Meowhead you win internetz. Too much win almost every post in this topic. kudos.
On topic;
what you have is
a) real underwater experience
b) what games normally do (add z vector to movement, add drowning, add slower movement)
c) what gw2 tries to do (add z vector to movement)
when you guys and gals say "its not realistic" what you mean to say is "its not what games normally do". Neither is realistic. you dont want realistic, you want conventional. GW2 is not conventional (or so they say)
GW2 also changes your skills, have different pets and different weapons.
But I thought we killed the discussion a week ago when someone pointed out that swimming in armor is more unrealstic than anything else here, not to mention all the loot you have on you.
Heck, I own a medium armor (Chainmail, helmet, gambusange and some leather parts, 14 Kg), and it is bad enough to try running in that, I would sink like a stone in it and not even an olympic swimmer could even survive falling in the water with it (and taking it off in the water is extremely hard, I rather do the "Lethal weapon" trick with the madhouse shirt than a chainmail).
Meowhead you win internetz. Too much win almost every post in this topic. kudos.
On topic;
what you have is
a) real underwater experience
b) what games normally do (add z vector to movement, add drowning, add slower movement)
c) what gw2 tries to do (add z vector to movement)
when you guys and gals say "its not realistic" what you mean to say is "its not what games normally do". Neither is realistic. you dont want realistic, you want conventional. GW2 is not conventional (or so they say)
GW2 also changes your skills, have different pets and different weapons.
But I thought we killed the discussion a week ago when someone pointed out that swimming in armor is more unrealstic than anything else here, not to mention all the loot you have on you.
Heck, I own a medium armor (Chainmail, helmet, gambusange and some leather parts, 14 Kg), and it is bad enough to try running in that, I would sink like a stone in it and not even an olympic swimmer could even survive falling in the water with it (and taking it off in the water is extremely hard, I rather do the "Lethal weapon" trick with the madhouse shirt than a chainmail).
I own a medium armor (Chainmail, helmet, gambusange and some leather parts, 14 Kg),
What? Why? How?
It is a replica of a 11th century armor for fighting, it is made to take real punishment.
Because I done some old school swordsplay (it is pretty popular actually).
What do you mean how? There are a whole bunch of people making classic armors, and it is not that expensive unless you do 15th century and want a full plate.
I also own a bunch of swords. If you are interested in learning to use a blade check out ARMA, they are pretty world wide.
I own a medium armor (Chainmail, helmet, gambusange and some leather parts, 14 Kg),
What? Why? How?
It is a replica of a 11th century armor for fighting, it is made to take real punishment.
Because I done some old school swordsplay (it is pretty popular actually).
What do you mean how? There are a whole bunch of people making classic armors, and it is not that expensive unless you do 15th century and want a full plate.
I also own a bunch of swords. If you are interested in learning to use a blade check out ARMA, they are pretty world wide.
I simply don't very often come across people who own medieval armor : P
I gotta tell you though, normally I see where you're going and I can agree with you, or find some milk chocolatey and caramel common ground, but here I think you took my analogy, and not only made it more confusing, but missed the mark on the point I think we were both going after here.
Keeping with the peanut analogy, you are essentially saying we both want peanuts, but we're ending up with a peanut substitute. While I get this, the point I'm making is.. in your analogy, we came for peanuts and left with something that IS a substitute, that doesn't resemble either of what we came for, and instead accepting what they are telling us we want, whereas I'm saying that on one side (mine) theres some commonality on the identifiers of said... peanuts, and on the other side these factors are removed. So while it might not be a 1 to 1 comparison with RL peanuts, in the virtual peanut market its just a couple of the major identifiers we have.
You say we came for honey roasted peanuts, and instead we get honey roasted peanut flavoring in... a can.. or a butter.. or a juice I'm not sure where you went with that one.... but in this instance, they are telling us we're getting Honey Roasted peanuts, but we're getting something that only resembles honey roasted peanuts in name and not in taste, function, or... texture... I guess.
The main thing here is that they are telling us this is underwater combat, that we are underwater, and by saying this people should expect to be underwater. What do you expect when you're underwater? Fish.... having to find a way to breathe.... different types of movement and the speed of such... things being blue.... maybe depth pressure or changes in temperature if you wanted to get technical..... cephalopods.... sometimes Godzilla. Regardless, take away some of those major aspects..... movement speed/type, having to breathe, Godzilla, and what do you have? A Peanut substitute.
We have to at least come to a middle ground here in at least one facet of this conversation... and if its ANYTHING to compromise on, its that Endless breathing underwater (along with just about everyone having this capability, though if this is strictly based on consumables only then thats a different story, but yet to be seen) and Absolutely NO movement penalty is not what you would USUALLY expect from underwater content.
Making analogies more confusing is the GOOD part, because it shows how inherently broken most of them are.
Your enjoyment of your honey roasted peanut analogue is PURELY subjective. 100%. For every feature you can list for your underwater content in an MMO that GW2 does not have, I can list two features that make it seem more underwater that GW2 does have and the other game doesn't.
It's nice that you've bought into the faux representation of underwater that gaming has semi-standardized, but the shorthand they're using to represent water is just choosing different aspects of water to reflect than GW2 is.
Also, technically you only have one complaint. The movement speed is too fast for you. People are breathing underwater because they have a mask designed to facilitate that. Therefore, your problem is with the mask, not with the water.
Unless you prefer your water to rabidly attack underwater breathing devices. In which case your underwater content just went from 'Your personal preference' to 'That's kind of creepy'.
You have to learn to roll with the game design punches and justify things in your head, because you've actually been doing that all along, just you got so fooled into one particular form of gaming shorthand you're mistaking it for the truth, rather than a convenient shorthand method of representing something. For example, I always tell myself that everybody in SW:ToR is just descended from Raz from Psychonauts. (You get like... a cookie or something if you realize what I'm talking about there.)
In my opinion, one of the core design features of being underwater, is that there probably shouldn't be fire and there certainly shouldn't be bows.
BAM. GW2 just totally slapped the hell out of 99% of the underwater content you care to mention in MMORPGs.
You know I think in most past MMORPGs, water has really just been an obstacle. It's kind of like the "sand traps" (golf) of an MMORPG. You normally tried to avoid swimming across a large body of water at all costs because it took so long, and if you got attacked by a difficult monster, you couldn't really run. This is much like how a golfer will try to avoid a sand trap...minus the monsters of course .
So that kind of water fits fine in a game where there's not really much content underwater. Kind of like how a golf course has a few sand traps just to keep things interesting.
But once you start putting a large amount of content underwater...this sand trap model doesn't work anymore. It would be like making an entire golf course on the beach. It would be horrible. The only way to have a lot of content underwater and make it tolerable is to make water something other than an obstacle.
I know you guys think that removing the "obstacle" aspect of water may seem forced, but in reality, out history is filled with humanity making environments that used to only be obstacles part of our domain. The ocean for example, used to be impassable before innovations like the compass, stronger ships, and salted food. Nowadays we exploit the ocean in many ways, even building huge oil platforms in the middle of it.
The desert is another example. Before ancient peoples learned how to survive off of this harsh environment, I'm sure it was just something to be avoided. Space is our next frontier, and while it's still pretty foreign to us, we have begun to exploit it with sattelites and stuff.
So I don't really see ground-dwelling races in the GW2 world beginning to exploit their underwater environments as anything that crazy.
Actually...time dilation is very realistic. In fact, assuming that the spacecraft are able to reach close to lightspeed, realistic space travel would mean that if you traveled to somewhere 2 light years away then 2 years would pass for the people at your destination, but only a few days would pass for you.
I'd like to see someone implement that lol .
RRelative time dilation is realistic, but I was talking absolute time dilation. In an MMORPG environment, where everybody is sensing time, the people who aren't flying spaceships must be taking days to complete even the most mundane actions.
U know u guys are crying over a feture they spent months to implement instead of screwing everyone up with movement penalty, breath restriction and normal skills working weirdly underwater like does any other MMO out there-and everyone would be okay with it!
This is so irrational (and you all bashers and very very ungrateful)
It's like crying over destructible environment for no chance your eyes'd be blast out with splinters!
They did something extraordinary (again!) and what they get is "booohooo this fantasy game full of magic, giant dragons, undead nations and living gods is totally unreal - u move normal underwater!"
wtf is wrong with u srsly..
So for all those spocks out there, thing of it that water in Tyria has lower viscosity - hope u happy, nerds
I think I actually spent way more time reading and theorycrafting about MMOs than playing them
I don't think they are nerds, they're like sub-subnerds, sort of like a troglodyte to an ogre, so to speak. The thing of it is is that a true nerd would be creative enough to solve their own conundrums. Reality has another set of physical laws allowing things that our reality doesn't? A real nerd sees that as a challenge and tasks their own knowledge to explain it. But a more limited, lesser nerd, a nerd of the lower planes, waves their arms and scream "Impossible!" hoping it'll make them look cool.
Except yelling "Impossible!" stopped being cool at some point after the '80s. Even Data would frown at someone for the use of impossible over highly improbable (Cause and Effect et al). And with the highly improbable, if it's right in front of you, then however improbable it seems, it must be true. Therefore it's down to the nerd to try and explain it enough to the point where it makes them happy. If a nerd can't do that, then they're really some lesser nerd, as I said, and shouldn't try to claim a full nerd card. They don't deserve it.
Really, I just think it's incredibly boring, pedestrian, plodding people just passing themselves off as nerds. They can't take certain elements being different to reality, so they scream "IMPOSSEEBLEH!" at things, hoping that it'll make those things go away. In truth, it'll just make any nerd worth their salt frown with scorn at them. Really, water behaving differently in a game is not something that's worth a thread, not a single thread, anywhere.
It's pedantic, plodding, and petty, it's petulant and almost pathologically pasteurised to the point of perhaps being a pinch pathetic. Yes, alliteration was required, there. It was so very required. I mean, this isn't Accountants Online. This is bloody People Flailing Around With Magic Fireballs at Continent Sized Dragons Online. And we're talking about how water behaves in a game like that, really? Really?
Anyone who's going to do that gets no credibility from me. It's just too ridiculous.
---
I would again suggest that if someone wants earth-like realism, then Guild Wars 2 is not the game for them, because it laughs in the face of such. This thread and others like it where people are complaining about how it's not earth-like realistic is sort of like someone going to a Call of Duty thread and complaining about how there aren't rainbows, bright colours, and ridiculous power ups in those games. There are games which are aimed at specific demographics. Therefore, may I suggest Darkfall Online or Mortal Online? Either or would be good for earth-like realism, as is my understanding.
But this is ridiculous. It's utterly ridiculous. It's like asking for magic in Civilisation. It's like asking for guns in Mario. It's like asking for rocket launchers in an F1 racing game. Let's be sane about this.
---
And if you so desperately want rocket launchers in an F1 game, then bloody found your own studio and do it. It's completely unfair to demand that a studio developing an F1 game for people who're F1 purists actually make the game less pure just to suit your own desires. This isn't a game marketed at you if you don't like what it's doing. It's marketed at me and people like me. It's just completely unfair to make these demands. The people who this game is aimed at don't want what you want. So again, found your own studio and make your own Guild Wars 2 clone that has realistic water for completely arbitrary reasons. But it's unfair to impact upon the game in what would be a negative way for the vast majority of the demographic it's aimed at.
It would be like, to say it again, adding rocket launchers to an F1 game just to suit people who want rocket launchers. This is nonsense! I hope this really puts pay to this debate, because debates like this are started by people who're far too spoilt, and expect everything their way, and... that's not something we should be fostering or considering to be acceptable. This isn't a game for you. So deal with it. Either accept it for what it is, find another game, or make your own game.
I am just so sick of hearing people making unreasonable demands of ArenaNet just because they want this to be MMO They're Tired of Playing But they Still Want More of II. If you want that, find it elsewhere or make it yourself. But all the complaining in the world isn't going to turn Guild Wars 2 into the game you want it to be.
Making analogies different and more confusing doesn't show how broken they are, they only show how broken the changes you made to them are. With all due respect senator, I feel you've overstepped your analogy powers.
I think what people are trying to tell me is that what makes [conventional] water mechanics doesn't actually mean that it makes a substance water, or water based content.
In games themselves you can only give yourself a certain number of identifiers for each set of obstacles, whether it be terrain, or combat, or itemization.
It seems that the biggest argument against what I'm saying is that, "Even regular water based content isn't remotely believeable, so its okay if this one is even less so."
In comparison though, in most games with water based content, this kind of content has always been this way, you likely have always encountered it and reacted with it based upon what the world offers. You were likely given no passes on it until a certain point, and it was likely always a part of the world you were in.
Thats not the case in GW2. The game has gone from not being able to trudge through water, to everyone having a breathing apparatus, carrying around a spear or something similar, and swimming unencumbered for hours on end.
Sure because other games shun some amounts of realism, but provide others doesn't mean GW2 is somehow immune because it went a different route here. I never said it had to be ultra realistic, I never said it wasn't fun, I said it was pointless and hokey. It isn't underwater combat, its below ground floating blue room combat.
Here, I'll make a deal here.... if trudging through any other liquid in GW2 doesn't offer some kind of movement penalty of any kind, I'll retract my statement here. I mean, at least I'll give them points for consistency. If they keep with the unencumbered by liquid mentality, then we may as well just leave it at rest.
(as for psychonauts, I loved the game, and raz could be an exaggerated smuggler, I suppose)
I don't think they are nerds, they're like sub-subnerds, sort of like a troglodyte to an ogre, so to speak. The thing of it is is that a true nerd would be creative enough to solve their own conundrums. Reality has another set of physical laws allowing things that our reality doesn't? A real nerd sees that as a challenge and tasks their own knowledge to explain it. But a more limited, lesser nerd, a nerd of the lower planes, waves their arms and scream "Impossible!" hoping it'll make them look cool.
Except yelling "Impossible!" stopped being cool at some point after the '80s. Even Data would frown at someone for the use of impossible over highly improbable (Cause and Effect et al). And with the highly improbable, if it's right in front of you, then however improbable it seems, it must be true. Therefore it's down to the nerd to try and explain it enough to the point where it makes them happy. If a nerd can't do that, then they're really some lesser nerd, as I said, and shouldn't try to claim a full nerd card. They don't deserve it.
Really, I just think it's incredibly boring, pedestrian, plodding people just passing themselves off as nerds. They can't take certain elements being different to reality, so they scream "IMPOSSEEBLEH!" at things, hoping that it'll make those things go away. In truth, it'll just make any nerd worth their salt frown with scorn at them. Really, water behaving differently in a game is not something that's worth a thread, not a single thread, anywhere.
It's pedantic, plodding, and petty, it's petulant and almost pathologically pasteurised to the point of perhaps being a pinch pathetic. Yes, alliteration was required, there. It was so very required. I mean, this isn't Accountants Online. This is bloody People Flailing Around With Magic Fireballs at Continent Sized Dragons Online. And we're talking about how water behaves in a game like that, really? Really?
Anyone who's going to do that gets no credibility from me. It's just too ridiculous.
---
I would again suggest that if someone wants earth-like realism, then Guild Wars 2 is not the game for them, because it laughs in the face of such. This thread and others like it where people are complaining about how it's not earth-like realistic is sort of like someone going to a Call of Duty thread and complaining about how there aren't rainbows, bright colours, and ridiculous power ups in those games. There are games which are aimed at specific demographics. Therefore, may I suggest Darkfall Online or Mortal Online? Either or would be good for earth-like realism, as is my understanding.
But this is ridiculous. It's utterly ridiculous. It's like asking for magic in Civilisation. It's like asking for guns in Mario. It's like asking for rocket launchers in an F1 racing game. Let's be sane about this.
I think I actually spent way more time reading and theorycrafting about MMOs than playing them
I don't think they are nerds, they're like sub-subnerds, sort of like a troglodyte to an ogre, so to speak. The thing of it is is that a true nerd would be creative enough to solve their own conundrums. Reality has another set of physical laws allowing things that our reality doesn't? A real nerd sees that as a challenge and tasks their own knowledge to explain it. But a more limited, lesser nerd, a nerd of the lower planes, waves their arms and scream "Impossible!" hoping it'll make them look cool.
Except yelling "Impossible!" stopped being cool at some point after the '80s. Even Data would frown at someone for the use of impossible over highly improbable (Cause and Effect et al). And with the highly improbable, if it's right in front of you, then however improbable it seems, it must be true. Therefore it's down to the nerd to try and explain it enough to the point where it makes them happy. If a nerd can't do that, then they're really some lesser nerd, as I said, and shouldn't try to claim a full nerd card. They don't deserve it.
Really, I just think it's incredibly boring, pedestrian, plodding people just passing themselves off as nerds. They can't take certain elements being different to reality, so they scream "IMPOSSEEBLEH!" at things, hoping that it'll make those things go away. In truth, it'll just make any nerd worth their salt frown with scorn at them. Really, water behaving differently in a game is not something that's worth a thread, not a single thread, anywhere.
It's pedantic, plodding, and petty, it's petulant and almost pathologically pasteurised to the point of perhaps being a pinch pathetic. Yes, alliteration was required, there. It was so very required. I mean, this isn't Accountants Online. This is bloody People Flailing Around With Magic Fireballs at Continent Sized Dragons Online. And we're talking about how water behaves in a game like that, really? Really?
Anyone who's going to do that gets no credibility from me. It's just too ridiculous.
---
I would again suggest that if someone wants earth-like realism, then Guild Wars 2 is not the game for them, because it laughs in the face of such. This thread and others like it where people are complaining about how it's not earth-like realistic is sort of like someone going to a Call of Duty thread and complaining about how there aren't rainbows, bright colours, and ridiculous power ups in those games. There are games which are aimed at specific demographics. Therefore, may I suggest Darkfall Online or Mortal Online? Either or would be good for earth-like realism, as is my understanding.
But this is ridiculous. It's utterly ridiculous. It's like asking for magic in Civilisation. It's like asking for guns in Mario. It's like asking for rocket launchers in an F1 racing game. Let's be sane about this.
---
And if you so desperately want rocket launchers in an F1 game, then bloody found your own studio and do it. It's completely unfair to demand that a studio developing an F1 game for people who're F1 purists actually make the game less pure just to suit your own desires. This isn't a game marketed at you if you don't like what it's doing. It's marketed at me and people like me. It's just completely unfair to make these demands. The people who this game is aimed at don't want what you want. So again, found your own studio and make your own Guild Wars 2 clone that has realistic water for completely arbitrary reasons. But it's unfair to impact upon the game in what would be a negative way for the vast majority of the demographic it's aimed at.
It would be like, to say it again, adding rocket launchers to an F1 game just to suit people who want rocket launchers. This is nonsense! I hope this really puts pay to this debate, because debates like this are started by people who're far too spoilt, and expect everything their way, and... that's not something we should be fostering or considering to be acceptable. This isn't a game for you. So deal with it. Either accept it for what it is, find another game, or make your own game.
I am just so sick of hearing people making unreasonable demands of ArenaNet just because they want this to be MMO They're Tired of Playing But they Still Want More of II. If you want that, find it elsewhere or make it yourself. But all the complaining in the world isn't going to turn Guild Wars 2 into the game you want it to be.
*falls over.*
And the inanity continues. Had someone but given just an infinitesimal amount of thought to what is considered a differing opinion, the need for trying to label negative proponents wouldn't be necessary. What that is though, is simply elitist and melodramatic for the sake of being such and nothing more. Accept your game for what it is, as I've accepted it, and accept the criticism it takes for its choices because you can't change it. I take this information, process it and give my opinion on it, too bad if it doesn't mesh with yours.
Consider others opinions arbitrary, but yours are equally so in that instance. Not for one minute do I truly find any of your posts anything more than a condescending rant. If you can't handle criticism of the game you're looking forward to, then you're going to end up writing plenty of futile posts.
I've been more than magnanimous when explaining my point of view, and you've been nothing but pitiless in trying to explain yours. Perhaps one day we can ALL grow up and accept others opinions, even if we disagree with them. Until that day, I'll be waiting to read the next rant
It seems that the biggest argument against what I'm saying is that, "Even regular water based content isn't remotely believeable, so its okay if this one is even less so."
(as for psychonauts, I loved the game, and raz could be an exaggerated smuggler, I suppose)
Correction. The way we're saying it is 'Even regular water based content isn't remotely believable, so it's okay if this one is believe equally just in different ways'.
Stop saying our feelings aren't important. T.T Your opinion is what your opinion is, but that doesn't mean we formed our opinion in some sort of crazy way where we agree with you in theory but disagree with you in practice just to drive you crazy.
My opinion is not 'This water content is less believable, but we like it that way', so stop putting it that way.
It's 'This water content is less believable to you but hey, that's you. Your issues aren't mine.'
This is where the sticking point is. I know I can't change your opinion as to what is important, but I just want you to see that we're valuing different things but see the water qualities of this particular water rendition just fine, even if you don't.
... and by 'we', I of course mean me, because I can't speak for all the other GW2 fans. Who knows, maybe some of them think the water is completely unrealistic in all ways, obviously inferior, but talks it up all awesome specifically to thwart you.
(Also, Psychonauts? Raz's family is suffering under a gypsy curse where they will die if they go in the water. A clever way of making the 'fall in water and die' mechanic of a platformer actually make sense.)
It seems that the biggest argument against what I'm saying is that, "Even regular water based content isn't remotely believeable, so its okay if this one is even less so."
(as for psychonauts, I loved the game, and raz could be an exaggerated smuggler, I suppose)
Correction. The way we're saying it is 'Even regular water based content isn't remotely believable, so it's okay if this one is believe equally just in different ways'.
Stop saying our feelings aren't important. T.T Your opinion is what your opinion is, but that doesn't mean we formed our opinion in some sort of crazy way where we agree with you in theory but disagree with you in practice just to drive you crazy.
My opinion is not 'This water content is less believable, but we like it that way', so stop putting it that way.
It's 'This water content is less believable to you but hey, that's you. Your issues aren't mine.'
This is where the sticking point is. I know I can't change your opinion as to what is important, but I just want you to see that we're valuing different things but see the water qualities of this particular water rendition just fine, even if you don't.
... and by 'we', I of course mean me, because I can't speak for all the other GW2 fans. Who knows, maybe some of them think the water is completely unrealistic in all ways, obviously inferior, but talks it up all awesome specifically to thwart you.
(Also, Psychonauts? Raz's family is suffering under a gypsy curse where they will die if they go in the water. A clever way of making the 'fall in water and die' mechanic of a platformer actually make sense.)
I do recall the dying when going into water on psychonauts , so good call on that.
What I'm saying as far as water based content is concerned is that there is a common basis regarding this kind of content. I tried to find that with you earlier, labelling what you expect from underwater content. Whilst perhaps Godzilla is a little far fetched for you, it isn't too off base to realize some of the largest and most influential parts of underwater content will not be present. I think that we both know this in some respects, but for the point of argument I'll concede that.
I never said that the content itself would be bad, people like to pretend I'm some sort of monster because I have an opinion contrary to their own, but thats not the intention. My intention is based on a preference, a preference that water at least act like water.
Perhaps in the games you've played water acts differently, perhaps you have a different perception of what makes water... water. Perhaps this is your first time experiencing water based content, I don't know. Where I see a difference though is, 1) acknowledging that something that is usually there is not and 2) coming to terms with the content based on that.
While I do 1 just fine, and dislike the ideas behind 2 because of such, it seems like everyone else is acting the opposite, they came to terms with the content well before they even considered what is or isn't there, and therefore couldn't care less.
I'm not the kind of person to give ANY content a free pass until A) I have a chance to play it It actually goes well with my playstyle or F) The information released doesn't give enough information on the particular features to make an opinion.
What I'm saying as far as water based content is concerned is that there is a common basis regarding this kind of content. I tried to find that with you earlier, labelling what you expect from underwater content. Whilst perhaps Godzilla is a little far fetched for you, it isn't too off base to realize some of the largest and most influential parts of underwater content will not be present. I think that we both know this in some respects, but for the point of argument I'll concede that.
I never said that the content itself would be bad, people like to pretend I'm some sort of monster because I have an opinion contrary to their own, but thats not the intention. My intention is based on a preference, a preference that water at least act like water.
Perhaps in the games you've played water acts differently, perhaps you have a different perception of what makes water... water. Perhaps this is your first time experiencing water based content, I don't know. Where I see a difference though is, 1) acknowledging that something that is usually there is not and 2) coming to terms with the content based on that.
While I do 1 just fine, and dislike the ideas behind 2 because of such, it seems like everyone else is acting the opposite, they came to terms with the content well before they even considered what is or isn't there, and therefore couldn't care less.
I'm not the kind of person to give ANY content a free pass until A) I have a chance to play it It actually goes well with my playstyle or F) The information released doesn't give enough information on the particular features to make an opinion.
I did mention some things I expected from being underwater. For example, no fire. No bows.
I want three dimensional movement. Bubbles. Underwater life. I want swimming animations. I want the sense of suspension you get from floating. I would like the chance to drown. I want justification for how you can breathe under there.
Hey presto, GW2 has all of those. Other MMOs don't.
I've done a lot of underwater content. I dislike moving slowly. Some of my favorite underwater content in a game? Ecco the Dolphin. Because he's not annoyingly slow and making the game drag along. :P I am willing to sacrifice that method of adding 'the feeling of water' for what I consider improved gameplay. ESPECIALLY in a situation where water isn't just a very occasional temporary thing you worry about for a minute or two.
I am 100% acknowledging that something that is usually there is not. It would be like if somebody told me they invented candy that tastes awesome but doesn't rot your teeth or make you fat.
I would be ALL over that. I would be like 'Hey, it may be ruining the 'feeling of candy' a bit, but only by removing bad qualities! BONUS win'
You can disagree with me, but don't patronize me by acting like I haven't thought this through as much as you have.
I've actually had this talk about underwater content more than once, with a friend who went to school for game design. We both agreed that the main parts that make underwater content suck so much in most games is the fact you're slower and constantly playing an unfun 'don't forget to breathe' minigame. It's generally very poorly designed content.
YES, you could make awesome content around those mechanisms, but usually companies don't. Usually underwater gameplay sections are vastly inferior. It's like the random vehicle content in some games where you realize they had the 'ride the motorcycle' or whatever part programmed by interns who hated the game company.
We disagree because we think about this differently and we have different opinions, not because one of us has the secret key to tthe Truth of Underwater, or because one of us is better at thinking things through.
Yes, GW2 underwater content could end up sucking, but they've picked decisions I've wanted myself, so hey... I have high hopes.
... and make no mistake, those ARE design decisions. They didn't go 'Let's cheap ass this and just do lazy water content', they specifically made people travel faster, and got rid of breathing consumables because they thought it would make a better game experience, and work better with their idea of what is fun underwater. You just don't like their choices.
Here, I'll make a deal here.... if trudging through any other liquid in GW2 doesn't offer some kind of movement penalty of any kind, I'll retract my statement here. I mean, at least I'll give them points for consistency. If they keep with the unencumbered by liquid mentality, then we may as well just leave it at rest.
(as for psychonauts, I loved the game, and raz could be an exaggerated smuggler, I suppose)
Wow just wow. Then we can all have another 20+ page thread complaining about lack of movement impairments where there should be. Cmon man use some sence. The point most of us have been trying to make that you refuse to allow to sink in is that the water content is pretty vast so they are doing away with the unnessesary parts to make that content a little more fun and playable.
I am reading your responces and now I couldn't care less if you gave them points on anything. You seem to enjoy bashing the game but you still come and complain about every feature revealed. It is sad when the team adds features that are different than other games and follow it with an explination, and people like you still cry nonsence. Your opinions are your own and valid to you, but if you choose to make them knownn then why aren't you open to others input? Because you aren't here to discuss you are here to bash? Use all the pretty words you want it is still amounting to the same thing.
added: And stop trying to sound like some martyr on the subject. You are on a GW2 forum arguing a point of view and being unreceptive to others explinations and opinions on how their point of view isn't affected the same way yours is. It only seems like people make you a monster because you are, for the most part, the only one here that is really trying to fish for a win in a debate to mark the game negatively.
It may have taken a few pages but at least you echoed back what I've been saying this whole time.
Originally posted by FlawSGI
Wow just wow. Then we can all have another 20+ page thread complaining about lack of movement impairments where there should be. Cmon man use some sence. The point most of us have been trying to make that you refuse to allow to sink in is that the water content is pretty vast so they are doing away with the unnessesary parts to make that content a little more fun and playable. I am reading your responces and now I couldn't care less if you gave them points on anything. You seem to enjoy bashing the game but you still come and complain about every feature revealed. It is sad when the team adds features that are different than other games and follow it with an explination, and people like you still cry nonsence. Your opinions are your own and valid to you, but if you choose to make them knownn then why aren't you open to others input? Because you aren't here to discuss you are here to bash? Use all the pretty words you want it is still amounting to the same thing. added: And stop trying to sound like some martyr on the subject. You are on a GW2 forum arguing a point of view and being unreceptive to others explinations and opinions on how their point of view isn't affected the same way yours is. It only seems like people make you a monster because you are, for the most part, the only one here that is really trying to fish for a win in a debate to mark the game negatively.
You say you've been reading my posts *now* and that I like bashing the game? If you read plenty of my posts I have both good and bad to say about the game, so either you don't read very many posts, or you're making a rash generalization because you, like others, can't handle criticism.
Nowhere did I say others opinions aren't valid, I strictly stated the opinion I've given is my own a number of times, and what ensued was everyone trying to change my opinion. Some arguments were pretty good, others, not so much.
You say I'm unreceptive to others, but that is a common case of one sidedness. Go back and read some of the responses to my posts. What you see are the people trying to "turn" my point of view.... telling me that my OPINION is wrong. I have never left the stance I started at, and won't, but I've always explained why I felt the way I did. People could either accept that, or not. It seems a great number of people can't.
Take my thread about "what I dislike about GW2" why did I write that? Well simply because, nobody else had, and I had some distinct things I didn't like about GW2 that I wanted to profess. Some people agreed with me, others called me names.
The only way my opinion will change is when I play the game and IF my experiences is contrary to my current perception. Right now my understanding is one par and sometimes better than some of the biggest proponents. In short, I know what I like and if a feature sounds like I won't like it, so be it, I'll voice my opinion on it.
It seems that the biggest argument against what I'm saying is that, "Even regular water based content isn't remotely believeable, so its okay if this one is even less so." (as for psychonauts, I loved the game, and raz could be an exaggerated smuggler, I suppose)
Correction. The way we're saying it is 'Even regular water based content isn't remotely believable, so it's okay if this one is believe equally just in different ways'. Stop saying our feelings aren't important. T.T Your opinion is what your opinion is, but that doesn't mean we formed our opinion in some sort of crazy way where we agree with you in theory but disagree with you in practice just to drive you crazy. My opinion is not 'This water content is less believable, but we like it that way', so stop putting it that way. It's 'This water content is less believable to you but hey, that's you. Your issues aren't mine.' This is where the sticking point is. I know I can't change your opinion as to what is important, but I just want you to see that we're valuing different things but see the water qualities of this particular water rendition just fine, even if you don't. ... and by 'we', I of course mean me, because I can't speak for all the other GW2 fans. Who knows, maybe some of them think the water is completely unrealistic in all ways, obviously inferior, but talks it up all awesome specifically to thwart you.
This is a terrific summation. I have no doubt that someone will have to repeat this sentiment in the next two pages, and 2 pages after that, and so on, because this entire argument is not being conducted in good faith.
The only way my opinion will change is when I play the game and IF my experiences is contrary to my current perception. Right now my understanding is one par and sometimes better than some of the biggest proponents. In short, I know what I like and if a feature sounds like I won't like it, so be it, I'll voice my opinion on it.
I have kept quiet on this thread, which in my opinion is a waste of time, but this made me just have to ask a question. A question I am curious about because it happens so frequently.
If you are closed minded to the point that you can not possibly be swayed in your opinion by conversations and exposure to other points of view, and only will change your opinion based on events you experience first hand, then why bother posting anything about your opinion? What is it you hope to gain? How is it enriching any conversation, unless opinions are asked for?
This is not an attack, especially when I feel that 99% of this board is either trolling, flaming just to flame, or desperately trying to prove someone else's opinion "wrong". I am just curious to know from someone who freely admits there is no way anyone is changing their mind what the point is of posting that opinion in a public setting, especially on a site like this.
It may have taken a few pages but at least you echoed back what I've been saying this whole time.
Originally posted by FlawSGI
Wow just wow. Then we can all have another 20+ page thread complaining about lack of movement impairments where there should be. Cmon man use some sence. The point most of us have been trying to make that you refuse to allow to sink in is that the water content is pretty vast so they are doing away with the unnessesary parts to make that content a little more fun and playable.
I am reading your responces and now I couldn't care less if you gave them points on anything. You seem to enjoy bashing the game but you still come and complain about every feature revealed. It is sad when the team adds features that are different than other games and follow it with an explination, and people like you still cry nonsence. Your opinions are your own and valid to you, but if you choose to make them knownn then why aren't you open to others input? Because you aren't here to discuss you are here to bash? Use all the pretty words you want it is still amounting to the same thing.
added: And stop trying to sound like some martyr on the subject. You are on a GW2 forum arguing a point of view and being unreceptive to others explinations and opinions on how their point of view isn't affected the same way yours is. It only seems like people make you a monster because you are, for the most part, the only one here that is really trying to fish for a win in a debate to mark the game negatively.
You say you've been reading my posts *now* and that I like bashing the game? If you read plenty of my posts I have both good and bad to say about the game, so either you don't read very many posts, or you're making a rash generalization because you, like others, can't handle criticism.
Nowhere did I say others opinions aren't valid, I strictly stated the opinion I've given is my own a number of times, and what ensued was everyone trying to change my opinion. Some arguments were pretty good, others, not so much.
You say I'm unreceptive to others, but that is a common case of one sidedness. Go back and read some of the responses to my posts. What you see are the people trying to "turn" my point of view.... telling me that my OPINION is wrong. I have never left the stance I started at, and won't, but I've always explained why I felt the way I did. People could either accept that, or not. It seems a great number of people can't.
Take my thread about "what I dislike about GW2" why did I write that? Well simply because, nobody else had, and I had some distinct things I didn't like about GW2 that I wanted to profess. Some people agreed with me, others called me names.
The only way my opinion will change is when I play the game and IF my experiences is contrary to my current perception. Right now my understanding is one par and sometimes better than some of the biggest proponents. In short, I know what I like and if a feature sounds like I won't like it, so be it, I'll voice my opinion on it.
Actually you made a good example of what I was saying. I didn't say I was now reading your posts. I said I read your post and NOW I couldn't care less. Play semantics if you want but I wasn't saying I just started reading them only that it is clear there is no point in trying to have agood discussion with you. As you just showed there is no two way conversation. You pull the same bullshit others do and claim since you plan on playing the game that you now have a valid argument and the go - ahead to bash it without looking like a troll when in fact you are. You also pointed out that you started a thread about what you dislike about GW2, on a GW2 forum, and then act surprised others come to try to sway your opinion. I honestly don't care to change your opinion since I feel the GW community would be better off w/o you. You are here to post negativety and thats it. You don't care for the game and thats been made clear. Good day sir.
The only way my opinion will change is when I play the game and IF my experiences is contrary to my current perception. Right now my understanding is one par and sometimes better than some of the biggest proponents. In short, I know what I like and if a feature sounds like I won't like it, so be it, I'll voice my opinion on it.
I have kept quiet on this thread, which in my opinion is a waste of time, but this made me just have to ask a question. A question I am curious about because it happens so frequently.
If you are closed minded to the point that you can not possibly be swayed in your opinion by conversations and exposure to other points of view, and only will change your opinion based on events you experience first hand, then why bother posting anything about your opinion? What is it you hope to gain? How is it enriching any conversation, unless opinions are asked for?
This is not an attack, especially when I feel that 99% of this board is either trolling, flaming just to flame, or desperately trying to prove someone else's opinion "wrong". I am just curious to know from someone who freely admits there is no way anyone is changing their mind what the point is of posting that opinion in a public setting, especially on a site like this.
I don't take it as an attack, I take it as a discussion, others seem to take it as an attack.
Quite simply as I said, this is a discussion board. Think about this for a minute. If everyone only posted positive impressions, we wouldn't have this conversation, in fact, we wouldn't have this thread at all. This thread started as a "I'll prove you wrong" thread, saying that there was a movement penalty to the "skeptics". As we know, there isn't, and to address that, those who are for this type of gameplay profess the game is better for it.
Now, as for voicing my opinion, it isn't an effort to change someone elses opinion, its so that my opinion gets to stand next to theirs. Opinions change, and all I can do right now is make one based on my perception of the "facts" of the game. If they question my opinion or disregard it harshly like I'm not supposed to have it, then I'll reinforce my opinion. As my opinions get reinforced people start taking that as "trolling" because it sounds like its just negative after negative, when in fact its just one negative revoiced in a different way in hopes they can accept that, this is the way I feel right now, and then we move on.
On the flipside though, how many positive conversations do we have over games? VIrtually none. These types of threads go unnoticed for the simple reason that nobody cares to regurgitate comments on how good something is. You may find 20 "negative" comments from me over a topic, maybe even a "negative" opinion thread by me over this game or others, but people seem to disregard the few and far between "positive" comments I make simply because the negative threads are more active.
I've been here for a long time, and I don't call people names, and I don't judge people based on their opinions. What I will do is make a judgment based on their character. I know that Meowhead is a good guy, and I like conversations with him. I know Elikal can flip flop on a game like nobodies business, and thats just how he is, and I have a strange respect for him for that. These posters provide their opinions to me good or bad, and while I may not disagree, as long as it is an opinion that can't be proven wrong, then I can accept it, tell them my point of view, and discuss it, even if they didn't ask me specifically for an opinion. Hence the reandomness and excitement known as the MMORPG.COM forums.
I don't take it as an attack, I take it as a discussion, others seem to take it as an attack.
Quite simply as I said, this is a discussion board. Think about this for a minute. If everyone only posted positive impressions, we wouldn't have this conversation, in fact, we wouldn't have this thread at all. This thread started as a "I'll prove you wrong" thread, saying that there was a movement penalty to the "skeptics". As we know, there isn't, and to address that, those who are for this type of gameplay profess the game is better for it.
Now, as for voicing my opinion, it isn't an effort to change someone elses opinion, its so that my opinion gets to stand next to theirs. Opinions change, and all I can do right now is make one based on my perception of the "facts" of the game. If they question my opinion or disregard it harshly like I'm not supposed to have it, then I'll reinforce my opinion. As my opinions get reinforced people start taking that as "trolling" because it sounds like its just negative after negative, when in fact its just one negative revoiced in a different way in hopes they can accept that, this is the way I feel right now, and then we move on.
On the flipside though, how many positive conversations do we have over games? VIrtually none. These types of threads go unnoticed for the simple reason that nobody cares to regurgitate comments on how good something is. You may find 20 "negative" comments from me over a topic, maybe even a "negative" opinion thread by me over this game or others, but people seem to disregard the few and far between "positive" comments I make simply because the negative threads are more active.
I've been here for a long time, and I don't call people names, and I don't judge people based on their opinions. What I will do is make a judgment based on their character. I know that Meowhead is a good guy, and I like conversations with him. I know Elikal can flip flop on a game like nobodies business, and thats just how he is, and I have a strange respect for him for that. These posters provide their opinions to me good or bad, and while I may not disagree, as long as it is an opinion that can't be proven wrong, then I can accept it, tell them my point of view, and discuss it, even if they didn't ask me specifically for an opinion. Hence the reandomness and excitement known as the MMORPG.COM forums.
I respectfully disagree, and I will explain. You see, you openly say you will not be swayed in your opinion, so therefore no discusion can be had about your opinion, you can only state it. A discussion constitutes a two way discourse through which a solution, or an argument can be made. If one side is not open to the possibility of changing their viewpoint it is, in fact, not a discussion.
Further if you feel others are telling you that your opinion is "wrong" in their retorts, and you restate your opinion, you are then telling them that their differing opinion is "wrong" and that yours is right. That is indeed why there are 45 pages on controversial subjects, because for the most part, those who are involved are not mature enough to see it is a differing of opinions and just drop it. Everyone must be "right".
If this is a real discussion, then you will be forced into an introspective role, at least momentarily, to examine if you are truly adding to a discussion, which would by definition requires an open mind as the people involve try to consider or examine the subject to find a solution, or if you are simply stating and restating your static opinion which can not be changed, and therefore is not a discussion.
I don't think I am phrasing it well, but essentially what I am saying is that restating your opinion over and over, even if in different ways without any intention of even considering another point of view is not a discussion. It is just saying "my opinion is right" which is no different than them saying your opinion is wrong. Of course maybe I am misunderstanding your PoV, if so please enlighten me.
Comments
GW2 also changes your skills, have different pets and different weapons.
But I thought we killed the discussion a week ago when someone pointed out that swimming in armor is more unrealstic than anything else here, not to mention all the loot you have on you.
Heck, I own a medium armor (Chainmail, helmet, gambusange and some leather parts, 14 Kg), and it is bad enough to try running in that, I would sink like a stone in it and not even an olympic swimmer could even survive falling in the water with it (and taking it off in the water is extremely hard, I rather do the "Lethal weapon" trick with the madhouse shirt than a chainmail).
What? Why? How?
It is a replica of a 11th century armor for fighting, it is made to take real punishment.
Because I done some old school swordsplay (it is pretty popular actually).
What do you mean how? There are a whole bunch of people making classic armors, and it is not that expensive unless you do 15th century and want a full plate.
I also own a bunch of swords. If you are interested in learning to use a blade check out ARMA, they are pretty world wide.
I simply don't very often come across people who own medieval armor : P
Making analogies more confusing is the GOOD part, because it shows how inherently broken most of them are.
Your enjoyment of your honey roasted peanut analogue is PURELY subjective. 100%. For every feature you can list for your underwater content in an MMO that GW2 does not have, I can list two features that make it seem more underwater that GW2 does have and the other game doesn't.
It's nice that you've bought into the faux representation of underwater that gaming has semi-standardized, but the shorthand they're using to represent water is just choosing different aspects of water to reflect than GW2 is.
Also, technically you only have one complaint. The movement speed is too fast for you. People are breathing underwater because they have a mask designed to facilitate that. Therefore, your problem is with the mask, not with the water.
Unless you prefer your water to rabidly attack underwater breathing devices. In which case your underwater content just went from 'Your personal preference' to 'That's kind of creepy'.
You have to learn to roll with the game design punches and justify things in your head, because you've actually been doing that all along, just you got so fooled into one particular form of gaming shorthand you're mistaking it for the truth, rather than a convenient shorthand method of representing something. For example, I always tell myself that everybody in SW:ToR is just descended from Raz from Psychonauts. (You get like... a cookie or something if you realize what I'm talking about there.)
In my opinion, one of the core design features of being underwater, is that there probably shouldn't be fire and there certainly shouldn't be bows.
BAM. GW2 just totally slapped the hell out of 99% of the underwater content you care to mention in MMORPGs.
You know I think in most past MMORPGs, water has really just been an obstacle. It's kind of like the "sand traps" (golf) of an MMORPG. You normally tried to avoid swimming across a large body of water at all costs because it took so long, and if you got attacked by a difficult monster, you couldn't really run. This is much like how a golfer will try to avoid a sand trap...minus the monsters of course
.
So that kind of water fits fine in a game where there's not really much content underwater. Kind of like how a golf course has a few sand traps just to keep things interesting.
But once you start putting a large amount of content underwater...this sand trap model doesn't work anymore. It would be like making an entire golf course on the beach. It would be horrible. The only way to have a lot of content underwater and make it tolerable is to make water something other than an obstacle.
I know you guys think that removing the "obstacle" aspect of water may seem forced, but in reality, out history is filled with humanity making environments that used to only be obstacles part of our domain. The ocean for example, used to be impassable before innovations like the compass, stronger ships, and salted food. Nowadays we exploit the ocean in many ways, even building huge oil platforms in the middle of it.
The desert is another example. Before ancient peoples learned how to survive off of this harsh environment, I'm sure it was just something to be avoided. Space is our next frontier, and while it's still pretty foreign to us, we have begun to exploit it with sattelites and stuff.
So I don't really see ground-dwelling races in the GW2 world beginning to exploit their underwater environments as anything that crazy.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
RRelative time dilation is realistic, but I was talking absolute time dilation. In an MMORPG environment, where everybody is sensing time, the people who aren't flying spaceships must be taking days to complete even the most mundane actions.
jesus!
U know u guys are crying over a feture they spent months to implement instead of screwing everyone up with movement penalty, breath restriction and normal skills working weirdly underwater like does any other MMO out there-and everyone would be okay with it!
This is so irrational (and you all bashers and very very ungrateful)
It's like crying over destructible environment for no chance your eyes'd be blast out with splinters!
They did something extraordinary (again!) and what they get is "booohooo this fantasy game full of magic, giant dragons, undead nations and living gods is totally unreal - u move normal underwater!"
wtf is wrong with u srsly..
So for all those spocks out there, thing of it that water in Tyria has lower viscosity - hope u happy, nerds
I think I actually spent way more time reading and theorycrafting about MMOs than playing them
I don't think they are nerds, they're like sub-subnerds, sort of like a troglodyte to an ogre, so to speak. The thing of it is is that a true nerd would be creative enough to solve their own conundrums. Reality has another set of physical laws allowing things that our reality doesn't? A real nerd sees that as a challenge and tasks their own knowledge to explain it. But a more limited, lesser nerd, a nerd of the lower planes, waves their arms and scream "Impossible!" hoping it'll make them look cool.
Except yelling "Impossible!" stopped being cool at some point after the '80s. Even Data would frown at someone for the use of impossible over highly improbable (Cause and Effect et al). And with the highly improbable, if it's right in front of you, then however improbable it seems, it must be true. Therefore it's down to the nerd to try and explain it enough to the point where it makes them happy. If a nerd can't do that, then they're really some lesser nerd, as I said, and shouldn't try to claim a full nerd card. They don't deserve it.
Really, I just think it's incredibly boring, pedestrian, plodding people just passing themselves off as nerds. They can't take certain elements being different to reality, so they scream "IMPOSSEEBLEH!" at things, hoping that it'll make those things go away. In truth, it'll just make any nerd worth their salt frown with scorn at them. Really, water behaving differently in a game is not something that's worth a thread, not a single thread, anywhere.
It's pedantic, plodding, and petty, it's petulant and almost pathologically pasteurised to the point of perhaps being a pinch pathetic.
Yes, alliteration was required, there. It was so very required. I mean, this isn't Accountants Online. This is bloody People Flailing Around With Magic Fireballs at Continent Sized Dragons Online. And we're talking about how water behaves in a game like that, really? Really?
Anyone who's going to do that gets no credibility from me. It's just too ridiculous.
---
I would again suggest that if someone wants earth-like realism, then Guild Wars 2 is not the game for them, because it laughs in the face of such. This thread and others like it where people are complaining about how it's not earth-like realistic is sort of like someone going to a Call of Duty thread and complaining about how there aren't rainbows, bright colours, and ridiculous power ups in those games. There are games which are aimed at specific demographics. Therefore, may I suggest Darkfall Online or Mortal Online? Either or would be good for earth-like realism, as is my understanding.
But this is ridiculous. It's utterly ridiculous. It's like asking for magic in Civilisation. It's like asking for guns in Mario. It's like asking for rocket launchers in an F1 racing game. Let's be sane about this.
---
And if you so desperately want rocket launchers in an F1 game, then bloody found your own studio and do it. It's completely unfair to demand that a studio developing an F1 game for people who're F1 purists actually make the game less pure just to suit your own desires. This isn't a game marketed at you if you don't like what it's doing. It's marketed at me and people like me. It's just completely unfair to make these demands. The people who this game is aimed at don't want what you want. So again, found your own studio and make your own Guild Wars 2 clone that has realistic water for completely arbitrary reasons. But it's unfair to impact upon the game in what would be a negative way for the vast majority of the demographic it's aimed at.
It would be like, to say it again, adding rocket launchers to an F1 game just to suit people who want rocket launchers. This is nonsense! I hope this really puts pay to this debate, because debates like this are started by people who're far too spoilt, and expect everything their way, and... that's not something we should be fostering or considering to be acceptable. This isn't a game for you. So deal with it. Either accept it for what it is, find another game, or make your own game.
I am just so sick of hearing people making unreasonable demands of ArenaNet just because they want this to be MMO They're Tired of Playing But they Still Want More of II. If you want that, find it elsewhere or make it yourself. But all the complaining in the world isn't going to turn Guild Wars 2 into the game you want it to be.
*falls over.*
Making analogies different and more confusing doesn't show how broken they are, they only show how broken the changes you made to them are. With all due respect senator, I feel you've overstepped your analogy powers.
I think what people are trying to tell me is that what makes [conventional] water mechanics doesn't actually mean that it makes a substance water, or water based content.
In games themselves you can only give yourself a certain number of identifiers for each set of obstacles, whether it be terrain, or combat, or itemization.
It seems that the biggest argument against what I'm saying is that, "Even regular water based content isn't remotely believeable, so its okay if this one is even less so."
In comparison though, in most games with water based content, this kind of content has always been this way, you likely have always encountered it and reacted with it based upon what the world offers. You were likely given no passes on it until a certain point, and it was likely always a part of the world you were in.
Thats not the case in GW2. The game has gone from not being able to trudge through water, to everyone having a breathing apparatus, carrying around a spear or something similar, and swimming unencumbered for hours on end.
Sure because other games shun some amounts of realism, but provide others doesn't mean GW2 is somehow immune because it went a different route here. I never said it had to be ultra realistic, I never said it wasn't fun, I said it was pointless and hokey. It isn't underwater combat, its below ground floating blue room combat.
Here, I'll make a deal here.... if trudging through any other liquid in GW2 doesn't offer some kind of movement penalty of any kind, I'll retract my statement here. I mean, at least I'll give them points for consistency. If they keep with the unencumbered by liquid mentality, then we may as well just leave it at rest.
(as for psychonauts, I loved the game, and raz could be an exaggerated smuggler, I suppose)
I think I actually spent way more time reading and theorycrafting about MMOs than playing them
And the inanity continues. Had someone but given just an infinitesimal amount of thought to what is considered a differing opinion, the need for trying to label negative proponents wouldn't be necessary. What that is though, is simply elitist and melodramatic for the sake of being such and nothing more. Accept your game for what it is, as I've accepted it, and accept the criticism it takes for its choices because you can't change it. I take this information, process it and give my opinion on it, too bad if it doesn't mesh with yours.
Consider others opinions arbitrary, but yours are equally so in that instance. Not for one minute do I truly find any of your posts anything more than a condescending rant. If you can't handle criticism of the game you're looking forward to, then you're going to end up writing plenty of futile posts.
I've been more than magnanimous when explaining my point of view, and you've been nothing but pitiless in trying to explain yours. Perhaps one day we can ALL grow up and accept others opinions, even if we disagree with them. Until that day, I'll be waiting to read the next rant
Correction. The way we're saying it is 'Even regular water based content isn't remotely believable, so it's okay if this one is believe equally just in different ways'.
Stop saying our feelings aren't important. T.T Your opinion is what your opinion is, but that doesn't mean we formed our opinion in some sort of crazy way where we agree with you in theory but disagree with you in practice just to drive you crazy.
My opinion is not 'This water content is less believable, but we like it that way', so stop putting it that way.
It's 'This water content is less believable to you but hey, that's you. Your issues aren't mine.'
This is where the sticking point is. I know I can't change your opinion as to what is important, but I just want you to see that we're valuing different things but see the water qualities of this particular water rendition just fine, even if you don't.
... and by 'we', I of course mean me, because I can't speak for all the other GW2 fans. Who knows, maybe some of them think the water is completely unrealistic in all ways, obviously inferior, but talks it up all awesome specifically to thwart you.
(Also, Psychonauts? Raz's family is suffering under a gypsy curse where they will die if they go in the water. A clever way of making the 'fall in water and die' mechanic of a platformer actually make sense.)
I do recall the dying when going into water on psychonauts , so good call on that.
What I'm saying as far as water based content is concerned is that there is a common basis regarding this kind of content. I tried to find that with you earlier, labelling what you expect from underwater content. Whilst perhaps Godzilla is a little far fetched for you, it isn't too off base to realize some of the largest and most influential parts of underwater content will not be present. I think that we both know this in some respects, but for the point of argument I'll concede that.
I never said that the content itself would be bad, people like to pretend I'm some sort of monster because I have an opinion contrary to their own, but thats not the intention. My intention is based on a preference, a preference that water at least act like water.
Perhaps in the games you've played water acts differently, perhaps you have a different perception of what makes water... water. Perhaps this is your first time experiencing water based content, I don't know. Where I see a difference though is, 1) acknowledging that something that is usually there is not and 2) coming to terms with the content based on that.
While I do 1 just fine, and dislike the ideas behind 2 because of such, it seems like everyone else is acting the opposite, they came to terms with the content well before they even considered what is or isn't there, and therefore couldn't care less.
I'm not the kind of person to give ANY content a free pass until A) I have a chance to play it
It actually goes well with my playstyle or F) The information released doesn't give enough information on the particular features to make an opinion.
I did mention some things I expected from being underwater. For example, no fire. No bows.
I want three dimensional movement. Bubbles. Underwater life. I want swimming animations. I want the sense of suspension you get from floating. I would like the chance to drown. I want justification for how you can breathe under there.
Hey presto, GW2 has all of those. Other MMOs don't.
I've done a lot of underwater content. I dislike moving slowly. Some of my favorite underwater content in a game? Ecco the Dolphin. Because he's not annoyingly slow and making the game drag along. :P I am willing to sacrifice that method of adding 'the feeling of water' for what I consider improved gameplay. ESPECIALLY in a situation where water isn't just a very occasional temporary thing you worry about for a minute or two.
I am 100% acknowledging that something that is usually there is not. It would be like if somebody told me they invented candy that tastes awesome but doesn't rot your teeth or make you fat.
I would be ALL over that. I would be like 'Hey, it may be ruining the 'feeling of candy' a bit, but only by removing bad qualities! BONUS win'
You can disagree with me, but don't patronize me by acting like I haven't thought this through as much as you have.
I've actually had this talk about underwater content more than once, with a friend who went to school for game design. We both agreed that the main parts that make underwater content suck so much in most games is the fact you're slower and constantly playing an unfun 'don't forget to breathe' minigame. It's generally very poorly designed content.
YES, you could make awesome content around those mechanisms, but usually companies don't. Usually underwater gameplay sections are vastly inferior. It's like the random vehicle content in some games where you realize they had the 'ride the motorcycle' or whatever part programmed by interns who hated the game company.
We disagree because we think about this differently and we have different opinions, not because one of us has the secret key to tthe Truth of Underwater, or because one of us is better at thinking things through.
Yes, GW2 underwater content could end up sucking, but they've picked decisions I've wanted myself, so hey... I have high hopes.
... and make no mistake, those ARE design decisions. They didn't go 'Let's cheap ass this and just do lazy water content', they specifically made people travel faster, and got rid of breathing consumables because they thought it would make a better game experience, and work better with their idea of what is fun underwater. You just don't like their choices.
Wow just wow. Then we can all have another 20+ page thread complaining about lack of movement impairments where there should be. Cmon man use some sence. The point most of us have been trying to make that you refuse to allow to sink in is that the water content is pretty vast so they are doing away with the unnessesary parts to make that content a little more fun and playable.
I am reading your responces and now I couldn't care less if you gave them points on anything. You seem to enjoy bashing the game but you still come and complain about every feature revealed. It is sad when the team adds features that are different than other games and follow it with an explination, and people like you still cry nonsence. Your opinions are your own and valid to you, but if you choose to make them knownn then why aren't you open to others input? Because you aren't here to discuss you are here to bash? Use all the pretty words you want it is still amounting to the same thing.
added: And stop trying to sound like some martyr on the subject. You are on a GW2 forum arguing a point of view and being unreceptive to others explinations and opinions on how their point of view isn't affected the same way yours is. It only seems like people make you a monster because you are, for the most part, the only one here that is really trying to fish for a win in a debate to mark the game negatively.
RIP Jimmy "The Rev" Sullivan and Paul Gray.
[quote]
Originally posted by Meowhead
It may have taken a few pages but at least you echoed back what I've been saying this whole time.
You say you've been reading my posts *now* and that I like bashing the game? If you read plenty of my posts I have both good and bad to say about the game, so either you don't read very many posts, or you're making a rash generalization because you, like others, can't handle criticism.
Nowhere did I say others opinions aren't valid, I strictly stated the opinion I've given is my own a number of times, and what ensued was everyone trying to change my opinion. Some arguments were pretty good, others, not so much.
You say I'm unreceptive to others, but that is a common case of one sidedness. Go back and read some of the responses to my posts. What you see are the people trying to "turn" my point of view.... telling me that my OPINION is wrong. I have never left the stance I started at, and won't, but I've always explained why I felt the way I did. People could either accept that, or not. It seems a great number of people can't.
Take my thread about "what I dislike about GW2" why did I write that? Well simply because, nobody else had, and I had some distinct things I didn't like about GW2 that I wanted to profess. Some people agreed with me, others called me names.
The only way my opinion will change is when I play the game and IF my experiences is contrary to my current perception. Right now my understanding is one par and sometimes better than some of the biggest proponents. In short, I know what I like and if a feature sounds like I won't like it, so be it, I'll voice my opinion on it.
This is a terrific summation. I have no doubt that someone will have to repeat this sentiment in the next two pages, and 2 pages after that, and so on, because this entire argument is not being conducted in good faith.
I have kept quiet on this thread, which in my opinion is a waste of time, but this made me just have to ask a question. A question I am curious about because it happens so frequently.
If you are closed minded to the point that you can not possibly be swayed in your opinion by conversations and exposure to other points of view, and only will change your opinion based on events you experience first hand, then why bother posting anything about your opinion? What is it you hope to gain? How is it enriching any conversation, unless opinions are asked for?
This is not an attack, especially when I feel that 99% of this board is either trolling, flaming just to flame, or desperately trying to prove someone else's opinion "wrong". I am just curious to know from someone who freely admits there is no way anyone is changing their mind what the point is of posting that opinion in a public setting, especially on a site like this.
Actually you made a good example of what I was saying. I didn't say I was now reading your posts. I said I read your post and NOW I couldn't care less. Play semantics if you want but I wasn't saying I just started reading them only that it is clear there is no point in trying to have agood discussion with you. As you just showed there is no two way conversation. You pull the same bullshit others do and claim since you plan on playing the game that you now have a valid argument and the go - ahead to bash it without looking like a troll when in fact you are. You also pointed out that you started a thread about what you dislike about GW2, on a GW2 forum, and then act surprised others come to try to sway your opinion. I honestly don't care to change your opinion since I feel the GW community would be better off w/o you. You are here to post negativety and thats it. You don't care for the game and thats been made clear. Good day sir.
RIP Jimmy "The Rev" Sullivan and Paul Gray.
I don't take it as an attack, I take it as a discussion, others seem to take it as an attack.
Quite simply as I said, this is a discussion board. Think about this for a minute. If everyone only posted positive impressions, we wouldn't have this conversation, in fact, we wouldn't have this thread at all. This thread started as a "I'll prove you wrong" thread, saying that there was a movement penalty to the "skeptics". As we know, there isn't, and to address that, those who are for this type of gameplay profess the game is better for it.
Now, as for voicing my opinion, it isn't an effort to change someone elses opinion, its so that my opinion gets to stand next to theirs. Opinions change, and all I can do right now is make one based on my perception of the "facts" of the game. If they question my opinion or disregard it harshly like I'm not supposed to have it, then I'll reinforce my opinion. As my opinions get reinforced people start taking that as "trolling" because it sounds like its just negative after negative, when in fact its just one negative revoiced in a different way in hopes they can accept that, this is the way I feel right now, and then we move on.
On the flipside though, how many positive conversations do we have over games? VIrtually none. These types of threads go unnoticed for the simple reason that nobody cares to regurgitate comments on how good something is. You may find 20 "negative" comments from me over a topic, maybe even a "negative" opinion thread by me over this game or others, but people seem to disregard the few and far between "positive" comments I make simply because the negative threads are more active.
I've been here for a long time, and I don't call people names, and I don't judge people based on their opinions. What I will do is make a judgment based on their character. I know that Meowhead is a good guy, and I like conversations with him. I know Elikal can flip flop on a game like nobodies business, and thats just how he is, and I have a strange respect for him for that. These posters provide their opinions to me good or bad, and while I may not disagree, as long as it is an opinion that can't be proven wrong, then I can accept it, tell them my point of view, and discuss it, even if they didn't ask me specifically for an opinion. Hence the reandomness and excitement known as the MMORPG.COM forums.
I respectfully disagree, and I will explain. You see, you openly say you will not be swayed in your opinion, so therefore no discusion can be had about your opinion, you can only state it. A discussion constitutes a two way discourse through which a solution, or an argument can be made. If one side is not open to the possibility of changing their viewpoint it is, in fact, not a discussion.
Further if you feel others are telling you that your opinion is "wrong" in their retorts, and you restate your opinion, you are then telling them that their differing opinion is "wrong" and that yours is right. That is indeed why there are 45 pages on controversial subjects, because for the most part, those who are involved are not mature enough to see it is a differing of opinions and just drop it. Everyone must be "right".
If this is a real discussion, then you will be forced into an introspective role, at least momentarily, to examine if you are truly adding to a discussion, which would by definition requires an open mind as the people involve try to consider or examine the subject to find a solution, or if you are simply stating and restating your static opinion which can not be changed, and therefore is not a discussion.
I don't think I am phrasing it well, but essentially what I am saying is that restating your opinion over and over, even if in different ways without any intention of even considering another point of view is not a discussion. It is just saying "my opinion is right" which is no different than them saying your opinion is wrong. Of course maybe I am misunderstanding your PoV, if so please enlighten me.