I understand what you are saying, but even a game of monoply ends with a winner. You see, GW2 is not a sandbox game, so to bring Darkfall into this just doesn't work. Sandbox is about players driving all of the content, and I enjoy those type of games too, but I also enjoy pure competition with a goal and that is to win. GW2, is playing off the spirit of competition here. You see, you are looking at it in the wrong light still, when I said when you defeat your enemies and move on to the next I understand you keep what you have taken. But the way I'm looking at it, is once you've beaten your enemies here, you are now on conquest in a different land to take over. You see? But, it also can be likened to a basketball game, albeit smaller scale battleground fights like in WAR or Rift, or even WoW are more alike, since this match can last for a week or more.
You see, a lot of people like competition with an ending, and they like to win. This is what this system is playing off of, it won't just be constant juggling forever with the same old people, will you meet that server again? Sure its highly probable, but you will wage a war for a week or more and there will be a victor determined, and then you will go on to meet new competition. I like it this way, because you are constantly testing your server against newer competition who may bring different strategies to the table.
I agree with that. I like instanced PvP like SWTORS Warzones too, thats objective based, but I also like the longer persistent, open world PvP. GW2 only has one of those at this time. They have arena matches that end in minutes, and larger open zones where persistent changes only last a week.
I'm not saying this is bad. I'm saying I prefer larger scale, open world always persistent PvP. Its a preference thing. Other games have battlegrounds or warzones or things of that nature to, and I like them... I play them... and then sometimes I just want to take a town, or control point and hold it with my guild for as long as we can, providing benefits to our faction on our server.
Both Alot and Meowhead are right, being able to capture an area indefinitely means that someone else won't be able to capture it at all if we do our job and keep the zone. I've never seen that to be the case in any of the games I've played simply because a group of players coordinating an attack at a time where defense is relatively low is ideal and yields the intended results.
I'm not saying it won't be fun. I'm saying that I have a preference. I'm saying I like being able to take an area and knowing that it won't go away at the end of the day, or week.
GW2 will satisfy some parts of gameplay for me, not doubt, SWTOR will satisfy others, and Firefall will satisfy yet, another and so on. While I dislike that the persistency will not be there, and that what you do in W v W will really not have an effect on what you see in the PvE world, I never though it wouldn't be fun. I just don't know how long it will be fun for ME.
Well you have to look at it like this. You will capture keeps, towers, resource nodes, villages, caravans, and your job is to help hold those while progressing to take over your enemies and hold that ground. It will be severely contested and you will be getting fights everywhere. Your solo guy has his place, your tight knit rogue groups have theirs, and your zerg mentallity people have their place. Just don't look at it as a loss of persistence, because I don't believe that is what ANet intended. What it is, is them taking DAoC and asking hmm, how can we improve upon this?
Well answer number one is: Actually allow somebody to indefinitely win. How do we do this? We implement a week long match, and finally there is an indefinite winner.
Answer number two, if one of the factions on a server, or even in a server cluster has much better players that PvP than x servers, then x servers are going to be in hell for the entirety of the game and probably jump to the other faction, or server. Thus, GW2 already didn't have factions, so it would have had to been with server clusters in the first place, but they didn't stop there. They implemented a system that helps the strong and helps the weak. You will be paired by your server strength, so this always presents a challenge for the strong servers, and it gives the weaker servers fighting chances because they are actually at their competition levels.
You don't see an issue with this and a 3 world system? The idea behind the 3 faction system was to have 2 smaller factions balance out the third larger one if it came to that. Thats why everyone raves about the 3 faction system. In a small instanced week long battle without persistent control and a mix and match of servers each week (which could depend on win/lose ration, but what about server size *which can change on a whim as transfers are free and common*, or participation in W v W v W? What about a smaller server with a higher win/lose ratio but with less players on the server total, but more players participating in W v W v W then another server? How is this going to be balanced and what is balance based on? Sure its easy to say the weaker servers just get grouped with weaker servers, but thats like saying that bad players only get grouped with bad players. Where is the line where a "weak" (lower population, lower participation) server thats won every match gets matched up with the "strong" servers that may or may not totaly destroy them?
Another qualm I have is that two worlds aren't going to balance out the third, more populated or active world because everyone is trying to take the castles, etc, for themselves. At the end of the week there is only 1 winner. 2nd place might give you a slightly higher ranking than 3rd for that week, but you aren't forced into staying on that server so its not like it matters if a server ranks number 1 or number 3, because, if you wanted to, you could just become part of the winning server all the time.
I haven't heard anything about them limiting that other than you can't transfer servers while you are in a W v W v W match with them and participate that same day (or week, I think).
There is no issue with this and 3 faction system. It applies an unpredictability to the PvP. It applies a balance all the way from the very beginning. The 3 faction system was awesome, and it fits with this. The winner will go on to face other servers coming off of wins. We don't know how zerg mentallity servers will play out against smaller more coordinated servers yet, but the answer to your question is simple. If a server with lower pop faces a much larger server because it has a high win ration, and they fail to win. Then, ummm they face other servers next week who are better matched. We don't know the specifics of the matchmaking so we can't delve much into that right now, but the way it is set up is it will be constantly changing so balance will be fine... Also, they have already said they are working on restrictions for server changing with WvW specifically in mind..
I can accept that. I'll still be somewhat skeptical about it, but I can accept a wait and see mentality.
While I do agree that the 3 faction system does provide some sense of unpredictability, it was more in line with providing balance for 2 factions that were outmatched. But if 3 factions are all matched evenly, then it will just be a 3 faction free for all. If they somehow aren't matched evenly then it doesn't matter how well coordinated 2 factions together are, only one will win and I fear cooperation would suffer because of it. Thats just one reason why persistent PvP is ideal to me, because if you are always facing the same sides, guilds, etc. you get to know when you need to bring extra manpower, or when a temporary alliance with another faction would be necessary. It doesn't mean I don't like things like Arena matches, its more of a preference than anything.
You are basing this off of other games you have played, but you don't even know hoe GW2 PvP is. The skill level represented in GW2 is something we haven't seen in MMO's, I've already quoted it once that a dev spoke of one dev taking out 9 other players simply cause he was much better. If a very good group oriented server gets matched with a server that was just mindlessly zerging for its wins, there is a good possibility that they could still win. You're gonna get matched by your strength and that is all that matters, and if 3 servers are evenly matched it doesn't really matter the 3 faction system is there for maybe when this server has more people that log off at this time, or maybe this one comes out in force at a different time. It is so that there will always be a constant threat for all servers and it won't be just a war of times between 2 servers.
I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Fallen Earth is a TPS, Darkfall uses FPS/TPS gameplay as well, DCUO is very skill based, TERA requires FPS skills as well. GW2s combat is middle ground between basic WoW gameplay and maybe TERA or DCUO. Some skills lock to enemies, some skills require area positioning or player positioning. Likewise in TERA or DCUO where blocking, dodging and skill combinations matter (as well as environmental variables).
I don't have a problem with GW2s skills (as I played GW1) and how they do their card based bar, nor do I have a problem with the way combat plays out (minus the very flashy animations for some moves). I can only base my opinions on what I've seen just as you are basing yours on what you've seen.
You are largely mistaken if you think GW2 is between WoW and TERA in skill. Have you even played TERA, and I played DCUO. The thing you aren't looking at is balance. GW2 is severely balanced, TERA has had some issues with balancing from everything I have read. Skill isn't just measured in twitch and aiming, there is a whole plethora of things that classify as skill, so what I mean by skill being the number one thing in this game is because of the FPS styled class "balancing" that destroys rock, paper, scissors, and build type fighting and winning.
I started playing MMORPGS with DAoC, I understand how the industry has changed, but I don't see here how you can say Guild Wars 2 is a game for those who want Instant gradification. and they are not removing player interaction they are making so I dont have to sit around and look for a tank or a healer for an hour just to play my high level content. Guild Wars 2 gets you to max fast, so you cna enjoy your time playing but its hardly the end.
I have been playing Guild Wars off and on for about 5 years, the lore of the game and the story it tells are grand and very epic in scale. People care about this lore just like any other game. and when a game has a rich established lore People care when it is violated. You get to max level in Guild Wars in under a day, (if you start from factions) but please getting max is not even rewarding...because you know as a player that your story is just starting. With Guild War it is about skill and the skills you bring to your party, you gear and weapons will always have the max stats on them becuase max wepons are easy to find. its the content that makes the game hard and fun and challenging , not the fact that I need to run this instance 20 times just to get my last piece of armor so i can go on to the next level of instancing.
I LOVE TO INVEST IN MY GAMING, and you know what ,a dynamic world that has the ability to make a zone different every time I walk though it makes me feel as if the world changes day to day as it has the ability to in real life, CAN I PLAY IN AN EVER CHANGING WORLD, yes. for years and years, OHH YEAH
Good then you have an idea where I am coming from and what is important to me. My old gaming group campaign that I (I'd been a player only for the first 3 years before sitting down and giving GMing/game world design a try and falling in love with that aspect of gaming) ran went through four game mechanic/system changes, lasted about 16 years and probably had over a 100 players in that time. Though the exact number is hard to recall since we're talking multiple states and a few countries before time and life got to the point and I started playing more nad more online for various reasons.
The first online multiplayer role-playing game I played from 1992 until hmm 2006-ish. (say ish because I was wandering off and taking longer and longer breaks from it by 2004 and I think the last time I had an active account was 2008-ish). Online multiplayer gaming ruined me for stand alone computer games btw. Though I still look back fondly at "Darklands", "Mechwarrior", "Populous" etc from twenty years ago. lol
Anyhow I am 'now" more positive about what GW2 might be. I'll say that after reading that review posted and some of the other comments. Still sitting on the fence to be sure but leaning more towards trying it out instead of sitting back and watching it unfold like I did with WH. I still want to see more on how crafting and skills of that nature will work and what they will offer.
p.s: I tend to just cut out the rest of the thread to cut down the screen scroll, leaving just the post/remarks I am responding to. Since I assume most are reading the thread already. It just becomes a redundant bunch of unneeded clutter in my opinion leaving all those long posts in the repsonse post. Just wanted to fyi that so no one would think I was up to someting underhanded. You just never know with internet bbs how someone will take something you do or say.
After reading this topic, the first post actually, I'm not very excited for Guild Wars 2. The dynamic events are going to be like the Rifts in Rift, just boring, repetitive, and they'll just get in the way.
Underwater combat? A significant portion of the game? I'm one of those people that don't like a lot of underwater stuff. Maybe a small exploration, or a hidden passage down there, but not a lot.
No mounts? Not a huge deal, but collecting mounts is more fun than collecting gear!
After reading this topic, the first post actually, I'm not very excited for Guild Wars 2. The dynamic events are going to be like the Rifts in Rift, just boring, repetitive, and they'll just get in the way.
*facepalm* you really know nothing about the dynamic events in GW2 ... anyway. i dont care anymore think what you want.
Both Alot and Meowhead are right, being able to capture an area indefinitely means that someone else won't be able to capture it at all if we do our job and keep the zone. I've never seen that to be the case in any of the games I've played simply because a group of players coordinating an attack at a time where defense is relatively low is ideal and yields the intended results.
I'm not saying it won't be fun. I'm saying that I have a preference. I'm saying I like being able to take an area and knowing that it won't go away at the end of the day, or week.
GW2 will satisfy some parts of gameplay for me, not doubt, SWTOR will satisfy others, and Firefall will satisfy yet, another and so on. While I dislike that the persistency will not be there, and that what you do in W v W will really not have an effect on what you see in the PvE world, I never though it wouldn't be fun. I just don't know how long it will be fun for ME.
Well you have to look at it like this. You will capture keeps, towers, resource nodes, villages, caravans, and your job is to help hold those while progressing to take over your enemies and hold that ground. It will be severely contested and you will be getting fights everywhere. Your solo guy has his place, your tight knit rogue groups have theirs, and your zerg mentallity people have their place. Just don't look at it as a loss of persistence, because I don't believe that is what ANet intended. What it is, is them taking DAoC and asking hmm, how can we improve upon this?
Well answer number one is: Actually allow somebody to indefinitely win. How do we do this? We implement a week long match, and finally there is an indefinite winner.
Answer number two, if one of the factions on a server, or even in a server cluster has much better players that PvP than x servers, then x servers are going to be in hell for the entirety of the game and probably jump to the other faction, or server. Thus, GW2 already didn't have factions, so it would have had to been with server clusters in the first place, but they didn't stop there. They implemented a system that helps the strong and helps the weak. You will be paired by your server strength, so this always presents a challenge for the strong servers, and it gives the weaker servers fighting chances because they are actually at their competition levels.
You don't see an issue with this and a 3 world system? The idea behind the 3 faction system was to have 2 smaller factions balance out the third larger one if it came to that. Thats why everyone raves about the 3 faction system. In a small instanced week long battle without persistent control and a mix and match of servers each week (which could depend on win/lose ration, but what about server size *which can change on a whim as transfers are free and common*, or participation in W v W v W? What about a smaller server with a higher win/lose ratio but with less players on the server total, but more players participating in W v W v W then another server? How is this going to be balanced and what is balance based on? Sure its easy to say the weaker servers just get grouped with weaker servers, but thats like saying that bad players only get grouped with bad players. Where is the line where a "weak" (lower population, lower participation) server thats won every match gets matched up with the "strong" servers that may or may not totaly destroy them?
Another qualm I have is that two worlds aren't going to balance out the third, more populated or active world because everyone is trying to take the castles, etc, for themselves. At the end of the week there is only 1 winner. 2nd place might give you a slightly higher ranking than 3rd for that week, but you aren't forced into staying on that server so its not like it matters if a server ranks number 1 or number 3, because, if you wanted to, you could just become part of the winning server all the time.
I haven't heard anything about them limiting that other than you can't transfer servers while you are in a W v W v W match with them and participate that same day (or week, I think).
There is no issue with this and 3 faction system. It applies an unpredictability to the PvP. It applies a balance all the way from the very beginning. The 3 faction system was awesome, and it fits with this. The winner will go on to face other servers coming off of wins. We don't know how zerg mentallity servers will play out against smaller more coordinated servers yet, but the answer to your question is simple. If a server with lower pop faces a much larger server because it has a high win ration, and they fail to win. Then, ummm they face other servers next week who are better matched. We don't know the specifics of the matchmaking so we can't delve much into that right now, but the way it is set up is it will be constantly changing so balance will be fine... Also, they have already said they are working on restrictions for server changing with WvW specifically in mind..
I can accept that. I'll still be somewhat skeptical about it, but I can accept a wait and see mentality.
While I do agree that the 3 faction system does provide some sense of unpredictability, it was more in line with providing balance for 2 factions that were outmatched. But if 3 factions are all matched evenly, then it will just be a 3 faction free for all. If they somehow aren't matched evenly then it doesn't matter how well coordinated 2 factions together are, only one will win and I fear cooperation would suffer because of it. Thats just one reason why persistent PvP is ideal to me, because if you are always facing the same sides, guilds, etc. you get to know when you need to bring extra manpower, or when a temporary alliance with another faction would be necessary. It doesn't mean I don't like things like Arena matches, its more of a preference than anything.
You are basing this off of other games you have played, but you don't even know hoe GW2 PvP is. The skill level represented in GW2 is something we haven't seen in MMO's, I've already quoted it once that a dev spoke of one dev taking out 9 other players simply cause he was much better. If a very good group oriented server gets matched with a server that was just mindlessly zerging for its wins, there is a good possibility that they could still win. You're gonna get matched by your strength and that is all that matters, and if 3 servers are evenly matched it doesn't really matter the 3 faction system is there for maybe when this server has more people that log off at this time, or maybe this one comes out in force at a different time. It is so that there will always be a constant threat for all servers and it won't be just a war of times between 2 servers.
I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Fallen Earth is a TPS, Darkfall uses FPS/TPS gameplay as well, DCUO is very skill based, TERA requires FPS skills as well. GW2s combat is middle ground between basic WoW gameplay and maybe TERA or DCUO. Some skills lock to enemies, some skills require area positioning or player positioning. Likewise in TERA or DCUO where blocking, dodging and skill combinations matter (as well as environmental variables).
I don't have a problem with GW2s skills (as I played GW1) and how they do their card based bar, nor do I have a problem with the way combat plays out (minus the very flashy animations for some moves). I can only base my opinions on what I've seen just as you are basing yours on what you've seen.
You are largely mistaken if you think GW2 is between WoW and TERA in skill. Have you even played TERA, and I played DCUO. The thing you aren't looking at is balance. GW2 is severely balanced, TERA has had some issues with balancing from everything I have read. Skill isn't just measured in twitch and aiming, there is a whole plethora of things that classify as skill, so what I mean by skill being the number one thing in this game is because of the FPS styled class "balancing" that destroys rock, paper, scissors, and build type fighting and winning.
Skill is skill, it doesn't matter. In DCUO I played a nature character, I was able to take out many opponents with the build I chose and the skill of abilities based on my weapon skill. "Balance" by one class always beating another class isn't prevalent in a lot of MMOs coming out. GW2 is the same card based system the used in GW1 mixed with some more positional combat, but the abilities seem to be roughly as varied, just much more flashy this time around.
Saying that a good player can take out 9 opponents in GW2 is like me saying I can take out 9 different opponents in any other competitive based game. I often times kill multiple opponents by myself in Global Agenda, and did when I played DCUO (not using exploits mind you). It doesn't mean anything to me to say GW2 is "balanced" and thereforce skill plays a much larger part. GW2 isn't based on FPS mechanics at all. Its based on card skill and positioning, which means nothing unless you are in a team environment.
Originally posted by Boge After reading this topic, the first post actually, I'm not very excited for Guild Wars 2. The dynamic events are going to be like the Rifts in Rift, just boring, repetitive, and they'll just get in the way. Underwater combat? A significant portion of the game? I'm one of those people that don't like a lot of underwater stuff. Maybe a small exploration, or a hidden passage down there, but not a lot. No mounts? Not a huge deal, but collecting mounts is more fun than collecting gear!
What you read in the first post is a simplification of what DEs will be. It is impossible for them to get in the way, because there is nothing like bog-standard MMO quests for them to interrupt. They ARE the open-world content, they are the life of the game and not monsters standing in a field waiting to be slaughtered, and they are happening all around you.
I encourage you to read ANet's blog posts about dynamic events before making up your mind. Unless... Well, unless you actually do prefer bog-standard MMO quests. What do you like to do in game?
After reading this topic, the first post actually, I'm not very excited for Guild Wars 2. The dynamic events are going to be like the Rifts in Rift, just boring, repetitive, and they'll just get in the way.
Underwater combat? A significant portion of the game? I'm one of those people that don't like a lot of underwater stuff. Maybe a small exploration, or a hidden passage down there, but not a lot.
No mounts? Not a huge deal, but collecting mounts is more fun than collecting gear!
What you read in the first post is a simplification of what DEs will be. It is impossible for them to get in the way, because there is nothing like bog-standard MMO quests for them to interrupt. They ARE the open-world content, they are the life of the game and not monsters standing in a field waiting to be slaughtered, and they are happening all around you.
I encourage you to read ANet's blog posts about dynamic events before making up your mind. Unless... Well, unless you actually do prefer bog-standard MMO quests. What do you like to do in game?
Sidhaethe is 100% correct here. It's not like Rift where you have a traditional quest base and then Rifts/Invasions get in the way of where you wanted to go. There will be 1500+ dynamic events in the game that will be the primary outdoor content. It's not like a themepark where you have to have to go from A to B to C to progress, you'll be able to wander around the world and see which ones you like or happen to stumble across, then run in and help.
As far as being boring goes, the difference between GW2's dynamic events and Rifts is context. With Rift, it's a hole opening up in the sky, and while they have shown they're adding more mechanics and minigames to them than just zerging waves, it's still just a hole in the sky. Are we killing the green monsters or are we killing the blue ones?
With GW2, dynamic events are like traditional quests but just better in almost every way. Any of the context of a quest you can have in a DE. It doesn't have to be Kill X bandits or kill Y centaurs or kill Z harpies. Bandits can be attacking a farm, or trying to poison a well. Centaurs are building seige weapons. Harpies are controlling an oasis that friendly ogres are trying to get water from. The possibilities are practically limitless.
I posted something about 10 or so pages ago about how to me, it really doesn't matter that dynamic events are dynamic, but rather that they truly are better than traditional quests in almost every possible way. It pretty much got lost. Rather than repost it, here's a link if you're interested.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
To me gw is classic excample how some game can exist only as long is f2p. So I never actually had high hopes for gw2. Unless will be 100% different.
Are you maybe mixing up 'free to play' with 'free to play but with purchase for cash shop' ? GW1 was F2P and was unbelievable value for money where the developers created a model where they were not money grabbing for profit over game quality. Its a good start for GW2 if that is the case again thats for sure. Guild wars was amazing beause it was great value for money ie free to play and no restrictions on content - do you think that is a bad thing?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
No one can do everything, that isn't realistic. It makes the game rather vanilla and lacking of depth. It feeds into the "now common" concept of "ADD or ADDH " or what ever acronymn the drug companies are selling everyone on. It also removes the need for team work and players seeking each other out, basically it is in my opinion an continuation of what WoW and some other games started which is a dumbing down of the challenge/risk/reward concept. Giving into the "I want what I want, and I want it now!" game design concept.
I personally think that gamers have "lost" the passion to strive to achieve, to interact with other players and work out a way, plan to over come some big nasty monster. Change can be a good thing, but the changes I've been watching for the past decade have been a real mixed bag at best. Some good stuff, some great innovations, great things that were no possible in the 90's are now possible. So much is now possible but instead we've got game design that makes for a swallow game experience.
I don't disagree with you that GW2 is different, again though I don't think it is all good, it to me is just the next step on the stairway that WoW started. Instant gradification games are games that players lose interest in quickly, wouldn't you rather immerse yourself in a game where you could play for years? Maybe not, I know I prefer that, but to each his own.
Every single GW2 class revealed so far is very distinct in how it plays. What's missing isn't roles, it's 'traditional roles' and inflexibility. Instead of tank, DPS and healing, GW2 has damage, control and support. Most of the classes are better at two of those things than the third but they can perform each role in a way which suits their class concept. They can switch weapons and skills to better specialise in whatever they want to do and they're not stuck doing the same thing over and over again for the entire game. That's awesome, especially in an MMO, seeing how many hours devs want you to play the game.
Now, this class flexibility certainly doesn't remove the need for teamwork. All it does is remove dependency on certain classes. You don't need 'a healer' or 'a tank', what you'll need is a set of people whose skills are built to synergise with one another. You need a true team, a unit, rather than a set of people all playing their own parts. You need to know that the skills you're loading onto you bar compliment those on your allies bars, that they're not redundant and when something goes wrong during the fight and you lose a cog in the machine, you need to have an idea of what to do to cover them.
"Those who stand at the top determine what's wrong and what's right. This very place is neutral ground! Justice will prevail, you say? But of course it will! Whoever wins this war becomes justice!"
Ya know, I am very excited about GW2 and am most definatley looking forward to it. However, I do not necessarily think we should automatically throw out the OP's list. Though some of the concerns listed may be a non issue to some, he obviously has concerns as we all might reguarding something or other about the game.
I think I will take the OP's list into consideration and use it as a sort of perspective to keep my expectations and hopes in check. I might not necessarily agree with every single thing, but the OP, in my opinion, presented the list in a fashion the merits a look or two, and some consideration.
I started playing MMORPGS with DAoC, I understand how the industry has changed, but I don't see here how you can say Guild Wars 2 is a game for those who want Instant gradification. and they are not removing player interaction they are making so I dont have to sit around and look for a tank or a healer for an hour just to play my high level content. Guild Wars 2 gets you to max fast, so you cna enjoy your time playing but its hardly the end.
I have been playing Guild Wars off and on for about 5 years, the lore of the game and the story it tells are grand and very epic in scale. People care about this lore just like any other game. and when a game has a rich established lore People care when it is violated. You get to max level in Guild Wars in under a day, (if you start from factions) but please getting max is not even rewarding...because you know as a player that your story is just starting. With Guild War it is about skill and the skills you bring to your party, you gear and weapons will always have the max stats on them becuase max wepons are easy to find. its the content that makes the game hard and fun and challenging , not the fact that I need to run this instance 20 times just to get my last piece of armor so i can go on to the next level of instancing.
I LOVE TO INVEST IN MY GAMING, and you know what ,a dynamic world that has the ability to make a zone different every time I walk though it makes me feel as if the world changes day to day as it has the ability to in real life, CAN I PLAY IN AN EVER CHANGING WORLD, yes. for years and years, OHH YEAH
Good then you have an idea where I am coming from and what is important to me. My old gaming group campaign that I (I'd been a player only for the first 3 years before sitting down and giving GMing/game world design a try and falling in love with that aspect of gaming) ran went through four game mechanic/system changes, lasted about 16 years and probably had over a 100 players in that time. Though the exact number is hard to recall since we're talking multiple states and a few countries before time and life got to the point and I started playing more nad more online for various reasons.
The first online multiplayer role-playing game I played from 1992 until hmm 2006-ish. (say ish because I was wandering off and taking longer and longer breaks from it by 2004 and I think the last time I had an active account was 2008-ish). Online multiplayer gaming ruined me for stand alone computer games btw. Though I still look back fondly at "Darklands", "Mechwarrior", "Populous" etc from twenty years ago. lol
Anyhow I am 'now" more positive about what GW2 might be. I'll say that after reading that review posted and some of the other comments. Still sitting on the fence to be sure but leaning more towards trying it out instead of sitting back and watching it unfold like I did with WH. I still want to see more on how crafting and skills of that nature will work and what they will offer.
p.s: I tend to just cut out the rest of the thread to cut down the screen scroll, leaving just the post/remarks I am responding to. Since I assume most are reading the thread already. It just becomes a redundant bunch of unneeded clutter in my opinion leaving all those long posts in the repsonse post. Just wanted to fyi that so no one would think I was up to someting underhanded. You just never know with internet bbs how someone will take something you do or say.
PS. Ohh totally the online multiplayer experince is matched by none, I play single players games now for the story same as i would read a book, but i never jump out of my seat or get as emotional as I can in Online gaming. The feeling of finally killing those guys who have been hammering you in PvP is just top notch
To me gw is classic excample how some game can exist only as long is f2p. So I never actually had high hopes for gw2. Unless will be 100% different.
Well, first of all, there's only one way to find out if GW2 is 100% different from GW1, and that's to read up about it. We'll wait! ArenaNet and Guild Wars 2 websites have loads of information, so you could be there a while. Or, alternatively, you could check out the "Everything we know about GW2" thread at the top of this forum. I'll give you the short answer: GW2 is significantly different from GW1, but in very specific ways. Feel free to ask any questions, but, seriously, read up on it.
Second of all, please elaborate on how GW could only exist if it's BUY to play?
I just dont see it..Why people are looking forward GW2 so much. Ive watched all the Videos on even went threw the GW2 Website and The only thing i see this has going for it is F2P. Underwater combat has been done before..World events done.. Making decisions that matter its been all been done.
GW2 IMO is like the south park episode where butters is a bad guy and his side kick keeps saying simpsons did it, and thats fine that its been done i just dont see how this will be any different then any other mmo out now or that will be out.
I feel the biggest turn off is the lack of Tank, Healer, Dps.. if i had to put a random number to the badness or the avg mmo player just trying to play 1 role it would be over 1/2 of them are terrible at just trying to fill one role. but again just IMO
I just dont see it..Why people are looking forward GW2 so much. Ive watched all the Videos on even went threw the GW2 Website and The only thing i see this has going for it is F2P. Underwater combat has been done before..World events done.. Making decisions that matter its been all been done.
GW2 IMO is like the south park episode where butters is a bad guy and his side kick keeps saying simpsons did it, and thats fine that its been done i just dont see how this will be any different then any other mmo out now or that will be out.
I feel the biggest turn off is the lack of Tank, Healer, Dps.. if i had to put a random number to the badness or the avg mmo player just trying to play 1 role it would be over 1/2 of them are terrible at just trying to fill one role. but again just IMO
Well, I guess you have your answer. We who are looking forward to GW2 are all crazy, because there is totally another MMO out there that does underwater combat with different skills and weapons for underwater, AND world events (NO quests), AND a personal story with world-impacting decisions, AND an anti-grind philosphy, AND is totally free after the box purchase, AND no tank/healer/dps (it's been done before, and successfully; see also, How To Play GW1 Where Anyone Can Be A Tank - it still requires skill and people still manage to do it somehow).
.....could you tell me what this wonderful game is, btw? I'd hate to have been missing out all this time.
I just dont see it..Why people are looking forward GW2 so much. Ive watched all the Videos on even went threw the GW2 Website and The only thing i see this has going for it is F2P. Underwater combat has been done before..World events done.. Making decisions that matter its been all been done.
GW2 IMO is like the south park episode where butters is a bad guy and his side kick keeps saying simpsons did it, and thats fine that its been done i just dont see how this will be any different then any other mmo out now or that will be out.
I feel the biggest turn off is the lack of Tank, Healer, Dps.. if i had to put a random number to the badness or the avg mmo player just trying to play 1 role it would be over 1/2 of them are terrible at just trying to fill one role. but again just IMO
Well, I guess you have your answer. We who are looking forward to GW2 are all crazy, because there is totally another MMO out there that does underwater combat with different skills and weapons for underwater, AND world events (NO quests), AND a personal story with world-impacting decisions, AND an anti-grind philosphy, AND is totally free after the box purchase, AND no tank/healer/dps (it's been done before, and successfully; see also, How To Play GW1 Where Anyone Can Be A Tank - it still requires skill and people still manage to do it somehow).
.....could you tell me what this wonderful game is, btw? I'd hate to have been missing out all this time.
I said its been done before i never stated its been done all in the same game. I guess im just not fooled by underwater combat with special items/skills that are just for underwater water zones have been done I.E Wow Not saying its the best but its been done.
Rift has world events heck even wow has them at the end of expacs. personal story with world impacting decisions Please see Tor fourms for more info on personal story inpaction decisions. I cant think of 1 mmo that doesnt claim to have some sort of anti grind philosphy. again i said free to play was all i see it has going for it. also thats my point rolles still take skill but people are bad at 1 role now they can be bad at 3.
guess MY point being im not sure how GW2 is breaking the mmo mold when really its the same that been out or thats coming out. again IMO heck i will still proabbly try the game dont get me wrong it looks fun but i just dont see why people feel this is the end all be all mmo /
I just dont see it..Why people are looking forward GW2 so much. Ive watched all the Videos on even went threw the GW2 Website and The only thing i see this has going for it is F2P. Underwater combat has been done before..World events done.. Making decisions that matter its been all been done.
GW2 IMO is like the south park episode where butters is a bad guy and his side kick keeps saying simpsons did it, and thats fine that its been done i just dont see how this will be any different then any other mmo out now or that will be out.
I feel the biggest turn off is the lack of Tank, Healer, Dps.. if i had to put a random number to the badness or the avg mmo player just trying to play 1 role it would be over 1/2 of them are terrible at just trying to fill one role. but again just IMO
Well, I guess you have your answer. We who are looking forward to GW2 are all crazy, because there is totally another MMO out there that does underwater combat with different skills and weapons for underwater, AND world events (NO quests), AND a personal story with world-impacting decisions, AND an anti-grind philosphy, AND is totally free after the box purchase, AND no tank/healer/dps (it's been done before, and successfully; see also, How To Play GW1 Where Anyone Can Be A Tank - it still requires skill and people still manage to do it somehow).
.....could you tell me what this wonderful game is, btw? I'd hate to have been missing out all this time.
I said its been done before i never stated its been done all in the same game. I guess im just not fooled by underwater combat with special items/skills that are just for underwater water zones have been done I.E Wow Not saying its the best but its been done.
Rift has world events heck even wow has them at the end of expacs. personal story with world impacting decisions Please see Tor fourms for more info on personal story inpaction decisions. I cant think of 1 mmo that doesnt claim to have some sort of anti grind philosphy. again i said free to play was all i see it has going for it. also thats my point rolles still take skill but people are bad at 1 role now they can be bad at 3.
In WoW your skillbar doesn't change when you go underwater, you don't specific weapons that you use underwater. No, you can just swing your sword around, shoot balls of fire, lightning strikes, fire arrows and the powder of your gun never gets wet.
Rift has World events every once in a while, unfortunately the quests are simply a grind, and the Rifts, one of Rift's selling points all seem to use the same script. GW2 has got more than 1600+ dynamic events, unlike the Rifts, they properly scale and they don't use the same script all the time.
I just dont see it..Why people are looking forward GW2 so much. Ive watched all the Videos on even went threw the GW2 Website and The only thing i see this has going for it is F2P. Underwater combat has been done before..World events done.. Making decisions that matter its been all been done.
GW2 IMO is like the south park episode where butters is a bad guy and his side kick keeps saying simpsons did it, and thats fine that its been done i just dont see how this will be any different then any other mmo out now or that will be out.
I feel the biggest turn off is the lack of Tank, Healer, Dps.. if i had to put a random number to the badness or the avg mmo player just trying to play 1 role it would be over 1/2 of them are terrible at just trying to fill one role. but again just IMO
Well, I guess you have your answer. We who are looking forward to GW2 are all crazy, because there is totally another MMO out there that does underwater combat with different skills and weapons for underwater, AND world events (NO quests), AND a personal story with world-impacting decisions, AND an anti-grind philosphy, AND is totally free after the box purchase, AND no tank/healer/dps (it's been done before, and successfully; see also, How To Play GW1 Where Anyone Can Be A Tank - it still requires skill and people still manage to do it somehow).
.....could you tell me what this wonderful game is, btw? I'd hate to have been missing out all this time.
I said its been done before i never stated its been done all in the same game. I guess im just not fooled by underwater combat with special items/skills that are just for underwater water zones have been done I.E Wow Not saying its the best but its been done.
Rift has world events heck even wow has them at the end of expacs. personal story with world impacting decisions Please see Tor fourms for more info on personal story inpaction decisions. I cant think of 1 mmo that doesnt claim to have some sort of anti grind philosphy. again i said free to play was all i see it has going for it. also thats my point rolles still take skill but people are bad at 1 role now they can be bad at 3.
In WoW your skillbar doesn't change when you go underwater, you don't specific weapons that you use underwater. No, you can just swing your sword around, shoot balls of fire, lightning strikes, fire arrows and the powder of your gun never gets wet.
Rift has World events every once in a while, unfortunately the quests are simply a grind, and the Rifts, one of Rift's selling points all seem to use the same script.GW2 has got more than 1600+ dynamic events, unlike the Rifts, they properly scale and they don't use the same script all the time.
That would be pretty cool if it ends up that way. My points are not to bash on the game itself i was stating my opinion but i forgot its the internet and people have to conform or get out lol.
I had fun with the time i spent in gw1 and i will probably enjoy my time in gw2 , maybe im just a 1.2 glass full kind of person.
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 just dont see it..Why people are looking forward GW2 so much. Ive watched all the Videos on even went threw the GW2 Website and The only thing i see this has going for it is F2P. Underwater combat has been done before..World events done.. Making decisions that matter its been all been done.
GW2 IMO is like the south park episode where butters is a bad guy and his side kick keeps saying simpsons did it, and thats fine that its been done i just dont see how this will be any different then any other mmo out now or that will be out.
I feel the biggest turn off is the lack of Tank, Healer, Dps.. if i had to put a random number to the badness or the avg mmo player just trying to play 1 role it would be over 1/2 of them are terrible at just trying to fill one role. but again just IMO
Well, I guess you have your answer. We who are looking forward to GW2 are all crazy, because there is totally another MMO out there that does underwater combat with different skills and weapons for underwater, AND world events (NO quests), AND a personal story with world-impacting decisions, AND an anti-grind philosphy, AND is totally free after the box purchase, AND no tank/healer/dps (it's been done before, and successfully; see also, How To Play GW1 Where Anyone Can Be A Tank - it still requires skill and people still manage to do it somehow).
.....could you tell me what this wonderful game is, btw? I'd hate to have been missing out all this time.
I said its been done before i never stated its been done all in the same game. I guess im just not fooled by underwater combat with special items/skills that are just for underwater water zones have been done I.E Wow Not saying its the best but its been done.
Rift has world events heck even wow has them at the end of expacs. personal story with world impacting decisions Please see Tor fourms for more info on personal story inpaction decisions. I cant think of 1 mmo that doesnt claim to have some sort of anti grind philosphy. again i said free to play was all i see it has going for it. also thats my point rolles still take skill but people are bad at 1 role now they can be bad at 3.
guess MY point being im not sure how GW2 is breaking the mmo mold when really its the same that been out or thats coming out. again IMO heck i will still proabbly try the game dont get me wrong it looks fun but i just dont see why people feel this is the end all be all mmo /
Well, MY point is that the fact that no game has done all of these things in one is one of the reasons WHY some of us are excited about GW2. I have, by the way, played Rift (rifts aren't dynamic events, and rifts aren't the main content of the open world like branching dynamic events are), and I've played WoW (bored me), and I'm well aware of SWTOR (intrigued by the story telling, annoyed by too much else - IMO *grin*).
And I don't know if you played GW1, or know anything about it, but the reason I brought it up is because the anti-grind philosophy has been shown to work in that game, people still play it (including myself), and so has the absence of a dedicated tank been shown to work, for example, so there's no need for you to wonder how it will work, because it's worked.
The reason why people are making a big deal about underwater combat is not because "oooh, ahhh, you can swim underwater, that's never been done before!" but haven't you ever wondered why you can shoot fireballs underwater? Because it totally wouldn't work that way. And all GW2 is doing is saying, "fireballs wouldn't work underwater, and neither would guns, so if you're going underwater, your spells work differently, and you'll need new weapons." I don't know of another game that's at least acknowledged that maybe being underwater changes more than whether or not you can breathe. THAT IS ALL. If you don't think that's a big deal, that's fine! You also don't have to believe any of the things the game has claimed, even the ones I addressed above. I mean, as you said, you've seen the videos and read the reports of how things went, so if you don't think it works despite that, what do I know? /shrug
You are always entitled to your opinion, and my disagreement with you is not an attack on your opinion, but it's a bit weird to ask people why they're excited about the game when there's a whole thread explaining why they are. IMO of course .
Rift has World events every once in a while, unfortunately the quests are simply a grind, and the Rifts, one of Rift's selling points all seem to use the same script. GW2 has got more than 1600+ dynamic events, unlike the Rifts, they properly scale and they don't use the same script all the time.
I don't feel inclined to read to the whole thread but this one caught my eye. Could you point towards the source link where this is said? So far my understanding was that the DE's ran on the same script, in that DE's can be linked in a large chain, but each DE itself can be in several states but still one script that steers it towards either fail or succeed. Sure, they might trigger different other DE's, some DE's that will appear when a town is conquered by mobs and some other DE's that will appear when a town is rescued and at peace, but they still run that one script of theirs.
Only dungeons from what I read have multiple scenarios and scripts that are run in it and that you can choose or influence.
edit: I just realised that maybe you meant "the same script for ALL the events", if that was what you meant, then you're right of course and you can forget my question, the script that runs 1 DE can be very different from the script that runs another DE.
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."
Rift has World events every once in a while, unfortunately the quests are simply a grind, and the Rifts, one of Rift's selling points all seem to use the same script. GW2 has got more than 1600+ dynamic events, unlike the Rifts, they properly scale and they don't use the same script all the time.
I don't feel inclined to read to the whole thread but this one caught my eye. Could you point towards the source link where this is said? So far my understanding was that the DE's ran on the same script, in that DE's can be linked in a large chain, but each DE itself can be in several states but still one script that steers it towards either fail or succeed. Sure, they might trigger different other DE's, some DE's that will appear when a town is conquered by mobs and some other DE's that will appear when a town is rescued and at peace, but they still run that one script of theirs.
Only dungeons from what I read have multiple scenarios and scripts that are run in it and that you can choose or influence.
With the same script I mean this: Rift opens up, after a few minutes monsters spawn in a group, this group attacks outposts of the faction that controls the zone. Every Rift does this. There lies the difference between Rifts and Dynamic Events, Rifts are usually the same, whereas Dynamic Events can range from defending a town against an invasion to chasing the rabbits away from farmer Bob's farm.
Comments
I agree with that. I like instanced PvP like SWTORS Warzones too, thats objective based, but I also like the longer persistent, open world PvP. GW2 only has one of those at this time. They have arena matches that end in minutes, and larger open zones where persistent changes only last a week.
I'm not saying this is bad. I'm saying I prefer larger scale, open world always persistent PvP. Its a preference thing. Other games have battlegrounds or warzones or things of that nature to, and I like them... I play them... and then sometimes I just want to take a town, or control point and hold it with my guild for as long as we can, providing benefits to our faction on our server.
You are largely mistaken if you think GW2 is between WoW and TERA in skill. Have you even played TERA, and I played DCUO. The thing you aren't looking at is balance. GW2 is severely balanced, TERA has had some issues with balancing from everything I have read. Skill isn't just measured in twitch and aiming, there is a whole plethora of things that classify as skill, so what I mean by skill being the number one thing in this game is because of the FPS styled class "balancing" that destroys rock, paper, scissors, and build type fighting and winning.
Good then you have an idea where I am coming from and what is important to me. My old gaming group campaign that I (I'd been a player only for the first 3 years before sitting down and giving GMing/game world design a try and falling in love with that aspect of gaming) ran went through four game mechanic/system changes, lasted about 16 years and probably had over a 100 players in that time. Though the exact number is hard to recall since we're talking multiple states and a few countries before time and life got to the point and I started playing more nad more online for various reasons.
The first online multiplayer role-playing game I played from 1992 until hmm 2006-ish. (say ish because I was wandering off and taking longer and longer breaks from it by 2004 and I think the last time I had an active account was 2008-ish). Online multiplayer gaming ruined me for stand alone computer games btw. Though I still look back fondly at "Darklands", "Mechwarrior", "Populous" etc from twenty years ago. lol
Anyhow I am 'now" more positive about what GW2 might be. I'll say that after reading that review posted and some of the other comments. Still sitting on the fence to be sure but leaning more towards trying it out instead of sitting back and watching it unfold like I did with WH. I still want to see more on how crafting and skills of that nature will work and what they will offer.
p.s: I tend to just cut out the rest of the thread to cut down the screen scroll, leaving just the post/remarks I am responding to. Since I assume most are reading the thread already. It just becomes a redundant bunch of unneeded clutter in my opinion leaving all those long posts in the repsonse post. Just wanted to fyi that so no one would think I was up to someting underhanded. You just never know with internet bbs how someone will take something you do or say.
After reading this topic, the first post actually, I'm not very excited for Guild Wars 2. The dynamic events are going to be like the Rifts in Rift, just boring, repetitive, and they'll just get in the way.
Underwater combat? A significant portion of the game? I'm one of those people that don't like a lot of underwater stuff. Maybe a small exploration, or a hidden passage down there, but not a lot.
No mounts? Not a huge deal, but collecting mounts is more fun than collecting gear!
*facepalm* you really know nothing about the dynamic events in GW2 ... anyway. i dont care anymore think what you want.
Skill is skill, it doesn't matter. In DCUO I played a nature character, I was able to take out many opponents with the build I chose and the skill of abilities based on my weapon skill. "Balance" by one class always beating another class isn't prevalent in a lot of MMOs coming out. GW2 is the same card based system the used in GW1 mixed with some more positional combat, but the abilities seem to be roughly as varied, just much more flashy this time around.
Saying that a good player can take out 9 opponents in GW2 is like me saying I can take out 9 different opponents in any other competitive based game. I often times kill multiple opponents by myself in Global Agenda, and did when I played DCUO (not using exploits mind you). It doesn't mean anything to me to say GW2 is "balanced" and thereforce skill plays a much larger part. GW2 isn't based on FPS mechanics at all. Its based on card skill and positioning, which means nothing unless you are in a team environment.
What you read in the first post is a simplification of what DEs will be. It is impossible for them to get in the way, because there is nothing like bog-standard MMO quests for them to interrupt. They ARE the open-world content, they are the life of the game and not monsters standing in a field waiting to be slaughtered, and they are happening all around you.
I encourage you to read ANet's blog posts about dynamic events before making up your mind. Unless... Well, unless you actually do prefer bog-standard MMO quests. What do you like to do in game?
Sidhaethe is 100% correct here. It's not like Rift where you have a traditional quest base and then Rifts/Invasions get in the way of where you wanted to go. There will be 1500+ dynamic events in the game that will be the primary outdoor content. It's not like a themepark where you have to have to go from A to B to C to progress, you'll be able to wander around the world and see which ones you like or happen to stumble across, then run in and help.
As far as being boring goes, the difference between GW2's dynamic events and Rifts is context. With Rift, it's a hole opening up in the sky, and while they have shown they're adding more mechanics and minigames to them than just zerging waves, it's still just a hole in the sky. Are we killing the green monsters or are we killing the blue ones?
With GW2, dynamic events are like traditional quests but just better in almost every way. Any of the context of a quest you can have in a DE. It doesn't have to be Kill X bandits or kill Y centaurs or kill Z harpies. Bandits can be attacking a farm, or trying to poison a well. Centaurs are building seige weapons. Harpies are controlling an oasis that friendly ogres are trying to get water from. The possibilities are practically limitless.
I posted something about 10 or so pages ago about how to me, it really doesn't matter that dynamic events are dynamic, but rather that they truly are better than traditional quests in almost every possible way. It pretty much got lost. Rather than repost it, here's a link if you're interested.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
To me gw is classic excample how some game can exist only as long is f2p. So I never actually had high hopes for gw2. Unless will be 100% different.
Are you maybe mixing up 'free to play' with 'free to play but with purchase for cash shop' ? GW1 was F2P and was unbelievable value for money where the developers created a model where they were not money grabbing for profit over game quality. Its a good start for GW2 if that is the case again thats for sure. Guild wars was amazing beause it was great value for money ie free to play and no restrictions on content - do you think that is a bad thing?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Every single GW2 class revealed so far is very distinct in how it plays. What's missing isn't roles, it's 'traditional roles' and inflexibility. Instead of tank, DPS and healing, GW2 has damage, control and support. Most of the classes are better at two of those things than the third but they can perform each role in a way which suits their class concept. They can switch weapons and skills to better specialise in whatever they want to do and they're not stuck doing the same thing over and over again for the entire game. That's awesome, especially in an MMO, seeing how many hours devs want you to play the game.
Now, this class flexibility certainly doesn't remove the need for teamwork. All it does is remove dependency on certain classes. You don't need 'a healer' or 'a tank', what you'll need is a set of people whose skills are built to synergise with one another. You need a true team, a unit, rather than a set of people all playing their own parts. You need to know that the skills you're loading onto you bar compliment those on your allies bars, that they're not redundant and when something goes wrong during the fight and you lose a cog in the machine, you need to have an idea of what to do to cover them.
"Those who stand at the top determine what's wrong and what's right. This very place is neutral ground! Justice will prevail, you say? But of course it will! Whoever wins this war becomes justice!"
Ya know, I am very excited about GW2 and am most definatley looking forward to it. However, I do not necessarily think we should automatically throw out the OP's list. Though some of the concerns listed may be a non issue to some, he obviously has concerns as we all might reguarding something or other about the game.
I think I will take the OP's list into consideration and use it as a sort of perspective to keep my expectations and hopes in check. I might not necessarily agree with every single thing, but the OP, in my opinion, presented the list in a fashion the merits a look or two, and some consideration.
well Hey im just glad you are a reasonable person, who at least tries to listen to people and reads responses http://www.arena.net/blog/andrew-mcleod-talks-crafting-in-gw2 This is pretty much all the community has on crafting .
PS. Ohh totally the online multiplayer experince is matched by none, I play single players games now for the story same as i would read a book, but i never jump out of my seat or get as emotional as I can in Online gaming. The feeling of finally killing those guys who have been hammering you in PvP is just top notch
I think boss foghts should be unscripted. Thats the only thing I wish they would change. We need more unpredictablility.
Well, first of all, there's only one way to find out if GW2 is 100% different from GW1, and that's to read up about it. We'll wait! ArenaNet and Guild Wars 2 websites have loads of information, so you could be there a while. Or, alternatively, you could check out the "Everything we know about GW2" thread at the top of this forum. I'll give you the short answer: GW2 is significantly different from GW1, but in very specific ways. Feel free to ask any questions, but, seriously, read up on it.
Second of all, please elaborate on how GW could only exist if it's BUY to play?
I just dont see it..Why people are looking forward GW2 so much. Ive watched all the Videos on even went threw the GW2 Website and The only thing i see this has going for it is F2P. Underwater combat has been done before..World events done.. Making decisions that matter its been all been done.
GW2 IMO is like the south park episode where butters is a bad guy and his side kick keeps saying simpsons did it, and thats fine that its been done i just dont see how this will be any different then any other mmo out now or that will be out.
I feel the biggest turn off is the lack of Tank, Healer, Dps.. if i had to put a random number to the badness or the avg mmo player just trying to play 1 role it would be over 1/2 of them are terrible at just trying to fill one role. but again just IMO
Well, I guess you have your answer. We who are looking forward to GW2 are all crazy, because there is totally another MMO out there that does underwater combat with different skills and weapons for underwater, AND world events (NO quests), AND a personal story with world-impacting decisions, AND an anti-grind philosphy, AND is totally free after the box purchase, AND no tank/healer/dps (it's been done before, and successfully; see also, How To Play GW1 Where Anyone Can Be A Tank - it still requires skill and people still manage to do it somehow).
.....could you tell me what this wonderful game is, btw? I'd hate to have been missing out all this time.
I said its been done before i never stated its been done all in the same game. I guess im just not fooled by underwater combat with special items/skills that are just for underwater water zones have been done I.E Wow Not saying its the best but its been done.
Rift has world events heck even wow has them at the end of expacs. personal story with world impacting decisions Please see Tor fourms for more info on personal story inpaction decisions. I cant think of 1 mmo that doesnt claim to have some sort of anti grind philosphy. again i said free to play was all i see it has going for it. also thats my point rolles still take skill but people are bad at 1 role now they can be bad at 3.
guess MY point being im not sure how GW2 is breaking the mmo mold when really its the same that been out or thats coming out. again IMO heck i will still proabbly try the game dont get me wrong it looks fun but i just dont see why people feel this is the end all be all mmo /
In WoW your skillbar doesn't change when you go underwater, you don't specific weapons that you use underwater. No, you can just swing your sword around, shoot balls of fire, lightning strikes, fire arrows and the powder of your gun never gets wet.
Rift has World events every once in a while, unfortunately the quests are simply a grind, and the Rifts, one of Rift's selling points all seem to use the same script. GW2 has got more than 1600+ dynamic events, unlike the Rifts, they properly scale and they don't use the same script all the time.
That would be pretty cool if it ends up that way. My points are not to bash on the game itself i was stating my opinion but i forgot its the internet and people have to conform or get out lol.
I had fun with the time i spent in gw1 and i will probably enjoy my time in gw2 , maybe im just a 1.2 glass full kind of person.
What the f... This thread got to 300+ posts in one day?!
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."
That reminds of that one thread, you know... : )
Well, MY point
is that the fact that no game has done all of these things in one is one of the reasons WHY some of us are excited about GW2. I have, by the way, played Rift (rifts aren't dynamic events, and rifts aren't the main content of the open world like branching dynamic events are), and I've played WoW (bored me), and I'm well aware of SWTOR (intrigued by the story telling, annoyed by too much else - IMO *grin*).
And I don't know if you played GW1, or know anything about it, but the reason I brought it up is because the anti-grind philosophy has been shown to work in that game, people still play it (including myself), and so has the absence of a dedicated tank been shown to work, for example, so there's no need for you to wonder how it will work, because it's worked.
The reason why people are making a big deal about underwater combat is not because "oooh, ahhh, you can swim underwater, that's never been done before!" but haven't you ever wondered why you can shoot fireballs underwater? Because it totally wouldn't work that way. And all GW2 is doing is saying, "fireballs wouldn't work underwater, and neither would guns, so if you're going underwater, your spells work differently, and you'll need new weapons." I don't know of another game that's at least acknowledged that maybe being underwater changes more than whether or not you can breathe. THAT IS ALL.
If you don't think that's a big deal, that's fine! You also don't have to believe any of the things the game has claimed, even the ones I addressed above. I mean, as you said, you've seen the videos and read the reports of how things went, so if you don't think it works despite that, what do I know? /shrug
You are always entitled to your opinion, and my disagreement with you is not an attack on your opinion, but it's a bit weird to ask people why they're excited about the game when there's a whole thread explaining why they are. IMO of course
.
I don't feel inclined to read to the whole thread but this one caught my eye. Could you point towards the source link where this is said? So far my understanding was that the DE's ran on the same script, in that DE's can be linked in a large chain, but each DE itself can be in several states but still one script that steers it towards either fail or succeed. Sure, they might trigger different other DE's, some DE's that will appear when a town is conquered by mobs and some other DE's that will appear when a town is rescued and at peace, but they still run that one script of theirs.
Only dungeons from what I read have multiple scenarios and scripts that are run in it and that you can choose or influence.
edit: I just realised that maybe you meant "the same script for ALL the events", if that was what you meant, then you're right of course and you can forget my question, the script that runs 1 DE can be very different from the script that runs another DE.
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."
With the same script I mean this: Rift opens up, after a few minutes monsters spawn in a group, this group attacks outposts of the faction that controls the zone. Every Rift does this. There lies the difference between Rifts and Dynamic Events, Rifts are usually the same, whereas Dynamic Events can range from defending a town against an invasion to chasing the rabbits away from farmer Bob's farm.