"The only players that I want running back to Tera are the people that actually want a combat engine where they can actively move out of the way/block of a person's attack. GW2 doesn't even the option of intercepting/blocking an attack aimed at an ally player."
I have provided ample evidence, based on fact and not opinion, that through a use of skills and dodge mechanics, one can in fact "move out of the way/block" a person's attack.
In Tera, at level 16, the one thing my sorcerer could do was jump back when the cooldown was done.
I don't see the difference. Do you think that people moving a targeting circle to follow my jumping back is somehow more complex that the dynamics in GW2?
Ya because you know when that skill is on cd you can literealy move few meter (in game) to the left or right and the attack will miss you instead of you have to use dodge/block. You know as a lancer in pvp, in 1v1s i don't block most of the attack i simply just move out of the way, same with how many people dodge my attacks.
Originally posted by stragen001
Actually, very few abilities, even ranged ones are homing in GW2. IE you can fire an arrow at someone and miss because they moved.
I have yet to see a ranged attack that hasn't hom yet in GW2, so far all video i see is some one is locked on a target and chasing/kiting it while using ranged attacks while the character all face slightly off rom the target and see the ranged attack curve toward teh enemy. I'm simply waiting for my guildie to play GW2 beta to confirm this =X
well, then I must say its "action combat system" is lacking some of the most basic elements, being able to move and doge while shooting/casting. Look up any FPS (true action combat) and see if you can shoot and move at the same time?
You really are something... aren't you?
You are judge, jury, and executioner. You choose what "action" means, you adapat it to your needing and after all this you still manage to say something WRONG.
Battlefield 3 is an FPS and no one EVER said that Tera is an FPS. If you want to say that GW2 is an FPS please be my guest.
Let's look at an Action game, not defined by you but by the rest of the world, Assassin's Creed is quite a famous example of the genre, now if you want to go look at some video or even play it, you'll notice that in AC there is rooting while attacking.
As i already said it's funny that you are pratically saying that GW2 is more an action game than an actual action games, but whatever makes your boat float is fine by me.
If you then go even futher than this, and look for some other action games videos, you'll notice that 90% of those games have roots while executing attacks.
Now you can like it or not, but the fact that "Joocheese doens't like it" it's not proof of what it is action and what is not.
Originally posted by joocheese
As to which one is better, I guess profit, sales, and subs (active playerbase) will define which one is more popular. We can only presuppose that the more popular combat system would be the one mostly prefered by players. In the case of Tera we'll have to count their subs, in the case of GW2, we'll have to count their active playerbase. Oh yeah, that's right, you don't have to pay 15 bucks a month to play GW2, nice deal! :-p
Again you keep saying this, I totally don't care who will have the largest fan base, I'm not trying to win an e-peen contest.
I already told you there is no need to wait, i can tell you now that GW2 will have a larger fan base and I'm playing both it's a win win situation for me.
Kehdar, either you're misinformed or you were being disingenuous. I've looked up a few clips of AC combat and it is nothing like Tera. You can move/doge while attacking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnQZHBodpwk
GW2 already has a larger fan base, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about active playerbase. Either way, I believe that GW2 will have a larger playerbase than Tera, not just because of the GW community (fanbase), but because of game mechanics.
Kehdar, either you're misinformed or you were being disingenuous. I've looked up a few clips of AC combat and it is nothing like Tera. You can move/doge while attacking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnQZHBodpwk
GW2 already has a larger fan base, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about active playerbase. Either way, I believe that GW2 will have a larger playerbase than Tera, not just because of the GW community (fanbase), but because of game mechanics.
Trust me you can't, before posting just to be sure i launched it and tested so i'm 100% sure that it roots you while attaking exaclty like Tera, nothing in that video prove me wrong.
No you are getting me wrong again, i'm talking of active player base too, I'm 100% positive that there will be more people playing GW2 then tera 24/7.
But again that doesn't mean i can't enjoy Tera as much i will enjoy GW.
There are more people who like soccer, football or basketball than the people who like volleyball still some love it. Does this mean volleyball is trash and should be eliminated?
Kehdar, either you're misinformed or you were being disingenuous. I've looked up a few clips of AC combat and it is nothing like Tera. You can move/doge while attacking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnQZHBodpwk
GW2 already has a larger fan base, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about active playerbase. Either way, I believe that GW2 will have a larger playerbase than Tera, not just because of the GW community (fanbase), but because of game mechanics.
Trust me you can't, before posting just to be sure i launched it and tested so i'm 100% sure that it roots you while attaking exaclty like Tera, nothing in that video prove me wrong.
No you are getting me wrong again, i'm talking of active player base too, I'm 100% positive that there will be more people playing GW2 then tera 24/7.
But again that doesn't mean i can't enjoy Tera as much i will enjoy GW.
There are more people who like soccer, football or basketball than the people who like volleyball still some love it. Does this mean volleyball is trash and should be eliminated?
Kehdar, I never said that Tera should be trashed and eliminated. In fact, quite the oppposite. Though Tera is not for me, I'm certain that many people (500k max) will enjoy the game. I just don't think its AAA monthly sub quality (it should be f2p). As I've said many times before, I wish Tera all the success it can get (unlike SWTOR). I watched the video again, I'm seeing the character move and attack at the same time.
1) You misunderstood and mocked what I said. 15.00 is a more affordable form of paid entertainment than anything else out there. I have at the most 4 hours a night to play. 4x30=120/15= 13 cents an hour... Problem is attention spans have people hopping from one title to another. I want a game I can park in at least a year.
2,3,4) GW1 had great graphics, story and was simple. B2p is how it was able to compete with other p2p games. It was and is not a quality AAA MMO by my standards and if GW2 is brining the same effort of game this time I'm glad I'm waiting a while to even consider it.
Deron_Barak, I was not mocking you, I thought your assessment was spot on (for the most part). As for your comment regading the dynamic events being better than quests, I could not agree with you more.
1) How is it that paying $15 USD per monthly sub (P2P) is more affordable than B2P/F2P? If you're arguing that of the games in the market right now the P2P are the better ones I would probably have to agree (except SWTOR), but being more affordable? I'm not sure I can agree.
2,3,4) GW1 was F2P not because of an economic strategy, it was because that is the philosophy espoused by Anet. If it was an economic strategy then GW2 being F2P would make no sense. GW2 by all accounts appears to be worthy of monthly subs; yet it remains F2P. GW1 and GW2 were/are F2P because that is the business model that Anet believes in; ask any of them. I'm not saying Anet is some saint amongst demons (Blizzard, EA, Bioware); Anet needs to turn a profit just like the others. But in this case, I would have to argue that Anet does believe in the F2P model; no other way of putting it.
I would like to but will i be able to play on NA server from EU?
Damn! yeah... I don't think you will be allowed to play on a NA server. Here's a question... in WVW will servers only battle other servers from their same server or will NA servers battle EU servers?
I would like to but will i be able to play on NA server from EU?
Damn! yeah... I don't think you will be allowed to play on a NA server. Here's a question... in WVW will servers only battle other servers from their same server or will NA servers battle EU servers?
I can only guess will be NA vs NA and EU vs EU, latency would be a problem otherwise.
I would like to but will i be able to play on NA server from EU?
Damn! yeah... I don't think you will be allowed to play on a NA server. Here's a question... in WVW will servers only battle other servers from their same server or will NA servers battle EU servers?
I can only guess will be NA vs NA and EU vs EU, latency would be a problem otherwise.
Well... in that case, I look forward to debating the game with you after the beta weekend. I don't think I'll be bothering much with the forums during the beta, but you can bet your *ss that I'll be on afterwards. I look forward to "trashing" the game as much as I do look forward to defending its greatness. Since I've pre purchased the game and I have the sense of ownership over it as a paying customer, I feel more free to rip it to pieces. As much as I love the GW world and am looking forward to playing this game, I'll be Anet's most demanding critic.
Well... in that case, I look forward to debating the game with you after the beta weekend. I don't think I'll be bothering much with the forums during the beta, but you can bet your *ss that I'll be on afterwards. I look forward to "trashing" the game as much as I do look forward to defending its greatness. Since I've pre purchased the game and I have the sense of ownership over it as a paying customer, I feel more free to rip it to pieces. As much as I love the GW world and am looking forward to playing this game, I'll be Anet's most demanding critic.
I don't think I'll be disappointed by GW2.
I kept the distances from GW2 board to avoid the insane hype, so to enjoy the game without spropositate hopes on it. I noticed that every time i start to read about a game months before I end up building an idealized version of it that will then crash into the reality once I try the game.
This time I prefer to be amazed once inside
Tera for example, I tryed it thinking "is just another Korean grinder" and instead i found myself amazed by the quality of the game.
I'm not sure we're having the same conversation. Or maybe we're just getting two entirely different meanings from it.
1. DE are quests, just done a different way. Done better? That depends on how it's implemented. You guys will have a chance to try it very soon and see if the activities you engage in are different than "normal" quests.
2. Whether ANet chose the b2p model because of philosophy or not, they would not have been able to get a sub for GW1 and have it be the success It was. It was not deep enough to be on par with other sub games at the time. B2P was it's gimmick. Fun? Certainly for a short while but not for a full time MMO.
I disagree that a B2P or F2P/CS model would produce the AAA quality games in today's market. Maybe eight years ago when it was taboo and there wasn't major F2P competition. You have to get people to pay up front and in huge numbers to make it work.
GW2 can make it happen I think, we'll see. I don't see it beginning the new way though.
I don't think it's cool to demonize companies that make money from subs. People freely pay the subs because to them it's worth it. If a 15/month sub is to much for someone to pay they should be stoked there are so many options now. Just don't claim every game should be B2P/F2P so they can play it.
TERA isn't that good. It has some neat concepts but they aren't executed well. They put more time into thengraphics then they did into the combat system. Each battle is not different. It's exactly the same. Spam the attack key use a skill animation. Monsters simply attack pretty much the same and you don't really have to dodge or anything, just spam spam spam. Dragon Nest executed combat much better,
I stoped there
1 for this crap f2p game u mention
2 spam spam spam nonesense
go solo some 28+ bams and come back here and tel me about those spam again....u will get one shot
later dungeons if u dont block or evade u will die with one single attack..this game is more skill based than ANY mmorpg fantasy end of story
I think that TERA will find it's niche, I highly doubt it would go F2P in it's first 3 months, but I would be surprised if it lasted a year before it was - too much competition to keep it's hat out of the F2P ring.
It's a decent quality title but there is too little to commend it outside of the combat & that wont be enough to see it through to it's next major expansion.
I'm not sure we're having the same conversation. Or maybe we're just getting two entirely different meanings from it.
1. DE are quests, just done a different way. Done better? That depends on how it's implemented. You guys will have a chance to try it very soon and see if the activities you engage in are different than "normal" quests.
2. Whether ANet chose the b2p model because of philosophy or not, they would not have been able to get a sub for GW1 and have it be the success It was. It was not deep enough to be on par with other sub games at the time. B2P was it's gimmick. Fun? Certainly for a short while but not for a full time MMO.
3. I disagree that a B2P or F2P/CS model would produce the AAA quality games in today's market. Maybe eight years ago when it was taboo and there wasn't major F2P competition. You have to get people to pay up front and in huge numbers to make it work.
4. GW2 can make it happen I think, we'll see. I don't see it beginning the new way though.
5. I don't think it's cool to demonize companies that make money from subs. People freely pay the subs because to them it's worth it. If a 15/month sub is to much for someone to pay they should be stoked there are so many options now. Just don't claim every game should be B2P/F2P so they can play it.
1. Agreed.
2. You do not know that; you absolutely have no way of knowing that. GW1 enjoyed great success all the way to Eye of the North.
3. We agree to disagree.
4. I hope so.
5. I never demonized any of the comanies. I just disagree with their business model (P2P)
Calm down people, both sides lol. Everyone has different taste, i thought we established that. We play games we like just like how peopel read books they like. Not everyone going to like it, certainlly doesn't make the other game less fun for the peopel who like it so can we stop doing pointless post?
If you guys are going to compare do it in constructive and postive way. And don't compare GW2 because most people haven't played it yet so wait till next monday to do that.
1) You misunderstood and mocked what I said. 15.00 is a more affordable form of paid entertainment than anything else out there. I have at the most 4 hours a night to play. 4x30=120/15= 13 cents an hour... Problem is attention spans have people hopping from one title to another. I want a game I can park in at least a year.
2,3,4) GW1 had great graphics, story and was simple. B2p is how it was able to compete with other p2p games. It was and is not a quality AAA MMO by my standards and if GW2 is brining the same effort of game this time I'm glad I'm waiting a while to even consider it.
Deron_Barak, I was not mocking you, I thought your assessment was spot on (for the most part). As for your comment regading the dynamic events being better than quests, I could not agree with you more.
1) How is it that paying $15 USD per monthly sub (P2P) is more affordable than B2P/F2P? If you're arguing that of the games in the market right now the P2P are the better ones I would probably have to agree (except SWTOR), but being more affordable? I'm not sure I can agree.
2,3,4) GW1 was F2P not because of an economic strategy, it was because that is the philosophy espoused by Anet. If it was an economic strategy then GW2 being F2P would make no sense. GW2 by all accounts appears to be worthy of monthly subs; yet it remains F2P. GW1 and GW2 were/are F2P because that is the business model that Anet believes in; ask any of them. I'm not saying Anet is some saint amongst demons (Blizzard, EA, Bioware); Anet needs to turn a profit just like the others. But in this case, I would have to argue that Anet does believe in the F2P model; no other way of putting it.
I'm not sure we're having the same conversation. Or maybe we're just getting two entirely different meanings from it.
1. DE are quests, just done a different way. Done better? That depends on how it's implemented. You guys will have a chance to try it very soon and see if the activities you engage in are different than "normal" quests.
2. Whether ANet chose the b2p model because of philosophy or not, they would not have been able to get a sub for GW1 and have it be the success It was. It was not deep enough to be on par with other sub games at the time. B2P was it's gimmick. Fun? Certainly for a short while but not for a full time MMO.
3. I disagree that a B2P or F2P/CS model would produce the AAA quality games in today's market. Maybe eight years ago when it was taboo and there wasn't major F2P competition. You have to get people to pay up front and in huge numbers to make it work.
4. GW2 can make it happen I think, we'll see. I don't see it beginning the new way though.
5. I don't think it's cool to demonize companies that make money from subs. People freely pay the subs because to them it's worth it. If a 15/month sub is to much for someone to pay they should be stoked there are so many options now. Just don't claim every game should be B2P/F2P so they can play it.
1. Agreed.
2. You do not know that; you absolutely have no way of knowing that. GW1 enjoyed great success all the way to Eye of the North.
3. We agree to disagree.
4. I hope so.
5. I never demonized any of the comanies. I just disagree with their business model (P2P)
Fair enough but you never answered our original topic of how you would pull off #3. The reply was GW1 as an example though that was back in 2004 and the market now has hefty competition in the "bargain bin" options.
This isn't General though so I'll concede my point. I got the answer I was looking for.
Even if like En Masse a lot more than Frogster, I will play on EU since for me 200ms in a game that require fast reaction is game breaking and I can only assume that a lot of other people will do the same even those who are screaming they'll play on NA.
I have seen a few Eu players on chat (Na server) saying they have better ping than what they had playing on EU servers so you never know.
High latency over the ocean is an ISP-thing... I had 200+ ms on NA-servers compared to EU-servers...so NA is a big no no for me.....
I'm a bit concerned about the low number of servers.
They set up just 6 servers for launch and considering the population of the mmorpg usually peak at launch and then slowly decline it's not encouraging imho.
Comments
Ya because you know when that skill is on cd you can literealy move few meter (in game) to the left or right and the attack will miss you instead of you have to use dodge/block. You know as a lancer in pvp, in 1v1s i don't block most of the attack i simply just move out of the way, same with how many people dodge my attacks.
I have yet to see a ranged attack that hasn't hom yet in GW2, so far all video i see is some one is locked on a target and chasing/kiting it while using ranged attacks while the character all face slightly off rom the target and see the ranged attack curve toward teh enemy. I'm simply waiting for my guildie to play GW2 beta to confirm this =X
Kehdar, either you're misinformed or you were being disingenuous. I've looked up a few clips of AC combat and it is nothing like Tera. You can move/doge while attacking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnQZHBodpwk
GW2 already has a larger fan base, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about active playerbase. Either way, I believe that GW2 will have a larger playerbase than Tera, not just because of the GW community (fanbase), but because of game mechanics.
Trust me you can't, before posting just to be sure i launched it and tested so i'm 100% sure that it roots you while attaking exaclty like Tera, nothing in that video prove me wrong.
No you are getting me wrong again, i'm talking of active player base too, I'm 100% positive that there will be more people playing GW2 then tera 24/7.
But again that doesn't mean i can't enjoy Tera as much i will enjoy GW.
There are more people who like soccer, football or basketball than the people who like volleyball still some love it. Does this mean volleyball is trash and should be eliminated?
Kehdar, I never said that Tera should be trashed and eliminated. In fact, quite the oppposite. Though Tera is not for me, I'm certain that many people (500k max) will enjoy the game. I just don't think its AAA monthly sub quality (it should be f2p). As I've said many times before, I wish Tera all the success it can get (unlike SWTOR). I watched the video again, I'm seeing the character move and attack at the same time.
When you attack the character move some step in front of him, but is part of the attack animation, like the warrior on Tera for example.
Anyway 500k subscribers will be a great result for Tera.
P.s. The multiplay of AC Brotherhood and Revelation is a blast
Kehdar, you gonna play the BWE?
OFC i'm gonna play it. I preordered the prepurchase of GW2
Nice! My char name will be Joocheese, I'll be joining the mmorpg.com guild. You should come join!
I would like to but will i be able to play on NA server from EU?
Deron_Barak, I was not mocking you, I thought your assessment was spot on (for the most part). As for your comment regading the dynamic events being better than quests, I could not agree with you more.
1) How is it that paying $15 USD per monthly sub (P2P) is more affordable than B2P/F2P? If you're arguing that of the games in the market right now the P2P are the better ones I would probably have to agree (except SWTOR), but being more affordable? I'm not sure I can agree.
2,3,4) GW1 was F2P not because of an economic strategy, it was because that is the philosophy espoused by Anet. If it was an economic strategy then GW2 being F2P would make no sense. GW2 by all accounts appears to be worthy of monthly subs; yet it remains F2P. GW1 and GW2 were/are F2P because that is the business model that Anet believes in; ask any of them. I'm not saying Anet is some saint amongst demons (Blizzard, EA, Bioware); Anet needs to turn a profit just like the others. But in this case, I would have to argue that Anet does believe in the F2P model; no other way of putting it.
Damn! yeah... I don't think you will be allowed to play on a NA server. Here's a question... in WVW will servers only battle other servers from their same server or will NA servers battle EU servers?
I can only guess will be NA vs NA and EU vs EU, latency would be a problem otherwise.
Well... in that case, I look forward to debating the game with you after the beta weekend. I don't think I'll be bothering much with the forums during the beta, but you can bet your *ss that I'll be on afterwards. I look forward to "trashing" the game as much as I do look forward to defending its greatness. Since I've pre purchased the game and I have the sense of ownership over it as a paying customer, I feel more free to rip it to pieces. As much as I love the GW world and am looking forward to playing this game, I'll be Anet's most demanding critic.
I don't think I'll be disappointed by GW2.
I kept the distances from GW2 board to avoid the insane hype, so to enjoy the game without spropositate hopes on it. I noticed that every time i start to read about a game months before I end up building an idealized version of it that will then crash into the reality once I try the game.
This time I prefer to be amazed once inside
Tera for example, I tryed it thinking "is just another Korean grinder" and instead i found myself amazed by the quality of the game.
I'm not sure we're having the same conversation. Or maybe we're just getting two entirely different meanings from it.
1. DE are quests, just done a different way. Done better? That depends on how it's implemented. You guys will have a chance to try it very soon and see if the activities you engage in are different than "normal" quests.
2. Whether ANet chose the b2p model because of philosophy or not, they would not have been able to get a sub for GW1 and have it be the success It was. It was not deep enough to be on par with other sub games at the time. B2P was it's gimmick. Fun? Certainly for a short while but not for a full time MMO.
I disagree that a B2P or F2P/CS model would produce the AAA quality games in today's market. Maybe eight years ago when it was taboo and there wasn't major F2P competition. You have to get people to pay up front and in huge numbers to make it work.
GW2 can make it happen I think, we'll see. I don't see it beginning the new way though.
I don't think it's cool to demonize companies that make money from subs. People freely pay the subs because to them it's worth it. If a 15/month sub is to much for someone to pay they should be stoked there are so many options now. Just don't claim every game should be B2P/F2P so they can play it.
Just not worth my time anymore.
I stoped there
1 for this crap f2p game u mention
2 spam spam spam nonesense
go solo some 28+ bams and come back here and tel me about those spam again....u will get one shot
later dungeons if u dont block or evade u will die with one single attack..this game is more skill based than ANY mmorpg fantasy end of story
I think that TERA will find it's niche, I highly doubt it would go F2P in it's first 3 months, but I would be surprised if it lasted a year before it was - too much competition to keep it's hat out of the F2P ring.
It's a decent quality title but there is too little to commend it outside of the combat & that wont be enough to see it through to it's next major expansion.
1. Agreed.
2. You do not know that; you absolutely have no way of knowing that. GW1 enjoyed great success all the way to Eye of the North.
3. We agree to disagree.
4. I hope so.
5. I never demonized any of the comanies. I just disagree with their business model (P2P)
Calm down people, both sides lol. Everyone has different taste, i thought we established that. We play games we like just like how peopel read books they like. Not everyone going to like it, certainlly doesn't make the other game less fun for the peopel who like it so can we stop doing pointless post?
If you guys are going to compare do it in constructive and postive way. And don't compare GW2 because most people haven't played it yet so wait till next monday to do that.
Just sayin'
Just not worth my time anymore.
Yes it will die same as gw2. This 2 games are not for European market. I don't think that any game on hype list will have huge success in Europe
Fair enough but you never answered our original topic of how you would pull off #3. The reply was GW1 as an example though that was back in 2004 and the market now has hefty competition in the "bargain bin" options.
This isn't General though so I'll concede my point. I got the answer I was looking for.
Just not worth my time anymore.
High latency over the ocean is an ISP-thing... I had 200+ ms on NA-servers compared to EU-servers...so NA is a big no no for me.....
I'm a bit concerned about the low number of servers.
They set up just 6 servers for launch and considering the population of the mmorpg usually peak at launch and then slowly decline it's not encouraging imho.
I wonder what's the sales number in EU.