is doing what like in Rift and large Raids. I could be wrong, because neither game has been released yet.
There Is Always Hope!
You're criticizing areas of the game that you have failed to fully understand. The people on GW2guru are waaaay ahead of you on tangible criticisms.
This is not a game.
Nah, it's not that SW:ToR fans are more respectful, it's that for most of them, GW2 doesn't even really register.
It might help if you look at it as if SW:ToR is the US, and GW2 is Canada.
Most people from the US only have a vague idea of what Canada is (That's... the state to the north, right?), and could care less about it. They rarely feel a need to compare themselves to Canada, or mention their superior points to Canada.
On the other hand, Canadians often tell me how much better their country is than the US.
This doesn't apply to ALL Canadians and people from the US, but the same basic principle holds.
If you don't want to compare countries, look at it as the Chicago vs. New York City rivalry.
New York City is, by and large, completely unaware that there is a rivalry.
When you're in the superior position (In terms of size and being mainstream, not saying the US is better than Canada or NYC is better than Chicago), there's no need to even think about who is #2, or #3, or whatever.
People in the underdog position are painfully aware of people in the better off position though.
On a side note, I'd like to point out that MOST of the activity I see in threads like this isn't GW2 people bashing SW:ToR, it's GW2 people trying to explain what they consider misconceptions.
I certainly never visit these threads to trash talk SW:ToR, and I'd be impressed if you can find a post by me saying anything negative about SW:ToR, despite some random people insisting I'm a GW2 troll. (Very impressed, since they don't exist)
Oh. Wait. I did say the ground textures in SW:ToR are a bit cheap, but I say the same thing about GW2, and heck, every MMORPG ever. Generally speaking, ground textures are the bastard unwanted stepchild of graphics.
Nice job insulting everybody who disagrees with you by saying they're insufficiently smart.
Have you ever considered that the problem might simply be that you're a little ignorant when it comes to GW2? Not stupid, mind you... just ignorant. As in you are not fully possessed of all the pertinent facts.
I plan on playing TOR with a group of friends multiplayer first then I will go through the game the way I want to when I get bored playing that character. I think that was how Bioware ment you to play the multiplayer, with a group of friends. But then again playing with PUG's all the time could be fun.. I't would always be random so you never know if somone is gonna be a jerk to an npc.
I don't want to get into a "which is better TOR or GW2" debate as that strikes me as just silly, on top of being flame-bait. They are different games with different design focuses and are each intended to appeal to thier own target audience.
I will say that one of the things I'm (personaly) most excited about for upcoming MMO's is GW2's Dynamic Events system....and I believe the people who are simply stating that it's a dressed up public quest...are off-base and really don't understand the implications of the design well.
Public Quest works like this
Quest Starts -> Que Wave1 -> Que Wave2 -> Que Wave3 -> Quest End.... 8 hours later repeat cycle.
The DE system is much more like a World State Engine.
Event Chain Trigger (Can either be to player action or random or timer, etc) -> Event object starts in Phase 1.... Player Actions can push Event object anyware from Phase 1-10, IF Event pushed to Phase 7 then player Actions can push event anyware from Phase 8-14, IF Event object pushed to Phase 12 THEN trigger whole OTHER even chain with it's own set of phases, etc.
The fact that GW2 is going to have litteraly THOUSANDS of such Event Chains and that they can EFFECT each other....means that the world as whole or any given area is unlikely to be exactly the same every single time you login. It also means that the world will actualy be able to change and respond to the players actions.
As far as I'm concerned, with the current level of game technology this is as close as a fully automated system can get to feeling like a real GM driven campaign world, that is dynamic and interactive. YMMV.