If i had a nickle everytime someone says 'WOW clone' i would be a millionaire by now. People even call GW2 and Tera WOW clones because players are so narrow minded these days that they pick up 2 or 3 features out of long list which resemble the most like traditional MMOS (not particularly WOW) and scream 'WOW CLONE'. All these MMOS including SWTOR have enough features to set it apart from WOW but who cares right? we will continue to use our tunnel vision.
Like what?
Outside of the speech options with NPCs, I didnt' really notice anything too interesting.
And it really does look like a WoW clone.
I class my MMOs with respect to gameplay and fun ; So sadly EQ AC1 and UO may pop into my mind with respect to a clone reference but WoW doesn't even reagister. We all have our benchmarks.
As an advocate of gameplay I feel that SWTOR will add a lot. And provide a great backdrop to have fun with friends, nothing so far indicates otherwise.
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
I class my MMOs with respect to gameplay and fun ; So sadly EQ AC1 and UO may pop into my mind with respect to a clone reference but WoW doesn't even reagister. We all have our benchmarks.
As an advocate of gameplay I feel that SWTOR will add a lot. And provide a great backdrop to have fun with friends, nothing so far indicates otherwise.
Imagine if we had the same kind of conversations about FPS games.
DOOM may have been a great game when it was released, it had new things we had not seen before.
If you released a game today that was exactly like DOOM, and I mean exactly in terms of gameplay, would it be successful?
Of course not, it'd be a huge huge flop. If anything, look at Duke Nukem: Forever - old, tired game mechanics that were awesome 10+ years ago but awful by today's standards.
Games like UO and EQ where amazing and great games when they were released. But if you re-released EQ or UO tomorrow EXACTLY like they were 10+ years ago, they'd be a huge flop.
The point?
Older games may have been great at the time, but few titles stand the test of time - they were only great because we didn't know how much better things could be.
And tbh, GW2 looks equally or more boring when killing mobs (link), although their boss fights look like a lot of fun.
That's not even a very good video and it looks more involving than the TOR combat; the Charr model animations look much more fluid, and the dodging looks like great fun. TOR just looked like a lot of standing around. /shrug
That video is basically a bunch of standing around. They dodged what maybe 3 times And what level is that video compared to the level 1 video shown above, where you basically have little skills available.
That video of GW2 combat is the Charr starting area, so level 1 combat. The very first combat at level 1 too as he's still opening up his second skill with his weapon. I do not agree that GW2 combat looks more boring than TOR combat. Even with the one skill it looks more interesting at that level. It might be equally boring at certain levels, though I really doubt that, but that link isn't going to prove much in terms of ToR combat being less boring than GW2 combat.
Well guess what, that video of TOR's combat in the OP? It's level 1 combat as well bro.
We can all have our own opinions, I'm not bashing GW2, I think it looks cool and I'll play it, but I'm freaking tired of people coming in here saying it is uber awesomely more awesome than the shit boring TOR, when there is nothing pointing to that.
In fact, I just saw a GW2 walkthrough of 20+ minutes were a charr engineer basically spammed 1 ability during the entirety of that video. That's at level 1, I understand that. Is it uber excitiingly more awesome than anything in the TOR level 1 demo? No.
If you had read what I was responding too then you probably wouldn't have written that, would you? He was saying that the SWTOR video was level 1 combat and wondering what level the GW2 video was at. I'm not bashing TOR, but if someone ask a question about GW2 I can answer, right?
And about that demo you're referring too, I'm sure someone could make a similar 'walkthrough' of just about any game if they really wanted to. A clueless player will be a clueless player.
Waiting for Guild Wars 2, and maybe SWTOR until that time...
Lol at this people judging a mmo after watching a lv 1 gameplay, from my point of view we have a lot of scared gw2 fans, bc maybe the game is not that great. did u see the Gw2 pvp vids? just 1 pvp mode ¨conquest¨ and is all about hold a shiny circle for a few secs to earn points, thats all, conquest version in swtor is capture a huge canon to burn your enemy ship, and they have opvp, rvr and more, gw2 who should be a pvp revolution for the mmo world is all about instanced pvp, a single mode ¨conquest¨ with the same, generic and basic ¨hold a zone to win points¨ system, thats all.
That is all they are showing at GamesCom. Jumping to the conclusion 'that's all' regarding a pvp-revolution for the mmo world makes you look very poorly informed. There is competitive PvP and W v W v W PvP. The last is not revealed yet, but it will be in the released product.
Waiting for Guild Wars 2, and maybe SWTOR until that time...
What I don't get is the hype complaint form the OP. GW2 and others are being hyped WAY above what SWTOR is, yet people come here and complain that there's too much going on. The only time I get info about this game is when I visit SWTOR specific forums, or when a convention is running, in which case most games are all getting massive attention. So what's the deal with the hype argument?
Yeah GW2 hype far far far exceeds SWToR hype. Whoever argues that is insane. Nto sure if I have seen Bioware come out and say they are dramatically changing stuff. I saw the ussual pr marketing crap, but nothing compared to what ArenaNET has been saying.
Showing*.
Arena Net doesn't say anything about Guild Wars 2 until it is inside the game, and is working how they want it to work. They've proudly showed off everything they've been saying at two Gamescons, Pax Prime, Pax East, and Comic-Con.
I'm sorry, but I've heard nothing but how revolutionary GW2 PvP is going to be for months now, but they've only just released any solid info about it this week at Gamescon. Don't get me wrong, it looks good (I'm not going to say revolutionary until I play it). And it's not like PR and hype is a bad thing. If you don't tell people about your awesome shit, people won't know about your awesome shit.
But still your statement is incorrect, and I stand by my argument that GW2 is hyped more.
What I don't get is the hype complaint form the OP. GW2 and others are being hyped WAY above what SWTOR is, yet people come here and complain that there's too much going on. The only time I get info about this game is when I visit SWTOR specific forums, or when a convention is running, in which case most games are all getting massive attention. So what's the deal with the hype argument?
Yeah GW2 hype far far far exceeds SWToR hype. Whoever argues that is insane. Nto sure if I have seen Bioware come out and say they are dramatically changing stuff. I saw the ussual pr marketing crap, but nothing compared to what ArenaNET has been saying.
Showing*.
Arena Net doesn't say anything about Guild Wars 2 until it is inside the game, and is working how they want it to work. They've proudly showed off everything they've been saying at two Gamescons, Pax Prime, Pax East, and Comic-Con.
I'm sorry, but I've heard nothing but how revolutionary GW2 PvP is going to be for months now, but they've only just released any solid info about it this week at Gamescon. Don't get me wrong, it looks good (I'm not going to say revolutionary until I play it). And it's not like PR and hype is a bad thing. If you don't tell people about your awesome shit, people won't know about your awesome shit.
But still your statement is incorrect, and I stand by my argument that GW2 is hyped more.
his statement was... correct. where was his starement incorrect?
What I don't get is the hype complaint form the OP. GW2 and others are being hyped WAY above what SWTOR is, yet people come here and complain that there's too much going on. The only time I get info about this game is when I visit SWTOR specific forums, or when a convention is running, in which case most games are all getting massive attention. So what's the deal with the hype argument?
Yeah GW2 hype far far far exceeds SWToR hype. Whoever argues that is insane. Nto sure if I have seen Bioware come out and say they are dramatically changing stuff. I saw the ussual pr marketing crap, but nothing compared to what ArenaNET has been saying.
Showing*.
Arena Net doesn't say anything about Guild Wars 2 until it is inside the game, and is working how they want it to work. They've proudly showed off everything they've been saying at two Gamescons, Pax Prime, Pax East, and Comic-Con.
I'm sorry, but I've heard nothing but how revolutionary GW2 PvP is going to be for months now, but they've only just released any solid info about it this week at Gamescon. Don't get me wrong, it looks good (I'm not going to say revolutionary until I play it). And it's not like PR and hype is a bad thing. If you don't tell people about your awesome shit, people won't know about your awesome shit.
But still your statement is incorrect, and I stand by my argument that GW2 is hyped more.
I'm actually not incorrect. You're just poorly informed. Arena Net has stayed almost completely away from the topic of GW2 PvP before Gamescon and the days preceding it except to say that there would be World PvP and Structured PvP, and giving very basic and miniscule details on each. We were left almost entirely in the dark, which is why it's such a big deal that we're getting PvP at Gamescon finally.
Bring up a source that shows Arena Net Public Relations telling everyone that, or atleast making a statement akin to "Guild Wars 2 PvP will be revolutionary." I'm actually really disturbed that you would make that up. Here's my source, where's yours?
And it would just so happen that it backs up my statement entirely on this very same topic, and is taken right here from MMORPG.com. Next time, try doing some actual research before posting.
MMORPG.com: "How soon can players expect to learn more about PvP?"
Colin Johanson, Lead Content Designer for Guild Wars 2: "I can’t say for sure when we’ll release more information on that, only that all the information we release, we try to make sure that what we’re talking about is in the game, it’s working, and it does the things that we want it to do before we come out and we talk about it."
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
What I don't get is the hype complaint form the OP. GW2 and others are being hyped WAY above what SWTOR is, yet people come here and complain that there's too much going on. The only time I get info about this game is when I visit SWTOR specific forums, or when a convention is running, in which case most games are all getting massive attention. So what's the deal with the hype argument?
Yeah GW2 hype far far far exceeds SWToR hype. Whoever argues that is insane. Nto sure if I have seen Bioware come out and say they are dramatically changing stuff. I saw the ussual pr marketing crap, but nothing compared to what ArenaNET has been saying.
Showing*.
Arena Net doesn't say anything about Guild Wars 2 until it is inside the game, and is working how they want it to work. They've proudly showed off everything they've been saying at two Gamescons, Pax Prime, Pax East, and Comic-Con.
Bioware does the same thing, they only release information about features that are currently implemented. It's the haters who keep moaning about lacking features that Bioware never said were in game and were never intended to be in the game.
Especially when it comes to the details about the action based combat animations. Haters keep calling the combat boring becasue it isn't twitchy, yet Bioware has said all along that it's the animations that are active and reactive, not the combat, which is and always has been slated to be MMO typical fare.
Acknowledged. I'm looking forward to TOR as well. I love Bioware and I loved KoTOR... which is also why I feel a bit burned because I'm not getting KotOR 3.
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
I think this is what cause's most of the hype. The Guild Wars 2 manifesto.
Most of it is well done. But I believe Ree Soesbee's statements are somewhat misleading.
"you effect things in a very permanent way." "you're rescuing a village that will stay rescued."
We now know that this isn't true. The village will stay rescued until another chain of events kick off to change that.
Ree Soesbee, as a continuity & lore director, was referring mainly to personal story. Arena Net doesn't pretend that dynamic events are something they're not.
Gamerzines.com: "As much as players and developers pretend, no mainstream MMO - outside of EVE - allows players to change the game-world permanently. Will Guild Wars 2 deliver on this often promised feature?"
Eric Flannum, Design Lead for Guild Wars 2: "Our event system offers persistent change but not permanent change. If a village burns down it is not gone forever, but rather gone until players help rebuild it. More permanent change can be found in our personal story instances where characters that die will stay dead, buildings will stay destroyed, etc"
Edit: So while misleading, it definitely wasn't intended to promote the game as something it wasn't. A small amount of research further explains some of the more implicit statements.
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
I think this is what cause's most of the hype. The Guild Wars 2 manifesto.
Most of it is well done. But I believe Ree Soesbee's statements are somewhat misleading.
"you effect things in a very permanent way." "you're rescuing a village that will stay rescued."
We now know that this isn't true. The village will stay rescued until another chain of events kick off to change that.
it is true, no one was mislead and every single person who had half a mind knew they were going to be looping events
its still true to this moment because it says how it is until acted upon by an outide force. usually the looped event. until then it will remain.. unlike most other MMOs of this game where that does not happen.
also i would like to mention that although there wil be loops it will try and so it in the most beliveable way possible.
its even possible that that village will never come back under attack ever, making it possible to make it permement.
its not like it will always loop the same way or ever return to the same place. the loops can be shorted lengthend and pushed into diffrent directions. so saying it will stay the same in a permanent way is not far from the truth. its just possible that it can be undone.
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
I think this is what cause's most of the hype. The Guild Wars 2 manifesto.
Most of it is well done. But I believe Ree Soesbee's statements are somewhat misleading.
"you effect things in a very permanent way." "you're rescuing a village that will stay rescued."
We now know that this isn't true. The village will stay rescued until another chain of events kick off to change that.
Ree Soesbee, as a continuity & lore director, was referring mainly to personal story. Arena Net doesn't pretend that dynamic events are something they're not.
Gamerzines.com: "As much as players and developers pretend, no mainstream MMO - outside of EVE - allows players to change the game-world permanently. Will Guild Wars 2 deliver on this often promised feature?"
Eric Flannum, Design Lead for Guild Wars 2: "Our event system offers persistent change but not permanent change. If a village burns down it is not gone forever, but rather gone until players help rebuild it. More permanent change can be found in our personal story instances where characters that die will stay dead, buildings will stay destroyed, etc"
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
I think this is what cause's most of the hype. The Guild Wars 2 manifesto.
Most of it is well done. But I believe Ree Soesbee's statements are somewhat misleading.
"you effect things in a very permanent way." "you're rescuing a village that will stay rescued."
We now know that this isn't true. The village will stay rescued until another chain of events kick off to change that.
Ree Soesbee, as a continuity & lore director, was referring mainly to personal story. Arena Net doesn't pretend that dynamic events are something they're not.
Gamerzines.com: "As much as players and developers pretend, no mainstream MMO - outside of EVE - allows players to change the game-world permanently. Will Guild Wars 2 deliver on this often promised feature?"
Eric Flannum, Design Lead for Guild Wars 2: "Our event system offers persistent change but not permanent change. If a village burns down it is not gone forever, but rather gone until players help rebuild it. More permanent change can be found in our personal story instances where characters that die will stay dead, buildings will stay destroyed, etc"
True but the video doesn't explain this and could easily be taken out of context.
anything can easily be taken out of context. just becasue they made a small folly in delivery does not eman you can hang it over their heads. in the end they did not lie, and they were not trying to mislead anyone.
Arena Net doesn't say anything about Guild Wars 2 until it is inside the game, and is working how they want it to work. They've proudly showed off everything they've been saying at two Gamescons, Pax Prime, Pax East, and Comic-Con.
I'm sorry, but I've heard nothing but how revolutionary GW2 PvP is going to be for months now, but they've only just released any solid info about it this week at Gamescon. Don't get me wrong, it looks good (I'm not going to say revolutionary until I play it). And it's not like PR and hype is a bad thing. If you don't tell people about your awesome shit, people won't know about your awesome shit.
But still your statement is incorrect, and I stand by my argument that GW2 is hyped more.
I'm actually not incorrect. You're just poorly informed. Arena Net has stayed almost completely away from the topic of GW2 PvP before Gamescon and the days preceding it except to say that there would be World PvP and Structured PvP, and giving very basic and miniscule details on each. We were left almost entirely in the dark, which is why it's such a big deal that we're getting PvP at Gamescon finally.
Bring up a source that shows Arena Net Public Relations telling everyone that, or atleast making a statement akin to "Guild Wars 2 PvP will be revolutionary." I'm actually really disturbed that you would make that up. Here's my source, where's yours?
And it would just so happen that it backs up my statement entirely on this very same topic, and is taken right here from MMORPG.com. Next time, try doing some actual research before posting.
MMORPG.com: "How soon can players expect to learn more about PvP?"
Colin Johanson, Lead Content Designer for Guild Wars 2: "I can’t say for sure when we’ll release more information on that, only that all the information we release, we try to make sure that what we’re talking about is in the game, it’s working, and it does the things that we want it to do before we come out and we talk about it."
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
Fair enough. I take back you being wrong about your original statement.
Now, I try not to be inaccurrate or misleading (doesn't always work out that way, and I'm not misleading anyone intentionally), but in the cases that I am, I'm willing to admit it and eat some crow. You're absolutely right, it's probably hyped by the players more, and not Anet.
Just to point something out... I'm not a news writer, nor do I find doing research entertaining in any form. If I recall an article and it's close at hand to throw into a post, then I will, but I'm not going to go out of my way to track down specific information. This is a web forum, and I'm just an average dude who reads and posts. And let's be honest, you're not really disturbed about anything you read on a general forum for a video game. People say and do stupid shit all the time. Let's try not to over dramatize it.
So I retract any part of my statements that allude to Anet hyping the game. The fans are doing a good enough job of that for them (look a link!).
Arena Net doesn't say anything about Guild Wars 2 until it is inside the game, and is working how they want it to work. They've proudly showed off everything they've been saying at two Gamescons, Pax Prime, Pax East, and Comic-Con.
I'm sorry, but I've heard nothing but how revolutionary GW2 PvP is going to be for months now, but they've only just released any solid info about it this week at Gamescon. Don't get me wrong, it looks good (I'm not going to say revolutionary until I play it). And it's not like PR and hype is a bad thing. If you don't tell people about your awesome shit, people won't know about your awesome shit.
But still your statement is incorrect, and I stand by my argument that GW2 is hyped more.
I'm actually not incorrect. You're just poorly informed. Arena Net has stayed almost completely away from the topic of GW2 PvP before Gamescon and the days preceding it except to say that there would be World PvP and Structured PvP, and giving very basic and miniscule details on each. We were left almost entirely in the dark, which is why it's such a big deal that we're getting PvP at Gamescon finally.
Bring up a source that shows Arena Net Public Relations telling everyone that, or atleast making a statement akin to "Guild Wars 2 PvP will be revolutionary." I'm actually really disturbed that you would make that up. Here's my source, where's yours?
And it would just so happen that it backs up my statement entirely on this very same topic, and is taken right here from MMORPG.com. Next time, try doing some actual research before posting.
MMORPG.com: "How soon can players expect to learn more about PvP?"
Colin Johanson, Lead Content Designer for Guild Wars 2: "I can’t say for sure when we’ll release more information on that, only that all the information we release, we try to make sure that what we’re talking about is in the game, it’s working, and it does the things that we want it to do before we come out and we talk about it."
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
Fair enough. I take back you being wrong about your original statement.
Now, I try not to be inaccurrate or misleading (doesn't always work out that way, and I'm not misleading anyone intentionally), but in the cases that I am, I'm willing to admit it and eat some crow. You're absolutely right, it's probably hyped by the players more, and not Anet.
Just to point something out... I'm not a news writer, nor do I find doing research entertaining in any form. If I recall an article and it's close at hand to throw into a post, then I will, but I'm not going to go out of my way to track down specific information. This is a web forum, and I'm just an average dude who reads and posts. And let's be honest, you're not really disturbed about anything you read on a general forum for a video game. People say and do stupid shit all the time. Let's try not to over dramatize it.
So I retract any part of my statements that allude to Anet hyping the game. The fans are doing a good enough job of that for them (look a link!).
Yeah, I was kind of dramatic about that... Heh. I could definitely have provided the same information in a less passionate manner.
Anywho~ I have every intention of playing Star Wars: The Old Republic, but the idea that "Guild Wars 2 is all hype" hasn't been relevant, really, since before Gamescon 2010. Actual fans who follow developer blogs and visit the site frequently will know what to expect when GW2 releases, but those who do not and fool themselves into thinking Guild Wars 2 is more than it is are setting themselves up for disappointment. And that's just a shame.
Also, referring to the above posts, it's worth noting that there's some truth to the vague nature of statements made by some of the lead developers of GW2 in their MMO Manifesto and how they could easily be taken out of context, but research solves any and all of these misinterpretations.
Well, since I have no work atm and I'm bored I'll throw in my 2 cents.
There's 3 MMOs I'm looking forward to atm. TSW, TOR and GW2. Now, do I think any of them will revolutionize the industry? No. Do I think they add new stuff into the MMO market. Well, yes... even tho it's just minor tweaks most of the time.
Here's a little background. No MMO ever gave me the feeling like SWG and AO did. AO because it was my first MMO and got me into the whole making friends online and just exploring and having fun thing. SWG because of the very loose skill system it had and with people having to go to cantinas and med centers to get wounds healed, it "forced" people into RP hubs, eventually converting some of them into at least part time RPers. It's the only MMO I know where playing as a dancer was fun
Also, I like storys in my game so I play the eventual single player RPG too...
What does that all lead into you ask? ok... you prolly don't but I'll tell you anyway. TOR will most likely be my "single player with coop" MMO... I will enjoy my class, explore the world, and from time to time, team up with a friend. It has no "revolutionary new idea" in it, but it's KINDA like wow in that it takes the good things from the market, tweaks them a little and presents them in a neat package. Plus, it gives you a story that you can enjoy while playing. While the first run might be 100-200 hours, the second one will prolly have more then 50% of the content repeated so it won't be as much fun anymore tho. It's basically like diablo 3 in that it gives you a story that you can follow and the option for a friend to join you in your adventure. The sad part is that while D3 or GW2 will not have a monthly sub, TOR will. So, because of that, I will prolly play it when the retail price drops and will be on and off, kinda like I have played wow. Join for 1-2 months, leave for 6.
Then we have GW2. GW2 is just plain fun and has no sub. What else is there to say? Yes, yes... it mixes themeparks with sanbox (a little), switching weapons and "leveling them" is kinda fun... but mostly it's not really revolutionary... it's just a game that looks really fun to play
And last, but not least, we have TSW. That one, I hope, will recapture SOME of the SWG fun I have had in mmos. The setting is really nice to RP in, the "no class" system will give you stuff to do, and social hubs will hopefuly give you a RP opportunity. So mostly, I hope this one will be my RP game, altho I'm not really sure yet how that will work.
So, are they revolutionary? Not really. Remove auto attack from wow and let people switch talents while mid combat and you have the GW2 combat system for example. Do these games offer something new and exciting? Yes.:)
I think this is what cause's most of the hype. The Guild Wars 2 manifesto.
Most of it is well done. But I believe Ree Soesbee's statements are somewhat misleading.
"you effect things in a very permanent way." "you're rescuing a village that will stay rescued."
We now know that this isn't true. The village will stay rescued until another chain of events kick off to change that.
True, it can be interpreted in a wrong way, you could think that if you rescue a village, then nobody else will be able to do that, since it's already been rescued. Obviously this is not the case since it would require an amount of content beyond anything that is even remotely possible to remain at least somewhat interesting.
What it does mean is that the quests will be dynamic instead of static. What you won't see happening is the typical quest mechanic where the NPC just keeps on asking players to go kill 10 centaurs that are 'attacking the village', no matter if you've just rescued the village or not. In the static quest mechanic, whether you just completed the quest or not, the problem just remains the same in order for the next player to be able complete the very same quest. The centaurs respawn and the next player can go "rescue the village" which is BS because it never actually happens. Not even for a while in the static quest form. No matter what you do the next player needs to be able to come in and kill 10 centaurs, the quest never changes.
If a dynamic event is completed or failed then it kicks off another dynamic event sometime in the future. I agree that it could be taken as a misleading statement.
Waiting for Guild Wars 2, and maybe SWTOR until that time...
Comments
I class my MMOs with respect to gameplay and fun ; So sadly EQ AC1 and UO may pop into my mind with respect to a clone reference but WoW doesn't even reagister. We all have our benchmarks.
As an advocate of gameplay I feel that SWTOR will add a lot. And provide a great backdrop to have fun with friends, nothing so far indicates otherwise.
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Imagine if we had the same kind of conversations about FPS games.
DOOM may have been a great game when it was released, it had new things we had not seen before.
If you released a game today that was exactly like DOOM, and I mean exactly in terms of gameplay, would it be successful?
Of course not, it'd be a huge huge flop. If anything, look at Duke Nukem: Forever - old, tired game mechanics that were awesome 10+ years ago but awful by today's standards.
Games like UO and EQ where amazing and great games when they were released. But if you re-released EQ or UO tomorrow EXACTLY like they were 10+ years ago, they'd be a huge flop.
The point?
Older games may have been great at the time, but few titles stand the test of time - they were only great because we didn't know how much better things could be.
"Wow clone" am I the only person that got far more of a KOTOR vibe from that video? Nothing about what I saw said WOW to me.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
If you had read what I was responding too then you probably wouldn't have written that, would you? He was saying that the SWTOR video was level 1 combat and wondering what level the GW2 video was at. I'm not bashing TOR, but if someone ask a question about GW2 I can answer, right?
And about that demo you're referring too, I'm sure someone could make a similar 'walkthrough' of just about any game if they really wanted to. A clueless player will be a clueless player.
Waiting for Guild Wars 2, and maybe SWTOR until that time...
That is all they are showing at GamesCom. Jumping to the conclusion 'that's all' regarding a pvp-revolution for the mmo world makes you look very poorly informed. There is competitive PvP and W v W v W PvP. The last is not revealed yet, but it will be in the released product.
Waiting for Guild Wars 2, and maybe SWTOR until that time...
I'm sorry, but I've heard nothing but how revolutionary GW2 PvP is going to be for months now, but they've only just released any solid info about it this week at Gamescon. Don't get me wrong, it looks good (I'm not going to say revolutionary until I play it). And it's not like PR and hype is a bad thing. If you don't tell people about your awesome shit, people won't know about your awesome shit.
But still your statement is incorrect, and I stand by my argument that GW2 is hyped more.
his statement was... correct. where was his starement incorrect?
I'm actually not incorrect. You're just poorly informed. Arena Net has stayed almost completely away from the topic of GW2 PvP before Gamescon and the days preceding it except to say that there would be World PvP and Structured PvP, and giving very basic and miniscule details on each. We were left almost entirely in the dark, which is why it's such a big deal that we're getting PvP at Gamescon finally.
Bring up a source that shows Arena Net Public Relations telling everyone that, or atleast making a statement akin to "Guild Wars 2 PvP will be revolutionary." I'm actually really disturbed that you would make that up. Here's my source, where's yours?
And it would just so happen that it backs up my statement entirely on this very same topic, and is taken right here from MMORPG.com. Next time, try doing some actual research before posting.
MMORPG.com: "How soon can players expect to learn more about PvP?"
Colin Johanson, Lead Content Designer for Guild Wars 2: "I can’t say for sure when we’ll release more information on that, only that all the information we release, we try to make sure that what we’re talking about is in the game, it’s working, and it does the things that we want it to do before we come out and we talk about it."
Guild Wars 2 might be hyped by the players more, but don't try to falsely accuse Arena Net of creating baseless expectations among it's fans. If a person has expectations about the game that far exceeds the game's capability, then that is entirely on the ignorance of that player because Arena Net has only ever talked about or promoted features that are already in the game and working.
Acknowledged. I'm looking forward to TOR as well. I love Bioware and I loved KoTOR... which is also why I feel a bit burned because I'm not getting KotOR 3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_1JnXYFcEk
I think this is what cause's most of the hype. The Guild Wars 2 manifesto.
Most of it is well done. But I believe Ree Soesbee's statements are somewhat misleading.
"you effect things in a very permanent way." "you're rescuing a village that will stay rescued."
We now know that this isn't true. The village will stay rescued until another chain of events kick off to change that.
Ree Soesbee, as a continuity & lore director, was referring mainly to personal story. Arena Net doesn't pretend that dynamic events are something they're not.
Gamerzines.com: "As much as players and developers pretend, no mainstream MMO - outside of EVE - allows players to change the game-world permanently. Will Guild Wars 2 deliver on this often promised feature?"
Eric Flannum, Design Lead for Guild Wars 2: "Our event system offers persistent change but not permanent change. If a village burns down it is not gone forever, but rather gone until players help rebuild it. More permanent change can be found in our personal story instances where characters that die will stay dead, buildings will stay destroyed, etc"
Source.
Edit: So while misleading, it definitely wasn't intended to promote the game as something it wasn't. A small amount of research further explains some of the more implicit statements.
it is true, no one was mislead and every single person who had half a mind knew they were going to be looping events
its still true to this moment because it says how it is until acted upon by an outide force. usually the looped event. until then it will remain.. unlike most other MMOs of this game where that does not happen.
also i would like to mention that although there wil be loops it will try and so it in the most beliveable way possible.
its even possible that that village will never come back under attack ever, making it possible to make it permement.
its not like it will always loop the same way or ever return to the same place. the loops can be shorted lengthend and pushed into diffrent directions. so saying it will stay the same in a permanent way is not far from the truth. its just possible that it can be undone.
True but the video doesn't explain this and could easily be taken out of context.
anything can easily be taken out of context. just becasue they made a small folly in delivery does not eman you can hang it over their heads. in the end they did not lie, and they were not trying to mislead anyone.
Fair enough. I take back you being wrong about your original statement.
Now, I try not to be inaccurrate or misleading (doesn't always work out that way, and I'm not misleading anyone intentionally), but in the cases that I am, I'm willing to admit it and eat some crow. You're absolutely right, it's probably hyped by the players more, and not Anet.
Just to point something out... I'm not a news writer, nor do I find doing research entertaining in any form. If I recall an article and it's close at hand to throw into a post, then I will, but I'm not going to go out of my way to track down specific information. This is a web forum, and I'm just an average dude who reads and posts. And let's be honest, you're not really disturbed about anything you read on a general forum for a video game. People say and do stupid shit all the time. Let's try not to over dramatize it.
So I retract any part of my statements that allude to Anet hyping the game. The fans are doing a good enough job of that for them (look a link!).
Yeah, I was kind of dramatic about that... Heh. I could definitely have provided the same information in a less passionate manner.
Anywho~ I have every intention of playing Star Wars: The Old Republic, but the idea that "Guild Wars 2 is all hype" hasn't been relevant, really, since before Gamescon 2010. Actual fans who follow developer blogs and visit the site frequently will know what to expect when GW2 releases, but those who do not and fool themselves into thinking Guild Wars 2 is more than it is are setting themselves up for disappointment. And that's just a shame.
Also, referring to the above posts, it's worth noting that there's some truth to the vague nature of statements made by some of the lead developers of GW2 in their MMO Manifesto and how they could easily be taken out of context, but research solves any and all of these misinterpretations.
Well, since I have no work atm and I'm bored I'll throw in my 2 cents.
There's 3 MMOs I'm looking forward to atm. TSW, TOR and GW2. Now, do I think any of them will revolutionize the industry? No. Do I think they add new stuff into the MMO market. Well, yes... even tho it's just minor tweaks most of the time.
Here's a little background. No MMO ever gave me the feeling like SWG and AO did. AO because it was my first MMO and got me into the whole making friends online and just exploring and having fun thing. SWG because of the very loose skill system it had and with people having to go to cantinas and med centers to get wounds healed, it "forced" people into RP hubs, eventually converting some of them into at least part time RPers. It's the only MMO I know where playing as a dancer was fun
Also, I like storys in my game so I play the eventual single player RPG too...
What does that all lead into you ask? ok... you prolly don't but I'll tell you anyway. TOR will most likely be my "single player with coop" MMO... I will enjoy my class, explore the world, and from time to time, team up with a friend. It has no "revolutionary new idea" in it, but it's KINDA like wow in that it takes the good things from the market, tweaks them a little and presents them in a neat package. Plus, it gives you a story that you can enjoy while playing. While the first run might be 100-200 hours, the second one will prolly have more then 50% of the content repeated so it won't be as much fun anymore tho. It's basically like diablo 3 in that it gives you a story that you can follow and the option for a friend to join you in your adventure. The sad part is that while D3 or GW2 will not have a monthly sub, TOR will. So, because of that, I will prolly play it when the retail price drops and will be on and off, kinda like I have played wow. Join for 1-2 months, leave for 6.
Then we have GW2. GW2 is just plain fun and has no sub. What else is there to say? Yes, yes... it mixes themeparks with sanbox (a little), switching weapons and "leveling them" is kinda fun... but mostly it's not really revolutionary... it's just a game that looks really fun to play
And last, but not least, we have TSW. That one, I hope, will recapture SOME of the SWG fun I have had in mmos. The setting is really nice to RP in, the "no class" system will give you stuff to do, and social hubs will hopefuly give you a RP opportunity. So mostly, I hope this one will be my RP game, altho I'm not really sure yet how that will work.
So, are they revolutionary? Not really. Remove auto attack from wow and let people switch talents while mid combat and you have the GW2 combat system for example. Do these games offer something new and exciting? Yes.:)
True, it can be interpreted in a wrong way, you could think that if you rescue a village, then nobody else will be able to do that, since it's already been rescued. Obviously this is not the case since it would require an amount of content beyond anything that is even remotely possible to remain at least somewhat interesting.
What it does mean is that the quests will be dynamic instead of static. What you won't see happening is the typical quest mechanic where the NPC just keeps on asking players to go kill 10 centaurs that are 'attacking the village', no matter if you've just rescued the village or not. In the static quest mechanic, whether you just completed the quest or not, the problem just remains the same in order for the next player to be able complete the very same quest. The centaurs respawn and the next player can go "rescue the village" which is BS because it never actually happens. Not even for a while in the static quest form. No matter what you do the next player needs to be able to come in and kill 10 centaurs, the quest never changes.
If a dynamic event is completed or failed then it kicks off another dynamic event sometime in the future. I agree that it could be taken as a misleading statement.
Waiting for Guild Wars 2, and maybe SWTOR until that time...