quote: "and if I wanted to play the game optimally he would become unrecognizable. If you don't care about role playing (I don't even really actively role play), then you'll likely not care."
comment: If you want to RP, then why worry about playing the game "optimally"? But yes, using only one of your two sets will leave you missing out a bit.
quote: "I am under the impression that you can swap any weapons in and out of combat."
comment: Not quit. Before level 7 you can only change a weapon out of combat; at level 7 you will open up the swap ability, allowing you to swap between two pre made sets in combat (with a cool down between swapping).
quote: "I do not know exactly which weapons are good at what"
comment: There is a tab in the hero screen that will tell you what each weapon does, even before you unlock the skill. It isn't uber detailed, but it's enough to get you started.
quote: "Next, the game forces on your character (at least it did for my Human) a very Lawful Good persona, often times Stupid Good and never multidimensional."
comment: In the human story lines you are a (mostly) good guy, or at least that's how you are perceived. If you want to RP something else, don't do the story lines. If the RP is important to you, then you can deal with the loss of XP and rewards.
I'm thinking this really isn't what you're looking for, you start by branding multiple options as a limit, and go downhill from there.
I'll vote that you pass on this game, at least for now. These are my reasons:
1. Anet on several occassions have defended the weird movement of characters that are described as being floaty. They've said that it's a result of transition animations but in real-time the character is moving with precision.
2. Storymode just isn't as deep as you seem to like and will ruin your unique roleplay for your character. Although some roleplayers say that they will play storymode OOC so that's an option if you like.
3. Combat abilities per weapon may be selectable and varied in expansions but not at release. It'd be best to wait until the first 2 expansions before you decide if you should play. As for the advantages of mixing up weapons, I'd say it's negligible.
Oh, and if you bought the game from ArenaNet, you can get a refund. I'm not sure about gamestores' policies though.
I don't feel like the weapon restrictions are necessary, personally. They could have gotten away with "stances" or anything of that nature that doesn't visually reflect on your character. Well, I guess if you consider being able to see what weapon your opponents are using and knowing a bit of what they are capable of being a core part of the game then it's important, but I feel that the freedom to use what you want with no penalty is more important, personally.
Well it makes sense for different weapons to have different abilities. You can't perform the same tasks with all weapons. For example, it's rather obvious that a two-handed sword is better for AoE attacks than a mace. I think the weapon skills in GW2 are very appropriate and fit with the weapons they are assigned to.
Btw even in Skyrim you can't perform AoE attacks with a one-handed weapon, I don't get why you ask for freedom to use what you want with no penalty. Heck all pnp RPGs have some kind of weapon restrictions because they ARE different weapons, if the only change is damage then why have all those different weapons? Just for "role playing"? Just to allow people to have the image they want? No, even in the real world, different weapons have different uses, why not have that in a game?
It doesn't make sense to me that someone is using a sword and a shield and then can (magically) produce a greatsword instantly. Every other modern game that I can think of always used this sparingly: my rogue in WoW had a bow, and when I used it it would appear out of thin air, but those instances are few and far between, and it certainly wasn't a large part of the class. The same goes for Rift. This game, however, it's going to be happening all the time. It's visually silly and I've always tried to stay away from it.
Weapon swapping leads to interesting gameplay though. It's a way to make combat interesting, true they sacrifice immersion but it's the same in single player RPGs no?
I guess it makes sense that someone who masters every weapon and can use them all in a fight (somehow handwaving the "appearing out of thin air" part for the sake of this hypothetical), but I feel like that's bordering on Mary Sue territory, where every character has to be a master of all arms to be effective, and those who (more realistically) are skilled with only subset of all available weapons are just weaker and it's their fault for not being great at everything.
You don't HAVE to be a master of all weapons, a subset is enough. Most content can be defeated with a single weapon set, having two weapon sets is enough for almost everything, unless you PVP. I can't remember a fight that I couldn't win with my Sword + Focus / Greatsword combo (Guardian)
No, but it is the game's fault for making different weapons do different things, forcing each player to use every weapon type at one point or another to be competitive.
As I said above it's natural and realistic for different weapons to do different things. A game where all weapons use the same skills is simply unrealistic. And nobody forces you to use them all you can use two weapon sets and do everything.
Block the trolls, don't answer them, so we can remove the garbage from these forums
OP the question you should be asking yourself. Is it the game that is restricting you or is it your rigid stance on what you want. If you talk to a lot of NPCs you can pick 1 of 3 replies. Read up on personality here: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Personality
The OP makes Hell of a lot of sense. I've been signed up for the beta for ages yet haven't been invited. The OP doesn't feel like the character he's playing is his. Clearly he got into the beta at my expense and is playing with MY character! The nerve!
The OP makes Hell of a lot of sense. I've been signed up for the beta for ages yet haven't been invited. The OP doesn't feel like the character he's playing is his. Clearly he got into the beta at my expense and is playing with MY character! The nerve!
For a small fee of $50 you could have been in beta, and when you finally decide to buy the game its going to cost you $50 anyway, so actually the beta is free...
Problem is that most people will buy the game to try it anyway, since its B2P and does not require subscription fees. So it will be well worth everyones money. Same as with the OP, if he can live with the fact that he will not be the most flexible character he can play the PvE part just as well as, just stick a bow or a gun in the 2nd slot, which would be totally in corporation with his sellsword.
If the OP really wants to play the character he described its very well possible. But it seems on top of the roleplay part the OP is also a mni-maxer that wants to have it all, despite the fact that his character clearly made a choice concentrating on a single weapon set-up.
Its not the game to play, but the player. If he wants to step away from the game for these reasons, he should do so. I personally have never played a more immersive MMO. Even from the viewpoint of a roleplayer.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
glad i didnt do human storyline, most of the time in my char personal story i ended up with an option to kill or let go in dishonour someone who betray the legion. so IMO if you want to become someone that too naive pick charr
This game's PvE homages back to D&D times were players are Heros that fight Dragons, save damsels, and are good guys for their cause....whatever that cause may be.
You obviously missed the point of D&D. A person could roll whatever they imagined as the system supported the whole spectrum of alignments.
I agree with the OP. This game doesn't really have the mechanics for great RP. It really is the ultimate arcade themepark complete with actiony combat. Whether that is a good thing or not depends on one's tastes.
In theory, yes, but in reality it's pretty much impossible to play whatever kind of personality you want because it conflicts with the ability of the campaign to progress too much.
Honestly, I don't see where people are getting off saying this game doesn't work for RP. So you can't build the exact build your character would be--big whoop. Most MMOs don't support that either.
In our experience, we found it perfect for RP. The dynamic events led to RP happening naturally, and the ability to customize our appearance, personality, and personal story paid off. An evil character is going to have difficulty working out in any MMO, I'm not sure why Guild Wars 2 is supposed to magically be able to support every single alignment and personality when it's flat out impossible even in single player games. That, is, unless you want your "evil" actions to be completely shallow and dialog-based, which any reasonable RPer wouldn't pay attention to anyway.
A game well suited to RP gives players opportunity and freedom for RP. Expecting game designers to design a million little differences for the minority when they have shit like balance and mechanical fun to worry about is downright unreasonable.
This pretty much put into words what I was thinking when I saw this thread. It's unreasonable to expect a full roleplaying experience through dialogue options and the like, and if you expected that, than you obviously didn't know what kinda game this was, AND you didn't realize how really good roleplaying works (creating a character with REAL people and playing a character with a roleplay group), instead of expecting superficial roleplaying (getting dialogue options involving the full spectrum of allignments with NPC characters).
summary of OP: I want to be a CG-one sword and sheild warrior, But choosing one specific combo of weapons narrows my options.
yeah it does, kinda like real life, you gotta make choices. i, personally like that.
Summary of OP: the perosonal story isnt like SWTOR, i want to be a "dark jedi" (a rose by any other name, sweets)
Yup. well, that is the hook that Bioware hung the whole game on isnt it? not so with GW2. So, if you insist on playing human...(again your choice) you will get stuck with the "good-guy" role.
Summay of OP: I played the game for a bit, but didnt get to weapon swapping with my warrior, so whats that about?
Then obviously you didnt play very long, you get it at level 7 and you can hit seven in about 1.5 hours of play, SO WTF? you didnt get to level seven in two betas? you didnt even try before posting. really? Level seven! you couldnt get there without having emotional issues about your pre-defined alter ego? Yes, you have wasted your money. go try TERA,
(no really dont... it is a one- role, one-weapon,one-playstyle game)
I've only played two of the betas (after pre-purchasing the game), but during that time there was one major problem that completely turned me off to the game: too much control was taken away from how I defined my character, and if I wanted to play the game optimally he would become unrecognizable. If you don't care about role playing (I don't even really actively role play), then you'll likely not care. I'm posting this in hopes I greatly missed the mark on some of these issues, because I would rather have not wasted $60.
The character: A cynical sellsword. Uses a sword and shield because he finds other weapons slow, ineffective, or otherwise unwieldy. Chaotic Good: mostly out for himself, but generally tends to (begrudgingly) help others in dire matters (matters of freedom, life and death, etc.). Does not use magic. He is a human.
The combination of sword and shield leaves me with Guardian and Warrior, and the restriction of no magic reduces that to just Warrior, which is fine. The title of the class is unimportant, and "Warrior" is about as generic as you can get anyway.
The first issue I ran into is that of multiple weapon sets and various weapons being good at various things. It is my understanding that if I just stick to one weapon set then I will be at a great disadvantage. While only two weapons can be equipped at a time, I am under the impression that you can swap any weapons in and out of combat. Meaning, again, that not focusing on all weapon types will leave you at a disadvantage.
I do not know exactly which weapons are good at what, but for example let's say that a two-handed sword is good at AoE damage and a one-handed sword is good at single target damage. Warrior A might run with a one-handed sword + bow setup and Warrior B might run with a two-handed sword + bow setup. If Warrior A is unwilling to switch to a two-handed sword + bow setup when beneficial and Warrior B [i]is[/i] willing to switch to a one-handed sword + bow setup, then clearly Warrior A is at a disadvantage, no?
Next, the game forces on your character (at least it did for my Human) a very Lawful Good persona, often times Stupid Good and never multidimensional. The voice acting aside (which was quite poor, at least in my opinion), the character was saying things that my character would never say. While BioWare games only really give you three choices these days, that's at least [i]something[/i]. I decided to just skip all of the cut scenes and make up my own story as I went, but it still feels like a negative.
Finally, and this isn't so much of a role playing issue but still something that bothered me visually, was that a lot of the animations felt really sluggish. Strafing in one direction and then changing to another was visually distracting to me; there was a distinct "glide" as the running animations changed, and it was very jarring for me. I'm a huge fan of "shield bash" abilities, but the shield bash ability here was lagged from me pressing the button by a noticeable amount of time. This, combined with the lack of customization and variety in physical weapon skills, made the combat very awkward and boring for me.
Does anyone have any corrections, clarifications, or agreements? Is this game just not for me?
I understand your frustration. But I'll say it time and time again, this is NOT an mmoRPG it is an mmoVG (video game); lots of people playing an arcade styled video game in the guise of a fantasy game.
In a true mmo (very few of these), you should have a lot of variation between kingdoms, factions, or realms. The variation and differences, i.e., religions, customs, clothing, architecture, combat systems, magic, physical features, even hair style and skin color, are what historically set apart one culture from another in the ancient to Medieval world.
Most developers could care less about history, 99% of them spend their time in classes learning how to code as opposed to learning about the complexity of human nature and culture. So by the time they get hired on to a project, even if they are hired to help work the story and appearance of the mmo, they just think video games. Why? These folks come from console playing FPS/RTS backgrounds. In the 90s, those developers came from the old school dungeons and dragons crowd. This is one reason as to why there is such a huge difference in game creation styles between the Ultima, EQ, Dark Age of Camelot era, and now.
So while your heart was in the right place, this is NOT an mmoRPG no matter how many times they make that claim. For the companies that makes these video game pvp experiences where you capture flags, or hold a "capture point," for x minutes, mmorpg is what they list on the box because they think that all that entails an MMO is having folks online. Trust me, nothing made me feel further from an immersive mmoRPG experience than playing Huttball or running a flag in WoW. But then, I never saw these as mmoRPGs and just enjoyed the video game quality of these titles.
We are in a dark age of the fantasy gaming genre. So many folks like to try out the different games, but the debate over what makes quality is turning into either the full sandbox players (especially the folks who have tons of free time who love to destroy incoming players and take their loot), or the theme park guys (who have tons of free time who love to destroy incoming pixels/NPCs and take their loot). Where the heck are the real mmorpgs? The ones with housing, and complex pvp, and lots of races with more than 1 or even 2 factions to choose from? Where is the depth that used to exist?
I am hoping Elder Scrolls Online will set a new standard so that even the younger generation of players starts to realize that there is more to an mmorpg than camping a leveling zone to rip off lowbies, or sitting in a flag capture match.
Some folks will just rtoll their eyes (especially the <24 age crowd, no offense), and say I am just holding on to nostalgia. Well fine, then call it that. I'm the guy that likes classic rock over Nicky Menage and Lil'Wayne, I'm the guy that would rather have a fully loaded '66 Camaro over a 2012, or the artwork of the Cistene Chapel over something smeared with CGI.
I've only played two of the betas (after pre-purchasing the game), but during that time there was one major problem that completely turned me off to the game: too much control was taken away from how I defined my character, and if I wanted to play the game optimally he would become unrecognizable. If you don't care about role playing (I don't even really actively role play), then you'll likely not care. I'm posting this in hopes I greatly missed the mark on some of these issues, because I would rather have not wasted $60.
<snipage--though I'm still responding to the whole OP>
I can confidently say that you did not miss the mark on these issues because that mark is your own to miss. Every player's desires and preferences in this regard differ. You wish for more of a blank slate character that you can imagine to be whatever you wish. Anet made the design choice to give players a variety of predetermined directions to take their characters, which, nonetheless, are just that: predetermined.
There's nothing wrong with either design choice; and I'm sure both has its fans. Think of single player RPGs like the Final Fantasy series, where some of them give you "blank" characters that you can make into any class type you wish within the character progression system, while others pigeonhole specific characters into specific classes, weapon and ability choices.
For GW2, this is something you will have to get past and learn to appreciate as another kind of system. It's simply the design choice of the game. If it's a gamebreaker for you, the only alternative is really to find a different game that better suits your tastes.
I've only played two of the betas (after pre-purchasing the game), but during that time there was one major problem that completely turned me off to the game: too much control was taken away from how I defined my character, and if I wanted to play the game optimally he would become unrecognizable. If you don't care about role playing (I don't even really actively role play), then you'll likely not care. I'm posting this in hopes I greatly missed the mark on some of these issues, because I would rather have not wasted $60.
The character: A cynical sellsword. Uses a sword and shield because he finds other weapons slow, ineffective, or otherwise unwieldy. Chaotic Good: mostly out for himself, but generally tends to (begrudgingly) help others in dire matters (matters of freedom, life and death, etc.). Does not use magic. He is a human.
The combination of sword and shield leaves me with Guardian and Warrior, and the restriction of no magic reduces that to just Warrior, which is fine. The title of the class is unimportant, and "Warrior" is about as generic as you can get anyway.
The first issue I ran into is that of multiple weapon sets and various weapons being good at various things. It is my understanding that if I just stick to one weapon set then I will be at a great disadvantage. While only two weapons can be equipped at a time, I am under the impression that you can swap any weapons in and out of combat. Meaning, again, that not focusing on all weapon types will leave you at a disadvantage.
I do not know exactly which weapons are good at what, but for example let's say that a two-handed sword is good at AoE damage and a one-handed sword is good at single target damage. Warrior A might run with a one-handed sword + bow setup and Warrior B might run with a two-handed sword + bow setup. If Warrior A is unwilling to switch to a two-handed sword + bow setup when beneficial and Warrior B [i]is[/i] willing to switch to a one-handed sword + bow setup, then clearly Warrior A is at a disadvantage, no?
Next, the game forces on your character (at least it did for my Human) a very Lawful Good persona, often times Stupid Good and never multidimensional. The voice acting aside (which was quite poor, at least in my opinion), the character was saying things that my character would never say. While BioWare games only really give you three choices these days, that's at least [i]something[/i]. I decided to just skip all of the cut scenes and make up my own story as I went, but it still feels like a negative.
Finally, and this isn't so much of a role playing issue but still something that bothered me visually, was that a lot of the animations felt really sluggish. Strafing in one direction and then changing to another was visually distracting to me; there was a distinct "glide" as the running animations changed, and it was very jarring for me. I'm a huge fan of "shield bash" abilities, but the shield bash ability here was lagged from me pressing the button by a noticeable amount of time. This, combined with the lack of customization and variety in physical weapon skills, made the combat very awkward and boring for me.
Does anyone have any corrections, clarifications, or agreements? Is this game just not for me?
I understand your frustration. But I'll say it time and time again, this is NOT an mmoRPG it is an mmoVG (video game); lots of people playing an arcade styled video game in the guise of a fantasy game.
In a true mmo (very few of these), you should have a lot of variation between kingdoms, factions, or realms. The variation and differences, i.e., religions, customs, clothing, architecture, combat systems, magic, physical features, even hair style and skin color, are what historically set apart one culture from another in the ancient to Medieval world.
Most developers could care less about history, 99% of them spend their time in classes learning how to code as opposed to learning about the complexity of human nature and culture. So by the time they get hired on to a project, even if they are hired to help work the story and appearance of the mmo, they just think video games. Why? These folks come from console playing FPS/RTS backgrounds. In the 90s, those developers came from the old school dungeons and dragons crowd. This is one reason as to why there is such a huge difference in game creation styles between the Ultima, EQ, Dark Age of Camelot era, and now.
So while your heart was in the right place, this is NOT an mmoRPG no matter how many times they make that claim. For the companies that makes these video game pvp experiences where you capture flags, or hold a "capture point," for x minutes, mmorpg is what they list on the box because they think that all that entails an MMO is having folks online. Trust me, nothing made me feel further from an immersive mmoRPG experience than playing Huttball or running a flag in WoW. But then, I never saw these as mmoRPGs and just enjoyed the video game quality of these titles.
We are in a dark age of the fantasy gaming genre. So many folks like to try out the different games, but the debate over what makes quality is turning into either the full sandbox players (especially the folks who have tons of free time who love to destroy incoming players and take their loot), or the theme park guys (who have tons of free time who love to destroy incoming pixels/NPCs and take their loot). Where the heck are the real mmorpgs? The ones with housing, and complex pvp, and lots of races with more than 1 or even 2 factions to choose from? Where is the depth that used to exist?
I am hoping Elder Scrolls Online will set a new standard so that even the younger generation of players starts to realize that there is more to an mmorpg than camping a leveling zone to rip off lowbies, or sitting in a flag capture match.
Some folks will just rtoll their eyes (especially the <24 age crowd, no offense), and say I am just holding on to nostalgia. Well fine, then call it that. I'm the guy that likes classic rock over Nicky Menage and Lil'Wayne, I'm the guy that would rather have a fully loaded '66 Camaro over a 2012, or the artwork of the Cistene Chapel over something smeared with CGI.
/here's to nostalgia /drink
And nothing what you said holds true for GW2. Even worse if you think TESO will set a new standard when the first thing they do at character creation is place you in a predetermined box is beyond me.
This thread is like that game of telephone where what is said at the end has nothing to do with the first statement. If you actually read it the OP never stated once that he wanted GW2 to be like SWTOR or that he wanted it to be any sort of RPG with decision making options.
I've only played two of the betas (after pre-purchasing the game), but during that time there was one major problem that completely turned me off to the game: too much control was taken away from how I defined my character, and if I wanted to play the game optimally he would become unrecognizable. If you don't care about role playing (I don't even really actively role play), then you'll likely not care. I'm posting this in hopes I greatly missed the mark on some of these issues, because I would rather have not wasted $60.t t
I will treat these 2 paragraphs as one point:
The character: A cynical sellsword. Uses a sword and shield because he finds other weapons slow, ineffective, or otherwise unwieldy. Chaotic Good: mostly out for himself, but generally tends to (begrudgingly) help others in dire matters (matters of freedom, life and death, etc.). Does not use magic. He is a human.
The combination of sword and shield leaves me with Guardian and Warrior, and the restriction of no magic reduces that to just Warrior, which is fine. The title of the class is unimportant, and "Warrior" is about as generic as you can get anyway.
Your story helps determine your characters path, but there is NOTHING in there that restricts you to sword and shield, unless you mean that sword and shield is part of the character you want to make... In which case I agree 110% that that choice restricts you and it is YOUR choice to be restricted. Go to other games and tell me which game permits you to equip your wizard with a sword and shield? Really?
The first issue I ran into is that of multiple weapon sets and various weapons being good at various things. It is my understanding that if I just stick to one weapon set then I will be at a great disadvantage. While only two weapons can be equipped at a time, I am under the impression that you can swap any weapons in and out of combat. Meaning, again, that not focusing on all weapon types will leave you at a disadvantage.
Not the case. You don't need to focus on all weapon types, it depends what you want to do with your character. For example, you might choose to go sword and board for main and rifle for 2nd set to give you a ranged option... It is viable. The only time you would be "gimped" by not having another weapon is if you want to do change your play style, and it takes a total of 20 minutes to unlock a new weapon entirely
I do not know exactly which weapons are good at what, but for example let's say that a two-handed sword is good at AoE damage and a one-handed sword is good at single target damage. Warrior A might run with a one-handed sword + bow setup and Warrior B might run with a two-handed sword + bow setup. If Warrior A is unwilling to switch to a two-handed sword + bow setup when beneficial and Warrior B [i]is[/i] willing to switch to a one-handed sword + bow setup, then clearly Warrior A is at a disadvantage, no?
No... you need to actually play this and see how it works, but that is not how it usually works.
Next, the game forces on your character (at least it did for my Human) a very Lawful Good persona, often times Stupid Good and never multidimensional. The voice acting aside (which was quite poor, at least in my opinion), the character was saying things that my character would never say. While BioWare games only really give you three choices these days, that's at least [i]something[/i]. I decided to just skip all of the cut scenes and make up my own story as I went, but it still feels like a negative.
True, and I agree... This game is about heroes stepping up and they don't leave a LOT of room for moral ambiguity. That being said, there are some... I.E. you beat someone in a duel and you get the choice of sparing him, insulting him, or killing him while he is down and disarmed. What you choose affects your future choices and your character does get darker.
Finally, and this isn't so much of a role playing issue but still something that bothered me visually, was that a lot of the animations felt really sluggish. Strafing in one direction and then changing to another was visually distracting to me; there was a distinct "glide" as the running animations changed, and it was very jarring for me. I'm a huge fan of "shield bash" abilities, but the shield bash ability here was lagged from me pressing the button by a noticeable amount of time. This, combined with the lack of customization and variety in physical weapon skills, made the combat very awkward and boring for me.
It is possible that shield isn't the best choice for you in this game. I will say that after trying all the professions(and unlocking most of the weapons) the only one I for sure won't be playing was the one I thought I would be playing originally. Not only do all the professions play differently but the SAME profession can play completely differently based on weapon... and the same profession/weapon can play differently with different utility/traits.
Does anyone have any corrections, clarifications, or agreements? Is this game just not for me?
Well, you said you don't actively roleplay, so I don't really see what the problem with roleplaying is for you... But that being said, I think the problem is that you chose a character and are trying to make that character work in this game, but you don't like the play style for the weapons and stuff you chose.
My advice would be to go back to the drawing board and do it a bit differently... Figure out which play style you enjoy in the game, and then come up with a character story that appeals to you and matches the play style.
You know, Maverick, this was a much better post than I expected entering the thread. I expected something worthy of the troll clans and am pleased that my expectations were not met. I understand your concerns and think, personally, that you're making a very cardinal mistake regarding role playing... trying to conform an RP style from other styles of games into games where they don't really fit. In GW2, there's no "chaotic good", "lawful evil", etc. That's simply not how the characters and the lore are designed. This is a massive land fighting for its very survival... all of us against the dragons and their minions. You talk about not using magic, but magic infuses Tyria. Even warriors and their skills use magic, but instead of being reflected in clones and illusions, fire and ice on demand, necrotic beings being raised, etc. it's reflected in warriors able to do super human feats, such as leaps across great distances to close on the enemy or magically infusing your shield with the ability to block all damage for a period of time, including magical damage aimed at you. Your very shouts, infused with magical energy, can heal your allies around you!
What I'm saying is this; take a step back and learn the world you intend to roleplay in. Then understand how you may need to adjust your concepts to fit in the world instead of trying to fit the world into your concepts. If you can do that, you'll find a much more rewarding experience. If not, there are other games, other worlds waiting for you. Find one that fits and be happy.
You know, Maverick, this was a much better post than I expected entering the thread. I expected something worthy of the troll clans and am pleased that my expectations were not met. I understand your concerns and think, personally, that you're making a very cardinal mistake regarding role playing... trying to conform an RP style from other styles of games into games where they don't really fit. In GW2, there's no "chaotic good", "lawful evil", etc. That's simply not how the characters and the lore are designed. This is a massive land fighting for its very survival... all of us against the dragons and their minions. You talk about not using magic, but magic infuses Tyria. Even warriors and their skills use magic, but instead of being reflected in clones and illusions, fire and ice on demand, necrotic beings being raised, etc. it's reflected in warriors able to do super human feats, such as leaps across great distances to close on the enemy or magically infusing your shield with the ability to block all damage for a period of time, including magical damage aimed at you. Your very shouts, infused with magical energy, can heal your allies around you!
What I'm saying is this; take a step back and learn the world you intend to roleplay in. Then understand how you may need to adjust your concepts to fit in the world instead of trying to fit the world into your concepts. If you can do that, you'll find a much more rewarding experience. If not, there are other games, other worlds waiting for you. Find one that fits and be happy.
^
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
Well, I was playing a mesmer (played one for 7 yrs in GW1) and it was totally different. Initially, I thought the character skills, etc were terribad. I stepped away for an hour and came back and realized I was TRYING to play a mesmer like I do in GW1 and it is different. Once I got over that, there were no issues and it all made sense. It also made the world more immersive.
I realize each game you need to play somewhat different, even though the professions/roles are named the same. It might be what you are dealing with.
Even pen and paper RPG games have restrictions. Roleplaying isn't necessarily about doing whatever you want, but rather asking yourself what your character would do given the situation. It might make the game difficult if you decide he/she would stick to sword and shield no matter what, but at any rate it is those kind of questions that make roleplaying interesting.
In a true mmo (very few of these), you should have a lot of variation between kingdoms, factions, or realms. The variation and differences, i.e., religions, customs, clothing, architecture, combat systems, magic, physical features, even hair style and skin color, are what historically set apart one culture from another in the ancient to Medieval world.
If I was a horrible person, I'd say 'back in my day, we bothered to learn about something before we critiqued it', but I'm not petty like that! (*cough*) Uhm, more seriously for a moment...
There is a big difference. There's 5 races in GW2, and all of them have different religions (Or lack thereof), customs, clothing, architecture, physical features, hair styles and skin color.
Yes, all the various hair styles/facial features/races for humans are lumped into one kingdom, but that's because there's only one human city left, and the other two cultures from GW1 are actually cut off from these lands.
In fact, Guild Wars: Factions and Guild Wars: Nightfall did a VERY good job of having two totally separate human cultures, from architecture to ethnic types to hairstyles... different fighting styles, different fighting techniques and magic.
Anyway, there's a lot of difference between the cultures and architecture in GW2... not just that, there's 5 truly humongous, magnificent cities full of NPCs and unique buildings that work as incredible RPing tools that really let you understand a lot more about the various cultures. There's even a starter area for EACH race, that lets you get a closer look at the culture of the lands and the types of people that inhabit it. It's okay to not like something, but if you speak from a position of complete ignorance, people will mistake you for somebody completely ignorant, and that's a horrible place to be.
Actually, any RPer worth their salt, if they use the personal story, won't use it as 'the story of their character', but as a sort of OOC aid to learning more about that particular race, the culture, the sorts of things they deal wtih. A pre-made personal story in a game is of course not going to be able to perfectly mimic an RPer's character concept, nor should it. Anybody who is using the SWTOR or TSW story as 'the canonical story of my character' is going to end up with a retardedly generic character who is just like thousands of other players. Personal stories in computer games are no good for any RPer who wants to go beyond the premade. They never have been, they never will be.
You have to conform to the game not the other way around. I went into gw2 expecting to enjoy playing an elementalist, every MMO i have played I usually gravitate towards mages (fire magic, earth etc); in guild wars 2 after playing an ele for 22 levels I finally accept the fact that the way I had imagine the ele was different from reality. I promptly changed my profession to mesmer and the game became a different experience.
So really OP, you have to keep your pre conceive notions out of the door and be willing to explore the game. If you don't find it enjoyable that is fine, but the issues you have seem to be more as a result of not being open to experience new things. And looking at things through a funnel.
I've only played two of the betas (after pre-purchasing the game), but during that time there was one major problem that completely turned me off to the game: too much control was taken away from how I defined my character, and if I wanted to play the game optimally he would become unrecognizable. If you don't care about role playing (I don't even really actively role play), then you'll likely not care. I'm posting this in hopes I greatly missed the mark on some of these issues, because I would rather have not wasted $60.
The character: A cynical sellsword. Uses a sword and shield because he finds other weapons slow, ineffective, or otherwise unwieldy. Chaotic Good: mostly out for himself, but generally tends to (begrudgingly) help others in dire matters (matters of freedom, life and death, etc.). Does not use magic. He is a human.
The combination of sword and shield leaves me with Guardian and Warrior, and the restriction of no magic reduces that to just Warrior, which is fine. The title of the class is unimportant, and "Warrior" is about as generic as you can get anyway.
The first issue I ran into is that of multiple weapon sets and various weapons being good at various things. It is my understanding that if I just stick to one weapon set then I will be at a great disadvantage. While only two weapons can be equipped at a time, I am under the impression that you can swap any weapons in and out of combat. Meaning, again, that not focusing on all weapon types will leave you at a disadvantage.
I do not know exactly which weapons are good at what, but for example let's say that a two-handed sword is good at AoE damage and a one-handed sword is good at single target damage. Warrior A might run with a one-handed sword + bow setup and Warrior B might run with a two-handed sword + bow setup. If Warrior A is unwilling to switch to a two-handed sword + bow setup when beneficial and Warrior B [i]is[/i] willing to switch to a one-handed sword + bow setup, then clearly Warrior A is at a disadvantage, no?
Next, the game forces on your character (at least it did for my Human) a very Lawful Good persona, often times Stupid Good and never multidimensional. The voice acting aside (which was quite poor, at least in my opinion), the character was saying things that my character would never say. While BioWare games only really give you three choices these days, that's at least [i]something[/i]. I decided to just skip all of the cut scenes and make up my own story as I went, but it still feels like a negative.
Finally, and this isn't so much of a role playing issue but still something that bothered me visually, was that a lot of the animations felt really sluggish. Strafing in one direction and then changing to another was visually distracting to me; there was a distinct "glide" as the running animations changed, and it was very jarring for me. I'm a huge fan of "shield bash" abilities, but the shield bash ability here was lagged from me pressing the button by a noticeable amount of time. This, combined with the lack of customization and variety in physical weapon skills, made the combat very awkward and boring for me.
Does anyone have any corrections, clarifications, or agreements? Is this game just not for me?
I'll be short. The problem is you. I don't mean it in a mean, flaming, etc., way. I mean, you made decisions in an environment where those decisions were self-limiting and instead of going with it and role-playing the fundamentally flawed character you made, you're complaining about the devs.
My belief (and experience) is that role-playing fundamentally flawed, or limited, character is a great opportunity. You have a 6 dexterity? Hey, you were born with a club foot... Your Int is 18 but your wisdom is 4? You're known for making foolish decisions where you didn't properly consider the future consequences of the action. (Like pre-ordering games from EA/BioWare.) Oh, you have a low INT? Remember Minsc from BG/BG2? That was a low-int Ranger from one of the dev's DnD campaign. There was a whole back-story how he became 'dumb' and why he had this thing for hamsters...
So, from an RP POV I see nothing that's an issue. You make a choice. You role-play it. You accept the consequences of your RP choices. Yet that's not what's happening. Which gets me to not seeing you as a role-player-first, but rather as a min-maxer who also wants the 'role-playing' cachet for some reason.
The absolute worst thing I dislike about GW2 is its rigid class/weapon structures. If I want to play a Hybrid Melee/Magic character with specific weapon setup then I should be able too. GW2 gives you so much freedom in picking your utility spells I do not understand for the life of me why they would revert from the GW1 model of letting you also pick your skills and weapons too. Dislike it greatly and its one of the main things I love about TSW. I get to pick my weapon and my skills to go with it. Anyway I dislike class based games which is dubious because GW2 is doing away with trinity specific roles but yet still sticking to idealogical classes.
The game is the game and it has been well known FOR YEARS that it is a class-based game. It's like going to a car dealership and complaining they don't sell airplanes. No **** they don't sell airplanes.
You know, Maverick, this was a much better post than I expected entering the thread. I expected something worthy of the troll clans and am pleased that my expectations were not met. I understand your concerns and think, personally, that you're making a very cardinal mistake regarding role playing... trying to conform an RP style from other styles of games into games where they don't really fit. In GW2, there's no "chaotic good", "lawful evil", etc. That's simply not how the characters and the lore are designed. This is a massive land fighting for its very survival... all of us against the dragons and their minions. You talk about not using magic, but magic infuses Tyria. Even warriors and their skills use magic, but instead of being reflected in clones and illusions, fire and ice on demand, necrotic beings being raised, etc. it's reflected in warriors able to do super human feats, such as leaps across great distances to close on the enemy or magically infusing your shield with the ability to block all damage for a period of time, including magical damage aimed at you. Your very shouts, infused with magical energy, can heal your allies around you!
What I'm saying is this; take a step back and learn the world you intend to roleplay in. Then understand how you may need to adjust your concepts to fit in the world instead of trying to fit the world into your concepts. If you can do that, you'll find a much more rewarding experience. If not, there are other games, other worlds waiting for you. Find one that fits and be happy.
Comments
quote: "and if I wanted to play the game optimally he would become unrecognizable. If you don't care about role playing (I don't even really actively role play), then you'll likely not care."
comment: If you want to RP, then why worry about playing the game "optimally"? But yes, using only one of your two sets will leave you missing out a bit.
quote: "I am under the impression that you can swap any weapons in and out of combat."
comment: Not quit. Before level 7 you can only change a weapon out of combat; at level 7 you will open up the swap ability, allowing you to swap between two pre made sets in combat (with a cool down between swapping).
quote: "I do not know exactly which weapons are good at what"
comment: There is a tab in the hero screen that will tell you what each weapon does, even before you unlock the skill. It isn't uber detailed, but it's enough to get you started.
quote: "Next, the game forces on your character (at least it did for my Human) a very Lawful Good persona, often times Stupid Good and never multidimensional."
comment: In the human story lines you are a (mostly) good guy, or at least that's how you are perceived. If you want to RP something else, don't do the story lines. If the RP is important to you, then you can deal with the loss of XP and rewards.
I'm thinking this really isn't what you're looking for, you start by branding multiple options as a limit, and go downhill from there.
I'll vote that you pass on this game, at least for now. These are my reasons:
1. Anet on several occassions have defended the weird movement of characters that are described as being floaty. They've said that it's a result of transition animations but in real-time the character is moving with precision.
2. Storymode just isn't as deep as you seem to like and will ruin your unique roleplay for your character. Although some roleplayers say that they will play storymode OOC so that's an option if you like.
3. Combat abilities per weapon may be selectable and varied in expansions but not at release. It'd be best to wait until the first 2 expansions before you decide if you should play. As for the advantages of mixing up weapons, I'd say it's negligible.
Oh, and if you bought the game from ArenaNet, you can get a refund. I'm not sure about gamestores' policies though.
Block the trolls, don't answer them, so we can remove the garbage from these forums
OP the question you should be asking yourself. Is it the game that is restricting you or is it your rigid stance on what you want. If you talk to a lot of NPCs you can pick 1 of 3 replies. Read up on personality here: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Personality
The OP makes Hell of a lot of sense. I've been signed up for the beta for ages yet haven't been invited. The OP doesn't feel like the character he's playing is his. Clearly he got into the beta at my expense and is playing with MY character! The nerve!
For a small fee of $50 you could have been in beta, and when you finally decide to buy the game its going to cost you $50 anyway, so actually the beta is free...
Problem is that most people will buy the game to try it anyway, since its B2P and does not require subscription fees. So it will be well worth everyones money. Same as with the OP, if he can live with the fact that he will not be the most flexible character he can play the PvE part just as well as, just stick a bow or a gun in the 2nd slot, which would be totally in corporation with his sellsword.
If the OP really wants to play the character he described its very well possible. But it seems on top of the roleplay part the OP is also a mni-maxer that wants to have it all, despite the fact that his character clearly made a choice concentrating on a single weapon set-up.
Its not the game to play, but the player. If he wants to step away from the game for these reasons, he should do so. I personally have never played a more immersive MMO. Even from the viewpoint of a roleplayer.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
glad i didnt do human storyline, most of the time in my char personal story i ended up with an option to kill or let go in dishonour someone who betray the legion. so IMO if you want to become someone that too naive pick charr
This pretty much put into words what I was thinking when I saw this thread. It's unreasonable to expect a full roleplaying experience through dialogue options and the like, and if you expected that, than you obviously didn't know what kinda game this was, AND you didn't realize how really good roleplaying works (creating a character with REAL people and playing a character with a roleplay group), instead of expecting superficial roleplaying (getting dialogue options involving the full spectrum of allignments with NPC characters).
summary of OP: I want to be a CG-one sword and sheild warrior, But choosing one specific combo of weapons narrows my options.
yeah it does, kinda like real life, you gotta make choices. i, personally like that.
Summary of OP: the perosonal story isnt like SWTOR, i want to be a "dark jedi" (a rose by any other name, sweets)
Yup. well, that is the hook that Bioware hung the whole game on isnt it? not so with GW2. So, if you insist on playing human...(again your choice) you will get stuck with the "good-guy" role.
Summay of OP: I played the game for a bit, but didnt get to weapon swapping with my warrior, so whats that about?
Then obviously you didnt play very long, you get it at level 7 and you can hit seven in about 1.5 hours of play, SO WTF? you didnt get to level seven in two betas? you didnt even try before posting. really? Level seven! you couldnt get there without having emotional issues about your pre-defined alter ego? Yes, you have wasted your money. go try TERA,
(no really dont... it is a one- role, one-weapon,one-playstyle game)
I understand your frustration. But I'll say it time and time again, this is NOT an mmoRPG it is an mmoVG (video game); lots of people playing an arcade styled video game in the guise of a fantasy game.
In a true mmo (very few of these), you should have a lot of variation between kingdoms, factions, or realms. The variation and differences, i.e., religions, customs, clothing, architecture, combat systems, magic, physical features, even hair style and skin color, are what historically set apart one culture from another in the ancient to Medieval world.
Most developers could care less about history, 99% of them spend their time in classes learning how to code as opposed to learning about the complexity of human nature and culture. So by the time they get hired on to a project, even if they are hired to help work the story and appearance of the mmo, they just think video games. Why? These folks come from console playing FPS/RTS backgrounds. In the 90s, those developers came from the old school dungeons and dragons crowd. This is one reason as to why there is such a huge difference in game creation styles between the Ultima, EQ, Dark Age of Camelot era, and now.
So while your heart was in the right place, this is NOT an mmoRPG no matter how many times they make that claim. For the companies that makes these video game pvp experiences where you capture flags, or hold a "capture point," for x minutes, mmorpg is what they list on the box because they think that all that entails an MMO is having folks online. Trust me, nothing made me feel further from an immersive mmoRPG experience than playing Huttball or running a flag in WoW. But then, I never saw these as mmoRPGs and just enjoyed the video game quality of these titles.
We are in a dark age of the fantasy gaming genre. So many folks like to try out the different games, but the debate over what makes quality is turning into either the full sandbox players (especially the folks who have tons of free time who love to destroy incoming players and take their loot), or the theme park guys (who have tons of free time who love to destroy incoming pixels/NPCs and take their loot). Where the heck are the real mmorpgs? The ones with housing, and complex pvp, and lots of races with more than 1 or even 2 factions to choose from? Where is the depth that used to exist?
I am hoping Elder Scrolls Online will set a new standard so that even the younger generation of players starts to realize that there is more to an mmorpg than camping a leveling zone to rip off lowbies, or sitting in a flag capture match.
Some folks will just rtoll their eyes (especially the <24 age crowd, no offense), and say I am just holding on to nostalgia. Well fine, then call it that. I'm the guy that likes classic rock over Nicky Menage and Lil'Wayne, I'm the guy that would rather have a fully loaded '66 Camaro over a 2012, or the artwork of the Cistene Chapel over something smeared with CGI.
/here's to nostalgia /drink
I can confidently say that you did not miss the mark on these issues because that mark is your own to miss. Every player's desires and preferences in this regard differ. You wish for more of a blank slate character that you can imagine to be whatever you wish. Anet made the design choice to give players a variety of predetermined directions to take their characters, which, nonetheless, are just that: predetermined.
There's nothing wrong with either design choice; and I'm sure both has its fans. Think of single player RPGs like the Final Fantasy series, where some of them give you "blank" characters that you can make into any class type you wish within the character progression system, while others pigeonhole specific characters into specific classes, weapon and ability choices.
For GW2, this is something you will have to get past and learn to appreciate as another kind of system. It's simply the design choice of the game. If it's a gamebreaker for you, the only alternative is really to find a different game that better suits your tastes.
And nothing what you said holds true for GW2. Even worse if you think TESO will set a new standard when the first thing they do at character creation is place you in a predetermined box is beyond me.
This thread is like that game of telephone where what is said at the end has nothing to do with the first statement. If you actually read it the OP never stated once that he wanted GW2 to be like SWTOR or that he wanted it to be any sort of RPG with decision making options.
"The game is not how I want it to be. Is the game for me?"
No.
Well, you said you don't actively roleplay, so I don't really see what the problem with roleplaying is for you... But that being said, I think the problem is that you chose a character and are trying to make that character work in this game, but you don't like the play style for the weapons and stuff you chose.
My advice would be to go back to the drawing board and do it a bit differently... Figure out which play style you enjoy in the game, and then come up with a character story that appeals to you and matches the play style.
You know, Maverick, this was a much better post than I expected entering the thread. I expected something worthy of the troll clans and am pleased that my expectations were not met. I understand your concerns and think, personally, that you're making a very cardinal mistake regarding role playing... trying to conform an RP style from other styles of games into games where they don't really fit. In GW2, there's no "chaotic good", "lawful evil", etc. That's simply not how the characters and the lore are designed. This is a massive land fighting for its very survival... all of us against the dragons and their minions. You talk about not using magic, but magic infuses Tyria. Even warriors and their skills use magic, but instead of being reflected in clones and illusions, fire and ice on demand, necrotic beings being raised, etc. it's reflected in warriors able to do super human feats, such as leaps across great distances to close on the enemy or magically infusing your shield with the ability to block all damage for a period of time, including magical damage aimed at you. Your very shouts, infused with magical energy, can heal your allies around you!
What I'm saying is this; take a step back and learn the world you intend to roleplay in. Then understand how you may need to adjust your concepts to fit in the world instead of trying to fit the world into your concepts. If you can do that, you'll find a much more rewarding experience. If not, there are other games, other worlds waiting for you. Find one that fits and be happy.
Oderint, dum metuant.
^
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
This thread is so very clever, what a wonderful way to critique the game in much the same way without alerting the masses.
Subtlety ... this thread has it.
Well, I was playing a mesmer (played one for 7 yrs in GW1) and it was totally different. Initially, I thought the character skills, etc were terribad. I stepped away for an hour and came back and realized I was TRYING to play a mesmer like I do in GW1 and it is different. Once I got over that, there were no issues and it all made sense. It also made the world more immersive.
I realize each game you need to play somewhat different, even though the professions/roles are named the same. It might be what you are dealing with.
Even pen and paper RPG games have restrictions. Roleplaying isn't necessarily about doing whatever you want, but rather asking yourself what your character would do given the situation. It might make the game difficult if you decide he/she would stick to sword and shield no matter what, but at any rate it is those kind of questions that make roleplaying interesting.
If I was a horrible person, I'd say 'back in my day, we bothered to learn about something before we critiqued it', but I'm not petty like that! (*cough*) Uhm, more seriously for a moment...
There is a big difference. There's 5 races in GW2, and all of them have different religions (Or lack thereof), customs, clothing, architecture, physical features, hair styles and skin color.
Yes, all the various hair styles/facial features/races for humans are lumped into one kingdom, but that's because there's only one human city left, and the other two cultures from GW1 are actually cut off from these lands.
In fact, Guild Wars: Factions and Guild Wars: Nightfall did a VERY good job of having two totally separate human cultures, from architecture to ethnic types to hairstyles... different fighting styles, different fighting techniques and magic.
Anyway, there's a lot of difference between the cultures and architecture in GW2... not just that, there's 5 truly humongous, magnificent cities full of NPCs and unique buildings that work as incredible RPing tools that really let you understand a lot more about the various cultures. There's even a starter area for EACH race, that lets you get a closer look at the culture of the lands and the types of people that inhabit it. It's okay to not like something, but if you speak from a position of complete ignorance, people will mistake you for somebody completely ignorant, and that's a horrible place to be.
Actually, any RPer worth their salt, if they use the personal story, won't use it as 'the story of their character', but as a sort of OOC aid to learning more about that particular race, the culture, the sorts of things they deal wtih. A pre-made personal story in a game is of course not going to be able to perfectly mimic an RPer's character concept, nor should it. Anybody who is using the SWTOR or TSW story as 'the canonical story of my character' is going to end up with a retardedly generic character who is just like thousands of other players. Personal stories in computer games are no good for any RPer who wants to go beyond the premade. They never have been, they never will be.
You have to conform to the game not the other way around. I went into gw2 expecting to enjoy playing an elementalist, every MMO i have played I usually gravitate towards mages (fire magic, earth etc); in guild wars 2 after playing an ele for 22 levels I finally accept the fact that the way I had imagine the ele was different from reality. I promptly changed my profession to mesmer and the game became a different experience.
So really OP, you have to keep your pre conceive notions out of the door and be willing to explore the game. If you don't find it enjoyable that is fine, but the issues you have seem to be more as a result of not being open to experience new things. And looking at things through a funnel.
I'll be short. The problem is you. I don't mean it in a mean, flaming, etc., way. I mean, you made decisions in an environment where those decisions were self-limiting and instead of going with it and role-playing the fundamentally flawed character you made, you're complaining about the devs.
My belief (and experience) is that role-playing fundamentally flawed, or limited, character is a great opportunity. You have a 6 dexterity? Hey, you were born with a club foot... Your Int is 18 but your wisdom is 4? You're known for making foolish decisions where you didn't properly consider the future consequences of the action. (Like pre-ordering games from EA/BioWare.) Oh, you have a low INT? Remember Minsc from BG/BG2? That was a low-int Ranger from one of the dev's DnD campaign. There was a whole back-story how he became 'dumb' and why he had this thing for hamsters...
So, from an RP POV I see nothing that's an issue. You make a choice. You role-play it. You accept the consequences of your RP choices. Yet that's not what's happening. Which gets me to not seeing you as a role-player-first, but rather as a min-maxer who also wants the 'role-playing' cachet for some reason.
The game is the game and it has been well known FOR YEARS that it is a class-based game. It's like going to a car dealership and complaining they don't sell airplanes. No **** they don't sell airplanes.
Very well said.