I'm not going to say that ANet is doing anything revolutionary with Guild Wars 2. I need to actually play the game before I can make that assessment. However, from what I've seen in the gameplay videos, the game seems to be very action packed and fun.
Whether or not ANet succeeds, just by trying to do something different from the rest of the flock, they get my respect.
My sentiments as well. I can't make a true judgement call until I can get some hands on time. Be that as it may, I can form a base opinion upon what I have seen. I can say I am liking what I have seen the past day or so. The combat looks action packed and many of the systems seem to be in place.
I think the Buy 2 Play model is going to be extremely popular as well. Almost anyone can scrounge up $50 for a game, not every can afford the $15 per month, especially in these economic times. Even if the game has DLC like GW1 has, it will still be cheaper per year overall than a standard mmo subscription.
Also remember that when GW1 came out it seemed to have attracted many Diablo fans, especially since ANet was basically founded by Blizzard North (iirc). Now, mmorpgs are far more mainstream, and there are many more opportunities to attract potential buyers.
I really think ANet has the potential for a huge hit here, but they have to deliver the goods.
Well based on stormwatch's review from the other thread it confirms everything I saw with the event system and shows that while the event system is "fun" and more compelling than what we've previously been offered in other mmorpgs, it isn't that groundbreaking revolutionary change as it is basically a quest system that is polished a lil bit.
Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
Well based on stormwatch's review from the other thread it confirms everything I saw with the event system and shows that while the event system is "fun" and more compelling than what we've previously been offered in other mmorpgs, it isn't that groundbreaking revolutionary change as it is basically a quest system that is polished a lil bit. Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
I'm just going to repeat what I wrote elsewhere on the topic:
Regarding 'quests' vs 'Dynamic Events':
- in most of the MMO's around, quests are being handled by finding your NPC, getting your quest that often means 'kill x of y' or 'get me these items' or 'go to that place', after which you get your reward. The quest text is meant to tell you why you are doing this and to add a bit of flavour. The world hasn't changed when you have finished your task, the next player will get the exact same quest to kill the guy you just killed, and all the quests are the same for everyone. In themepark MMO's you don't have to search for questgivers, they're easily recognisable by things like exclamation marks.
So, the features of most current MMO quests are:
- no staying impact on world after completion
- static quest NPC's
- quests starts when its NPC is found, and explanation is given by way of quest text
- only 1 resolution of the quest (besides abandoning quest)
- now Dynamic Events. Even when you wouldn't interfere, Events are happening and playing itself out. Instead of looking for quest NPC's, you see visual signs of what is happening, like instead of seeing a bunch of centaurs roaming around outside a city without effect as you see in other MMO's, with Events they actually invade the city. Events in contrast to quests have consequences, if you fail in your task it leads to one path changing the environment - for everyone - if you succeed it leads to another path changing the environment. And this result on the world doesn't change after 10 seconds as in other MMO's until a mob respawns or the next player gets the same quest you had. No, the effect stays while the event continues in its chain to another stage.
So, the features of a Dynamic Event are:
- staying impact until an Event stage or another player changes the situation
- dynamic nature, events are unfolding continuously, the 'world' is in motion and the events with it
- Events are ongoing with or without you, you can participate when you're near, visually you can see what is happening instead of having to read about it in quest text
- 2 (or more) resolutions to an event, pass or fail (besides abandoning)
There is no MMO at the moment that has those elements, most MMO's follow the quest mechanic as described in the 1st example.
Then we have the personal story quests: your background determines what quests you encounter in the instanced areas. One early example was that if you had chosen as background that you were nobleman then you had to help out a fellow nobleman near your house, had you chosen to be a commoner then you got into a gang fight near your house.
While not as revolutionary as Dynamic Events, most MMO's don't have that too.
As for how GW2 is different, to describe the other aspects takes too long. What could be seen from the vidoes is how polished in certain aspects GW2 already is. Animation and character creation looks good, other players roaming around and helping eachother out is seen working, Events are seen unfolding and the monster boss fights are looking spectacular and even while a large number of players is participating it all looks fluid and smooth.
All in all I'd say that if some might find that GW2 isn't revolutionary in its gameplay aspects, it certainly is evolutionary.
Besides that, if those aren't things you can get excited about in a MMO, then I'm wondering what actually you're looking for in your MMO.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Well based on stormwatch's review from the other thread it confirms everything I saw with the event system and shows that while the event system is "fun" and more compelling than what we've previously been offered in other mmorpgs, it isn't that groundbreaking revolutionary change as it is basically a quest system that is polished a lil bit. Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
I'm just going to repeat what I wrote elsewhere on the topic:
Regarding 'quests' vs 'Dynamic Events':
- in most of the MMO's around, quests are being handled by finding your NPC, getting your quest that often means 'kill x of y' or 'get me these items' or 'go to that place', after which you get your reward. The quest text is meant to tell you why you are doing this and to add a bit of flavour. The world hasn't changed when you have finished your task, the next player will get the exact same quest to kill the guy you just killed, and all the quests are the same for everyone. In themepark MMO's you don't have to search for questgivers, they're easily recognisable by things like exclamation marks.
So, the features of most current MMO quests are:
- no staying impact on world after completion
- static quest NPC's
- quests starts when its NPC is found, and explanation is given by way of quest text
- only 1 resolution of the quest (besides abandoning quest)
- now Dynamic Events. Even when you wouldn't interfere, Events are happening and playing itself out. Instead of looking for quest NPC's, you see visual signs of what is happening, like instead of seeing a bunch of centaurs roaming around outside a city without effect as you see in other MMO's, with Events they actually invade the city. Events in contrast to quests have consequences, if you fail in your task it leads to one path changing the environment - for everyone - if you succeed it leads to another path changing the environment. And this result on the world doesn't change after 10 seconds as in other MMO's until a mob respawns or the next player gets the same quest you had. No, the effect stays while the event continues in its chain to another stage.
So, the features of a Dynamic Event are:
- staying impact until an Event stage or another player changes the situation
- dynamic nature, events are unfolding continuously, the 'world' is in motion and the events with it
- Events are ongoing with or without you, you can participate when you're near, visually you can see what is happening instead of having to read about it in quest text
- 2 (or more) resolutions to an event, pass or fail (besides abandoning)
There is no MMO at the moment that has those elements, most MMO's follow the quest mechanic as described in the 1st example.
Then we have the personal story quests: your background determines what quests you encounter in the instanced areas. One early example was that if you had chosen as background that you were nobleman then you had to help out a fellow nobleman near your house, had you chosen to be a commoner then you got into a gang fight near your house.
While not as revolutionary as Dynamic Events, most MMO's don't have that too.
As for how GW2 is different, to describe the other aspects takes too long. What could be seen from the vidoes is how polished in certain aspects GW2 already is. Animation and character creation looks good, other players roaming around and helping eachother out is seen working, Events are seen unfolding and the monster boss fights are looking spectacular and even while a large number of players is participating it all looks fluid and smooth.
All in all I'd say that if some might find that GW2 isn't revolutionary in its gameplay aspects, it certainly is evolutionary.
Besides that, if those aren't things you can get excited about in a MMO, then I'm wondering what actually you're looking for in your MMO.
I'm looking for depth, innovation, and intuitive design, not bits of polish on already common features.
Originally posted by RobertDinh Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
Originally posted by RobertDinh Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
The demo only has so much to do, a lot of the footage is redundant. From what i've seen the combat has the same "feel" as aion. I am talking about animation and graphics here and if you can't see the similarities well your perspective may just be skewed (speaking in general not directly towards the post I quoted)
What i've seen is polished and decent, but nothing innovative and mindblowing.
Originally posted by RobertDinh Originally posted by PTEDOriginally posted by RobertDinh Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
The demo only has so much to do, a lot of the footage is redundant. From what i've seen the combat has the same "feel" as aion. I am talking about animation and graphics here and if you can't see the similarities well your perspective may just be skewed (speaking in general not directly towards the post I quoted)
What i've seen is polished and decent, but nothing innovative and mindblowing.
How do you spot a Dynamic Event following a different path when you have only watched one side of it?
Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
The demo only has so much to do, a lot of the footage is redundant. From what i've seen the combat has the same "feel" as aion. I am talking about animation and graphics here and if you can't see the similarities well your perspective may just be skewed (speaking in general not directly towards the post I quoted) What i've seen is polished and decent, but nothing innovative and mindblowing.
From what I can see, its all in the experience from playing it. All the reviews I've read have said its innovative and mindblowing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcDFbg2HC3w Here's a video that I'm watching now. It has an English voiceover and have so far gone through the weapon switching and one of the events.
Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
The demo only has so much to do, a lot of the footage is redundant. From what i've seen the combat has the same "feel" as aion. I am talking about animation and graphics here and if you can't see the similarities well your perspective may just be skewed (speaking in general not directly towards the post I quoted) What i've seen is polished and decent, but nothing innovative and mindblowing.
From what I can see, its all in the experience from playing it. All the reviews I've read have said its innovative and mindblowing.
They say that because they are biased, but they haven't actually proposed anything about the game that indicates so. Stormwatch had a very objective write-up. Also you may just be looking for positive reviews and downplaying any criticisms. Some people think anet can do no wrong.
Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
The demo only has so much to do, a lot of the footage is redundant. From what i've seen the combat has the same "feel" as aion. I am talking about animation and graphics here and if you can't see the similarities well your perspective may just be skewed (speaking in general not directly towards the post I quoted) What i've seen is polished and decent, but nothing innovative and mindblowing.
From what I can see, its all in the experience from playing it. All the reviews I've read have said its innovative and mindblowing.
They say that because they are biased, but they haven't actually proposed anything about the game that indicates so. Stormwatch had a very objective write-up. Also you may just be looking for positive reviews and downplaying any criticisms. Some people think anet can do no wrong.
The criticisms were small and negligible. If it was something like combat was slow or cross proffesion combos didn't work then I'd be more inclined to be worried but none of those problems occured and everything they said they would have seems to be working fine.
I think what we may want to see more of is the enemy(possibly centaurs) setting up camp at a town and then watching players retake that town and push back the centaurs to their stronghold. GC is not over yet though, so that might still be in there somewhere. But as it is now, everything they promised is in the game.
They say that because they are biased, but they haven't actually proposed anything about the game that indicates so. Stormwatch had a very objective write-up. Also you may just be looking for positive reviews and downplaying any criticisms. Some people think anet can do no wrong.
Funny that you say that. I went so far to quote Stormwatch' comments about his experiences, mind his quotes colored in red:
As Stormwatch elaborated:
Originally posted by Stormwatch
The fact that I don't know what happens with the quest is a good thing, I guess. It managed well to push me forward to the next chain of events. These quests would only make sense in the context of the situation, so when the event is done (and it will even if you don't do anything at all) the quest very likely go away as well. When I did finish the 3 villager rescue mission and talked to the NPC in a larger house (tavern?), the described dialogue scene in letterbox style appeared and explained a bit of the background. This setup managed well to basically tell the story where centaurs attack, I am helping to rescue villagers, we go to the tavern, the main NPCs have some kind of pep talk and we go out agian to drive the centaurs off who were still running around and attack anyone, then the castle scene as described. Nice little story all told in public quest style. If I had left out the quest, then I would be just killing centaurs straight through. In a sense, the quest adds a little episode into the narrative.
In contrast to normal MMO quests, he would still get the reward even when not talking to any NPC's in need, since he participated in it by his actions. That is (enhanced)Public Quest mechanic.
The very most NPCs in the area where basically victims and for providing flavor-text. It wasn't like other MMOs where the place was littered with questing green icons above all NPCs. In some places they would also shout in speech bubbles to point to the action, as a reminder what you should be doing. Also different from normal MMO questing.
They demoed the two zones/scenarios and I saw someone else playing a personal story, which seemed(!) to be entirely instanced. I guess they took inspirations of Age of Conan's nightly adventures; among some other things. The map opens with a similar zoom out effect, if I am not mistaken, the letterbox dialogues appeared in AOC earlier as well.
Personal Stories are the only thing that are like regular quests as you see in other MMO's. With the difference that your background will determine what kind of quests and stories involved you will encounter. The only thinig coming really close is the nighttime adventures in AoC.
In terms of content: if they manage to provide enough of these events for the game world (basically, so many that it keeps the game going), then it makes it a lot more interesting than the other two games. Or older MMORPGS, because this is a kind of dialectic synthesis of the two extreme other ideologies from before (procedular content and extreme directed content). Now that these things are technically possible online and graphically, which i guess, was an issue, developers can catch up and do the stuff they wanted to do for at least 10+ years (because all these neat ideas already existed back then in text form, and even more sophisitacted). This is clear win.
I feel that GW2 is in a line of great games that all did some cool stuff and brought some evolution to the genre. GW2 picks up the torch of public quests of Warhammer-Online who could only do quests that way because other games back to EQ and DAOC and WOW more recently added crucial elements to it etc.
I agree with that last conclusion, the Dynamic Events is the next, better step of Public Quests, better implemented by it being on a world scale and having lasting impact. Stormwatch' description and what I've seen so far from the videos is basically what I expected the Events to be, it sounds exciting.
Once again, I have to ask, if you don't find GW2 innovative at all, what MMO's do you find innovative? And do you actually have played and liked other current MMO's, because I've played a lot of them and can clearly see differences in mechanics.
If your goal is to say that people should not just follow all hype, be more sceptic not just accept blindly anything ANet is saying, then we get that, at least a number of people do and are sensible enough to keep following the videos and reports but only making up our mind finally when we can play the demo and experience for ourselves. You on the other hand seem as biased and determined to prove that GW2 is nothing new at all and just the same as the current MMO's.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Originally posted by PTED http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcDFbg2HC3w Here's a video that I'm watching now. It has an English voiceover and have so far gone through the weapon switching and one of the events.
ok, I see a lot of people flaming this poor guy. All he said was his opinion on the game and his opinion was pretty positive about it. I mean jeez , this game is subject to scrutiny just like all the other games on here , right?
EDIT, hmm I was confusing the OP with the guy on the top here, but anyhow the OP has some valid points.
Some peopel can't take evne the slightest negative comment toward GW2 on this forum...SW:TOR is fair game but GW2 is sacred.ArenaNet could release a video of thme shaking cardboard cut outs to represent gameplay and speak gibberish and people her ewoudl exclaim that it was fresh and innovative.Proof is not needed when blind faith is prevalent.
Now I personally found the video encouraging and it looked fun but would agree it in no way constitutes proof of anything Arenanet has expounded on in words only and the OPS hands on experience on the demo seems to soldiify that.Still even if it does turn out to be less innovative than is being expounded as long as it's fun and engaging I'll still give it a go and there's still a lot of time for ArenaNet to deliver the cheques their mouths are writing.
It was the same way when TOR information was first released up until they started releasing a lot more information and videos and people started getting tired of waiting. Then the trolls come out, and we'll see it for GW2 as well. As usual the truth is always in the middle between fanatics. These games will always be better then the most antagonistic troll tries to convince you it will, but it will never be as good as the most avid fanboy pretends it will be. If you are a regular gamer, these will just be good games, but nothing here gives me a shining example that TOR or GW2 will truly revolutionize gameplay for years to come. They may both be popular for many years to come, maybe even as popular as World of Warcraft if they play their cards right, but lets face it, WoW didn't revolutionize anything. Innovations and polish aside, neither will these upcoming games.
The best I can hope for is a solid, fun game on release.
That's because when things get too over hyped people get a lil tired of it. Now it's not TOR but it is this game being way over hyped and blown out of proportion as being something that might "Save" the MMORPG genre.
I'm just gonna sit back and wait and see what it really turns out to be before I reserve any judgement.
That's because when things get too over hyped people get a lil tired of it. Now it's not TOR but it is this game being way over hyped and blown out of proportion as being something that might "Save" the MMORPG genre.
I'm just gonna sit back and wait and see what it really turns out to be before I reserve any judgement.
You know the funny thing about this, is that the hype you (and others are referring to), is player generated. I'm not saying GW2 doesn't have hype, but if you look at what they are saying, they never claim they are going to 'save the industry', they do claim they want to change the way an MMO can be played.
The truly mind-boggling part is that now that we are seeing exactly what they have already promised, there are people who say 'man that's nothing new'. Even when shown, quite literally, how it differs from nearly every other MMO out there, it's still 'just minor changes'.
Now, I'm not saying the game is perfect, or for everyone; but to quote an earlier post "if that's not revolutionary, or at least evolutionary, then what is". It's like certain people got this concept in their head that an MMO was going to do everything and make them a sandwich to eat while playing it.
We're given pretty clear evidence that they are handling things quite a bit differently. Yes, there are similarities (you still have a character that you play, you still have armor & weapons, you still have skills and a map), but i think it can be called a fact that this game has new features. The only thing that should be debated on now is whether or not those new features look appealing to you.
I think it's kind of foolish to even rate an MMO as a 'savior' or 'messiah' for it's industry, especially when it's not even released yet. Those sort of critiques are always blown way out of proportion, and can only really be made after a game has released & had an impact (or lack thereof) on the industry.
That's because when things get too over hyped people get a lil tired of it. Now it's not TOR but it is this game being way over hyped and blown out of proportion as being something that might "Save" the MMORPG genre.
I'm just gonna sit back and wait and see what it really turns out to be before I reserve any judgement.
You know the funny thing about this, is that the hype you (and others are referring to), is player generated. I'm not saying GW2 doesn't have hype, but if you look at what they are saying, they never claim they are going to 'save the industry', they do claim they want to change the way an MMO can be played.
The truly mind-boggling part is that now that we are seeing exactly what they have already promised, there are people who say 'man that's nothing new'. Even when shown, quite literally, how it differs from nearly every other MMO out there, it's still 'just minor changes'.
Now, I'm not saying the game is perfect, or for everyone; but to quote an earlier post "if that's not revolutionary, or at least evolutionary, then what is". It's like certain people got this concept in their head that an MMO was going to do everything and make them a sandwich to eat while playing it.
We're given pretty clear evidence that they are handling things quite a bit differently. Yes, there are similarities (you still have a character that you play, you still have armor & weapons, you still have skills and a map), but i think it can be called a fact that this game has new features. The only thing that should be debated on now is whether or not those new features look appealing to you.
I think it's kind of foolish to even rate an MMO as a 'savior' or 'messiah' for it's industry, especially when it's not even released yet. Those sort of critiques are always blown way out of proportion, and can only really be made after a game has released & had an impact (or lack thereof) on the industry.
Your clear evidence isn't clear evidence though, it is grasping at straws by people who don't want to admit wrong in gw2.
It's pretty obvious how their game is really just a polishing up of already common features in other mmos, and the hype while it can be partially player generated, is due in large part to their articles and manifesto. They come off confident/arrogant as hell like their game is going to utterly blow people's minds, but nothing they have done is mindblowing, just decent polish. I mean often times dealing with a fanboy (i'm not naming names) is much like dealing with a fanatic from another walk in life. Not only do you need proof of your claims, which is fine, but they will scrutinize every little thing and try to bog you down with poorly constructed arguments. For example, it was clear in the demos and leaked videos that the event alerter functioned very similarly to what a gold exclamation mark does for a quest based mmorpg. However, despite the fact that it was very obvious from the footage, people were trying to scrutinize whether it functioned the way it did, and demanded screenshots. That is basically a classic case of denial when something is presented clearly to you and you have some sorta mental block on seeing it for what it actually is. I personally was not going to sit there screenshotting videos that everyone has access to and can clearly see. It is great that stormwatch's review covered it so clearly though but I wouldn't be surprised if people are still in denial about the functionality of the event alerter. I find it funny that anet is still misleading people, I recently read an interview where one of their devs was dogging on other mmorpgs and saying that their mmorpg would never have you collecting wolf tails. Yet instead they may have you collect harpy glands.
That's because when things get too over hyped people get a lil tired of it. Now it's not TOR but it is this game being way over hyped and blown out of proportion as being something that might "Save" the MMORPG genre.
I'm just gonna sit back and wait and see what it really turns out to be before I reserve any judgement.
You know the funny thing about this, is that the hype you (and others are referring to), is player generated. I'm not saying GW2 doesn't have hype, but if you look at what they are saying, they never claim they are going to 'save the industry', they do claim they want to change the way an MMO can be played.
The truly mind-boggling part is that now that we are seeing exactly what they have already promised, there are people who say 'man that's nothing new'. Even when shown, quite literally, how it differs from nearly every other MMO out there, it's still 'just minor changes'.
Now, I'm not saying the game is perfect, or for everyone; but to quote an earlier post "if that's not revolutionary, or at least evolutionary, then what is". It's like certain people got this concept in their head that an MMO was going to do everything and make them a sandwich to eat while playing it.
We're given pretty clear evidence that they are handling things quite a bit differently. Yes, there are similarities (you still have a character that you play, you still have armor & weapons, you still have skills and a map), but i think it can be called a fact that this game has new features. The only thing that should be debated on now is whether or not those new features look appealing to you.
I think it's kind of foolish to even rate an MMO as a 'savior' or 'messiah' for it's industry, especially when it's not even released yet. Those sort of critiques are always blown way out of proportion, and can only really be made after a game has released & had an impact (or lack thereof) on the industry.
Your clear evidence isn't clear evidence though, it is grasping at straws by people who don't want to admit wrong in gw2. It's pretty obvious how their game is really just a polishing up of already common features in other mmos, and the hype while it can be partially player generated, is due in large part to their articles and manifesto. They come off confident/arrogant as hell like their game is going to utterly blow people's minds, but nothing they have done is mindblowing, just decent polish. I mean often times dealing with a fanboy (i'm not naming names) is much like dealing with a fanatic from another walk in life. Not only do you need proof of your claims, which is fine, but they will scrutinize every little thing and try to bog you down with poorly constructed arguments. For example, it was clear in the demos and leaked videos that the event alerter functioned very similarly to what a gold exclamation mark does for a quest based mmorpg. However, despite the fact that it was very obvious from the footage, people were trying to scrutinize whether it functioned the way it did, and demanded screenshots. That is basically a classic case of denial when something is presented clearly to you and you have some sorta mental block on seeing it for what it actually is. I personally was not going to sit there screenshotting videos that everyone has access to and can clearly see. It is great that stormwatch's review covered it so clearly though but I wouldn't be surprised if people are still in denial about the functionality of the event alerter. I find it funny that anet is still misleading people, I recently read an interview where one of their devs was dogging on other mmorpgs and saying that their mmorpg would never have you collecting wolf tails. Yet instead they may have you collect harpy glands.
you never have evicence. so what are you talking about? you never make a clear case, and you always discredit everythign said by anyone who does not agree with you without backing it up.
That's because when things get too over hyped people get a lil tired of it. Now it's not TOR but it is this game being way over hyped and blown out of proportion as being something that might "Save" the MMORPG genre.
I'm just gonna sit back and wait and see what it really turns out to be before I reserve any judgement.
You know the funny thing about this, is that the hype you (and others are referring to), is player generated. I'm not saying GW2 doesn't have hype, but if you look at what they are saying, they never claim they are going to 'save the industry', they do claim they want to change the way an MMO can be played.
The truly mind-boggling part is that now that we are seeing exactly what they have already promised, there are people who say 'man that's nothing new'. Even when shown, quite literally, how it differs from nearly every other MMO out there, it's still 'just minor changes'.
Now, I'm not saying the game is perfect, or for everyone; but to quote an earlier post "if that's not revolutionary, or at least evolutionary, then what is". It's like certain people got this concept in their head that an MMO was going to do everything and make them a sandwich to eat while playing it.
We're given pretty clear evidence that they are handling things quite a bit differently. Yes, there are similarities (you still have a character that you play, you still have armor & weapons, you still have skills and a map), but i think it can be called a fact that this game has new features. The only thing that should be debated on now is whether or not those new features look appealing to you.
I think it's kind of foolish to even rate an MMO as a 'savior' or 'messiah' for it's industry, especially when it's not even released yet. Those sort of critiques are always blown way out of proportion, and can only really be made after a game has released & had an impact (or lack thereof) on the industry.
Your clear evidence isn't clear evidence though, it is grasping at straws by people who don't want to admit wrong in gw2. It's pretty obvious how their game is really just a polishing up of already common features in other mmos, and the hype while it can be partially player generated, is due in large part to their articles and manifesto. They come off confident/arrogant as hell like their game is going to utterly blow people's minds, but nothing they have done is mindblowing, just decent polish. I mean often times dealing with a fanboy (i'm not naming names) is much like dealing with a fanatic from another walk in life. Not only do you need proof of your claims, which is fine, but they will scrutinize every little thing and try to bog you down with poorly constructed arguments. For example, it was clear in the demos and leaked videos that the event alerter functioned very similarly to what a gold exclamation mark does for a quest based mmorpg. However, despite the fact that it was very obvious from the footage, people were trying to scrutinize whether it functioned the way it did, and demanded screenshots. That is basically a classic case of denial when something is presented clearly to you and you have some sorta mental block on seeing it for what it actually is. I personally was not going to sit there screenshotting videos that everyone has access to and can clearly see. It is great that stormwatch's review covered it so clearly though but I wouldn't be surprised if people are still in denial about the functionality of the event alerter. I find it funny that anet is still misleading people, I recently read an interview where one of their devs was dogging on other mmorpgs and saying that their mmorpg would never have you collecting wolf tails. Yet instead they may have you collect harpy glands.
you never have evicence. so what are you talking about? you never make a clear case, and you always discredit everythign said by anyone who does not agree with you without backing it up.
This goes back to the example of denial, you may not want to see it as evidence, because you think gw2 can do no wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that it is evidence.
For example my slam on the event alerter, the videos were my evidence, but there were some fans that did not want to accept what they saw in the videos, so they further demanded screenshots. The videos are already there, they are clear as day, you can see the event alerter pop up and mark nearby event locations for you, sorta like how quest givers in WoW will have gold exclamation marks on your radar. One thing smart people learn growing up is that you should not enable fanatical behavior. You need to learn when to move past certain types of people in favor of people that practice objective analysis.
@Robertdinh: I admit, I'm puzzled why you even post here.
While you claim you like to play GW2, I haven't even seen one post in which you were positive or enthusiastic about GW2, which is a strange way to behave for someone who's interested to learn more of a game in order to play it.
Furthermore you keep accusing anyone not agreeing with you to be blinded by fanboism, but you're making the same mistake by ignoring anything not conform your view of ANet and GW2, which in short seems to be "ANet is not to be trusted, they're lying to hype" and "GW2 offers nothing new and is the same as all the other current MMO's".
I agree that it's not healthy to just blindly follow any hype - better to gather more information but also play yourself in the beta to commit yourself - but in the same way it's not reasonable to discredit and discard anything positive regarding the MMO game you're following. At the least it's not the behaviour of someone who's interested in a game in order to play it, so I have to ask: if you find GW2 offering nothing special to your taste, then which MMO are you truly interested in or do you consider innovative, if not GW2?
For as for now to any objective observer, you're acting more the fanatic you're accusing so many others to be.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
You can not judge how innovative is the game based on couple of gameplay videos. All that you can see from gameplay videos is if the game has good animations, graphic, and if the imediate gameplay looks fun. All 3 are checked for GW2. And... To really feel the innovation in GW2 you will need to play it. And probably for several hours.
yet you troll the TOR forums going against what you just said...ironic....
That's cause gw2 can do no wrong but competition is the devil! On a more serious note (responding to the guy you quoted), yes being experienced with things is good, but at the same time people who have a wealth of experience already can quickly understand the mechanics of new things presented to them.
I do not need to use my mouse and keyboard personally to understand the vibe of a game. I can see event alerters, collection quests, unintuitive UIs, aion style animations, and that doesn't change the moment i'm the one playing and not just spectating.
I've never said the game wouldn't be fun, I just said it isn't anything aside from a few touchups on previous mmorpgs. No different than what wow did to the industry when it came out, except wow was better funded and had better hype. I'd also say what wow did to the industry is probably a much greater jump than what gw2 will do to the current industry, but that may be because wow was polishing upon a more archaic 1st generation set of mmorpgs, where gw2 is only polishing on games that are already going through extensive polish all the time.
Originally posted by cyphers
@Robertdinh: I admit, I'm puzzled why you even post here. While you claim you like to play GW2, I haven't even seen one post in which you were positive or enthusiastic about GW2, which is a strange way to behave for someone who's interested to learn more of a game in order to play it. Furthermore you keep accusing anyone not agreeing with you to be blinded by fanboism, but you're making the same mistake by ignoring anything not conform your view of ANet and GW2, which in short seems to be "ANet is not to be trusted, they're lying to hype" and "GW2 offers nothing new and is the same as all the other current MMO's".
I agree that it's not healthy to just blindly follow any hype - better to gather more information but also play yourself in the beta to commit yourself - but in the same way it's not reasonable to discredit and discard anything positive regarding the MMO game you're following. At the least it's not the behaviour of someone who's interested in a game in order to play it, so I have to ask: if you find GW2 offering nothing special to your taste, then which MMO are you truly interested in or do you consider innovative, if not GW2?
Being positive and enthusiastic is only good when it is objectively based. Doing it just to do it is sorta fanboyish. The problem is while people may understand the benefit of being objective and not blindly following hype and gathering information, if their lens is already tinted with fanboism then everything they see through that lens is already inaccurate because of their perception.
There is a difference between looking at something objectively, and just saying you are when your perspective is already skewed and distorts what you see. Sorta like how some people took anet's confidence in their manifesto as bold statements, while others seem to think that just because anet is confident it automatically means gw2 is god's gift to mmorpgs. Their logic being "if they are confident it must be because the game is so amazing that it makes them confident, so them being confident is proof that the game is amazing" Unfortunately logic doesn't work that way. As far as the current market goes there aren't really any innovative mmorpgs in development, they all play it safe and simply polish up on already successful formulas. Though I am seeing more of companies behaving like anet, promising you they got this groundbreaking mmorpg that doesn't settle for current industry standards and try to imply they go way above and beyond, but they are always pretty much playing it safe despite what they claim.
Nice story, but I still don't understand: why are you following GW2 if you see nothing in it that makes you enthusiastic about it? Is there even a MMO that you are enthusiastic about? You say that you find them all the same, nothing much difference between them, it sounds like you've dismissed them all as games you won't even consider to play.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Nice story, but I still don't understand: why are you following GW2 if you see nothing in it that makes you enthusiastic about it? Is there even a MMO that you are enthusiastic about? You say that you find them all the same, nothing much difference between them, it sounds like you've dismissed them all as games you won't even consider to play.
See this ties into my example of a lens and how a tinted lens can skew your perspective. I have clarified many times that gw2 will be fine for "casual fun" but it isn't going to be as groundbreaking and innovative as anet has claimed. Yet this is somehow interpreted as having zero enthusiasm for the game. Just because I can objectively identify that the game isn't going to live up to the dev created hype, doesn't mean there is no enthusiasm. The lens is tinted in this regard because people who are overzealous about gw2 think that if you don't just absolutely go wild about it like they do, you are at the opposite end of the spectrum. Sort of like a realist may seem pessimistic to an optimist, even if they are only really at a point of neutrality and equally as distant from pessimism as they are from optimism.
You can not judge how innovative is the game based on couple of gameplay videos.
All that you can see from gameplay videos is if the game has good animations, graphic, and if the imediate gameplay looks fun.
All 3 are checked for GW2.
And...
To really feel the innovation in GW2 you will need to play it. And probably for several hours.
yet you troll the TOR forums going against what you just said...ironic....
That's cause gw2 can do no wrong but competition is the devil! On a more serious note (responding to the guy you quoted), yes being experienced with things is good, but at the same time people who have a wealth of experience already can quickly understand the mechanics of new things presented to them. I do not need to use my mouse and keyboard personally to understand the vibe of a game. I can see event alerters, collection quests, unintuitive UIs, aion style animations, and that doesn't change the moment i'm the one playing and not just spectating. I've never said the game wouldn't be fun, I just said it isn't anything aside from a few touchups on previous mmorpgs. No different than what wow did to the industry when it came out, except wow was better funded and had better hype. I'd also say what wow did to the industry is probably a much greater jump than what gw2 will do to the current industry, but that may be because wow was polishing upon a more archaic 1st generation set of mmorpgs, where gw2 is only polishing on games that are already going through extensive polish all the time.
Originally posted by cyphers
@Robertdinh: I admit, I'm puzzled why you even post here.
While you claim you like to play GW2, I haven't even seen one post in which you were positive or enthusiastic about GW2, which is a strange way to behave for someone who's interested to learn more of a game in order to play it.
Furthermore you keep accusing anyone not agreeing with you to be blinded by fanboism, but you're making the same mistake by ignoring anything not conform your view of ANet and GW2, which in short seems to be "ANet is not to be trusted, they're lying to hype" and "GW2 offers nothing new and is the same as all the other current MMO's".
I agree that it's not healthy to just blindly follow any hype - better to gather more information but also play yourself in the beta to commit yourself - but in the same way it's not reasonable to discredit and discard anything positive regarding the MMO game you're following. At the least it's not the behaviour of someone who's interested in a game in order to play it, so I have to ask: if you find GW2 offering nothing special to your taste, then which MMO are you truly interested in or do you consider innovative, if not GW2?
Being positive and enthusiastic is only good when it is objectively based. Doing it just to do it is sorta fanboyish. The problem is while people may understand the benefit of being objective and not blindly following hype and gathering information, if their lens is already tinted with fanboism then everything they see through that lens is already inaccurate because of their perception. There is a difference between looking at something objectively, and just saying you are when your perspective is already skewed and distorts what you see. Sorta like how some people took anet's confidence in their manifesto as bold statements, while others seem to think that just because anet is confident it automatically means gw2 is god's gift to mmorpgs. Their logic being "if they are confident it must be because the game is so amazing that it makes them confident, so them being confident is proof that the game is amazing" Unfortunately logic doesn't work that way. As far as the current market goes there aren't really any innovative mmorpgs in development, they all play it safe and simply polish up on already successful formulas. Though I am seeing more of companies behaving like anet, promising you they got this groundbreaking mmorpg that doesn't settle for current industry standards and try to imply they go way above and beyond, but they are always pretty much playing it safe despite what they claim.
RobertDinh,
Oh dear....still on the attack eh? You are so critical against GW 2 now that you can't even see past that yourself, therefore you are no better than the fanboy. In ways I think it's worse. At least the fan-boy actually sees the positives, the hope and enjoyment to their tastes, what you are portraying here is that you would rather take the negatives and start off as the critical type. I certainly hope your attitude is not like this in how you lead your life.
As I said before, maybe you should take a break on trying to find out any new info on GW 2 since you have your own "lens" on now and it's clear you can't seem to see past it. You are animate that you think GW 2 is not revolutionary, rather just a touch-up on existing conventions. That is fine. But now it seems as though you are no longer trying to debate what it is that you think is not revolutionary about GW 2 but rather attempting to pull apart people's positive outlook on the game. I think deep down that you envy them. You envy them because they see an outlook that is one of enjoyment and hope which through your own doing ie beyond your reach. You really don't want people to be excited about a game do you??
I also laugh at your personal view on logic and how you say that your logic is more logical than others, yes logic really applies to people's emotions and feelings about a game am I right?
Comments
My sentiments as well. I can't make a true judgement call until I can get some hands on time. Be that as it may, I can form a base opinion upon what I have seen. I can say I am liking what I have seen the past day or so. The combat looks action packed and many of the systems seem to be in place.
I think the Buy 2 Play model is going to be extremely popular as well. Almost anyone can scrounge up $50 for a game, not every can afford the $15 per month, especially in these economic times. Even if the game has DLC like GW1 has, it will still be cheaper per year overall than a standard mmo subscription.
Also remember that when GW1 came out it seemed to have attracted many Diablo fans, especially since ANet was basically founded by Blizzard North (iirc). Now, mmorpgs are far more mainstream, and there are many more opportunities to attract potential buyers.
I really think ANet has the potential for a huge hit here, but they have to deliver the goods.
Anyway back to my original point, where is the mindblowing content that anet has talked up so much?
I'm just going to repeat what I wrote elsewhere on the topic:
Regarding 'quests' vs 'Dynamic Events':
- in most of the MMO's around, quests are being handled by finding your NPC, getting your quest that often means 'kill x of y' or 'get me these items' or 'go to that place', after which you get your reward. The quest text is meant to tell you why you are doing this and to add a bit of flavour. The world hasn't changed when you have finished your task, the next player will get the exact same quest to kill the guy you just killed, and all the quests are the same for everyone. In themepark MMO's you don't have to search for questgivers, they're easily recognisable by things like exclamation marks.
So, the features of most current MMO quests are:
- no staying impact on world after completion
- static quest NPC's
- quests starts when its NPC is found, and explanation is given by way of quest text
- only 1 resolution of the quest (besides abandoning quest)
- now Dynamic Events. Even when you wouldn't interfere, Events are happening and playing itself out. Instead of looking for quest NPC's, you see visual signs of what is happening, like instead of seeing a bunch of centaurs roaming around outside a city without effect as you see in other MMO's, with Events they actually invade the city. Events in contrast to quests have consequences, if you fail in your task it leads to one path changing the environment - for everyone - if you succeed it leads to another path changing the environment. And this result on the world doesn't change after 10 seconds as in other MMO's until a mob respawns or the next player gets the same quest you had. No, the effect stays while the event continues in its chain to another stage.
So, the features of a Dynamic Event are:
- staying impact until an Event stage or another player changes the situation
- dynamic nature, events are unfolding continuously, the 'world' is in motion and the events with it
- Events are ongoing with or without you, you can participate when you're near, visually you can see what is happening instead of having to read about it in quest text
- 2 (or more) resolutions to an event, pass or fail (besides abandoning)
There is no MMO at the moment that has those elements, most MMO's follow the quest mechanic as described in the 1st example.
Then we have the personal story quests: your background determines what quests you encounter in the instanced areas. One early example was that if you had chosen as background that you were nobleman then you had to help out a fellow nobleman near your house, had you chosen to be a commoner then you got into a gang fight near your house.
While not as revolutionary as Dynamic Events, most MMO's don't have that too.
As for how GW2 is different, to describe the other aspects takes too long. What could be seen from the vidoes is how polished in certain aspects GW2 already is. Animation and character creation looks good, other players roaming around and helping eachother out is seen working, Events are seen unfolding and the monster boss fights are looking spectacular and even while a large number of players is participating it all looks fluid and smooth.
All in all I'd say that if some might find that GW2 isn't revolutionary in its gameplay aspects, it certainly is evolutionary.
Besides that, if those aren't things you can get excited about in a MMO, then I'm wondering what actually you're looking for in your MMO.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I'm just going to repeat what I wrote elsewhere on the topic:
Regarding 'quests' vs 'Dynamic Events':
- in most of the MMO's around, quests are being handled by finding your NPC, getting your quest that often means 'kill x of y' or 'get me these items' or 'go to that place', after which you get your reward. The quest text is meant to tell you why you are doing this and to add a bit of flavour. The world hasn't changed when you have finished your task, the next player will get the exact same quest to kill the guy you just killed, and all the quests are the same for everyone. In themepark MMO's you don't have to search for questgivers, they're easily recognisable by things like exclamation marks.
So, the features of most current MMO quests are:
- no staying impact on world after completion
- static quest NPC's
- quests starts when its NPC is found, and explanation is given by way of quest text
- only 1 resolution of the quest (besides abandoning quest)
- now Dynamic Events. Even when you wouldn't interfere, Events are happening and playing itself out. Instead of looking for quest NPC's, you see visual signs of what is happening, like instead of seeing a bunch of centaurs roaming around outside a city without effect as you see in other MMO's, with Events they actually invade the city. Events in contrast to quests have consequences, if you fail in your task it leads to one path changing the environment - for everyone - if you succeed it leads to another path changing the environment. And this result on the world doesn't change after 10 seconds as in other MMO's until a mob respawns or the next player gets the same quest you had. No, the effect stays while the event continues in its chain to another stage.
So, the features of a Dynamic Event are:
- staying impact until an Event stage or another player changes the situation
- dynamic nature, events are unfolding continuously, the 'world' is in motion and the events with it
- Events are ongoing with or without you, you can participate when you're near, visually you can see what is happening instead of having to read about it in quest text
- 2 (or more) resolutions to an event, pass or fail (besides abandoning)
There is no MMO at the moment that has those elements, most MMO's follow the quest mechanic as described in the 1st example.
Then we have the personal story quests: your background determines what quests you encounter in the instanced areas. One early example was that if you had chosen as background that you were nobleman then you had to help out a fellow nobleman near your house, had you chosen to be a commoner then you got into a gang fight near your house.
While not as revolutionary as Dynamic Events, most MMO's don't have that too.
As for how GW2 is different, to describe the other aspects takes too long. What could be seen from the vidoes is how polished in certain aspects GW2 already is. Animation and character creation looks good, other players roaming around and helping eachother out is seen working, Events are seen unfolding and the monster boss fights are looking spectacular and even while a large number of players is participating it all looks fluid and smooth.
All in all I'd say that if some might find that GW2 isn't revolutionary in its gameplay aspects, it certainly is evolutionary.
Besides that, if those aren't things you can get excited about in a MMO, then I'm wondering what actually you're looking for in your MMO.
I'm looking for depth, innovation, and intuitive design, not bits of polish on already common features.How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
The demo only has so much to do, a lot of the footage is redundant. From what i've seen the combat has the same "feel" as aion. I am talking about animation and graphics here and if you can't see the similarities well your perspective may just be skewed (speaking in general not directly towards the post I quoted)What i've seen is polished and decent, but nothing innovative and mindblowing.
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
The demo only has so much to do, a lot of the footage is redundant. From what i've seen the combat has the same "feel" as aion. I am talking about animation and graphics here and if you can't see the similarities well your perspective may just be skewed (speaking in general not directly towards the post I quoted)
What i've seen is polished and decent, but nothing innovative and mindblowing.
How do you spot a Dynamic Event following a different path when you have only watched one side of it?
From what I can see, its all in the experience from playing it. All the reviews I've read have said its innovative and mindblowing.
This is not a game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcDFbg2HC3w Here's a video that I'm watching now. It has an English voiceover and have so far gone through the weapon switching and one of the events.
How much of the footage have you watched so far? There's around 2-3 hours worth of stuff that I've seen. Perhaps you'll spot something that you previously didn't.
The demo only has so much to do, a lot of the footage is redundant. From what i've seen the combat has the same "feel" as aion. I am talking about animation and graphics here and if you can't see the similarities well your perspective may just be skewed (speaking in general not directly towards the post I quoted) What i've seen is polished and decent, but nothing innovative and mindblowing.From what I can see, its all in the experience from playing it. All the reviews I've read have said its innovative and mindblowing.
They say that because they are biased, but they haven't actually proposed anything about the game that indicates so. Stormwatch had a very objective write-up. Also you may just be looking for positive reviews and downplaying any criticisms. Some people think anet can do no wrong.The criticisms were small and negligible. If it was something like combat was slow or cross proffesion combos didn't work then I'd be more inclined to be worried but none of those problems occured and everything they said they would have seems to be working fine.
I think what we may want to see more of is the enemy(possibly centaurs) setting up camp at a town and then watching players retake that town and push back the centaurs to their stronghold. GC is not over yet though, so that might still be in there somewhere. But as it is now, everything they promised is in the game.
This is not a game.
Funny that you say that. I went so far to quote Stormwatch' comments about his experiences, mind his quotes colored in red:
As Stormwatch elaborated:
I agree with that last conclusion, the Dynamic Events is the next, better step of Public Quests, better implemented by it being on a world scale and having lasting impact. Stormwatch' description and what I've seen so far from the videos is basically what I expected the Events to be, it sounds exciting.
Once again, I have to ask, if you don't find GW2 innovative at all, what MMO's do you find innovative? And do you actually have played and liked other current MMO's, because I've played a lot of them and can clearly see differences in mechanics.
If your goal is to say that people should not just follow all hype, be more sceptic not just accept blindly anything ANet is saying, then we get that, at least a number of people do and are sensible enough to keep following the videos and reports but only making up our mind finally when we can play the demo and experience for ourselves. You on the other hand seem as biased and determined to prove that GW2 is nothing new at all and just the same as the current MMO's.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Hey, robert, check out this video. I'm not sure if it disproves or proves your analysis, but it's pretty damn cool nonetheless:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnV9ESWqlOA&translated=1
And no, this is not spam. That is a GW2 video from gamescom
.
There's a version at http://vid.buffed.de/v/RzWLHLnrJwx/Guild-Wars-2/Wartower-Spotlight-GC-2010-Folge-1-neu/ that doesn't have half the screen blocked.
That's because when things get too over hyped people get a lil tired of it. Now it's not TOR but it is this game being way over hyped and blown out of proportion as being something that might "Save" the MMORPG genre.
I'm just gonna sit back and wait and see what it really turns out to be before I reserve any judgement.
"When it comes to GW2 any game is fair game"
You know the funny thing about this, is that the hype you (and others are referring to), is player generated. I'm not saying GW2 doesn't have hype, but if you look at what they are saying, they never claim they are going to 'save the industry', they do claim they want to change the way an MMO can be played.
The truly mind-boggling part is that now that we are seeing exactly what they have already promised, there are people who say 'man that's nothing new'. Even when shown, quite literally, how it differs from nearly every other MMO out there, it's still 'just minor changes'.
Now, I'm not saying the game is perfect, or for everyone; but to quote an earlier post "if that's not revolutionary, or at least evolutionary, then what is". It's like certain people got this concept in their head that an MMO was going to do everything and make them a sandwich to eat while playing it.
We're given pretty clear evidence that they are handling things quite a bit differently. Yes, there are similarities (you still have a character that you play, you still have armor & weapons, you still have skills and a map), but i think it can be called a fact that this game has new features. The only thing that should be debated on now is whether or not those new features look appealing to you.
I think it's kind of foolish to even rate an MMO as a 'savior' or 'messiah' for it's industry, especially when it's not even released yet. Those sort of critiques are always blown way out of proportion, and can only really be made after a game has released & had an impact (or lack thereof) on the industry.
You know the funny thing about this, is that the hype you (and others are referring to), is player generated. I'm not saying GW2 doesn't have hype, but if you look at what they are saying, they never claim they are going to 'save the industry', they do claim they want to change the way an MMO can be played.
The truly mind-boggling part is that now that we are seeing exactly what they have already promised, there are people who say 'man that's nothing new'. Even when shown, quite literally, how it differs from nearly every other MMO out there, it's still 'just minor changes'.
Now, I'm not saying the game is perfect, or for everyone; but to quote an earlier post "if that's not revolutionary, or at least evolutionary, then what is". It's like certain people got this concept in their head that an MMO was going to do everything and make them a sandwich to eat while playing it.
We're given pretty clear evidence that they are handling things quite a bit differently. Yes, there are similarities (you still have a character that you play, you still have armor & weapons, you still have skills and a map), but i think it can be called a fact that this game has new features. The only thing that should be debated on now is whether or not those new features look appealing to you.
I think it's kind of foolish to even rate an MMO as a 'savior' or 'messiah' for it's industry, especially when it's not even released yet. Those sort of critiques are always blown way out of proportion, and can only really be made after a game has released & had an impact (or lack thereof) on the industry.
Your clear evidence isn't clear evidence though, it is grasping at straws by people who don't want to admit wrong in gw2.It's pretty obvious how their game is really just a polishing up of already common features in other mmos, and the hype while it can be partially player generated, is due in large part to their articles and manifesto. They come off confident/arrogant as hell like their game is going to utterly blow people's minds, but nothing they have done is mindblowing, just decent polish. I mean often times dealing with a fanboy (i'm not naming names) is much like dealing with a fanatic from another walk in life. Not only do you need proof of your claims, which is fine, but they will scrutinize every little thing and try to bog you down with poorly constructed arguments. For example, it was clear in the demos and leaked videos that the event alerter functioned very similarly to what a gold exclamation mark does for a quest based mmorpg. However, despite the fact that it was very obvious from the footage, people were trying to scrutinize whether it functioned the way it did, and demanded screenshots. That is basically a classic case of denial when something is presented clearly to you and you have some sorta mental block on seeing it for what it actually is. I personally was not going to sit there screenshotting videos that everyone has access to and can clearly see. It is great that stormwatch's review covered it so clearly though but I wouldn't be surprised if people are still in denial about the functionality of the event alerter. I find it funny that anet is still misleading people, I recently read an interview where one of their devs was dogging on other mmorpgs and saying that their mmorpg would never have you collecting wolf tails. Yet instead they may have you collect harpy glands.
you never have evicence. so what are you talking about? you never make a clear case, and you always discredit everythign said by anyone who does not agree with you without backing it up.
You know the funny thing about this, is that the hype you (and others are referring to), is player generated. I'm not saying GW2 doesn't have hype, but if you look at what they are saying, they never claim they are going to 'save the industry', they do claim they want to change the way an MMO can be played.
The truly mind-boggling part is that now that we are seeing exactly what they have already promised, there are people who say 'man that's nothing new'. Even when shown, quite literally, how it differs from nearly every other MMO out there, it's still 'just minor changes'.
Now, I'm not saying the game is perfect, or for everyone; but to quote an earlier post "if that's not revolutionary, or at least evolutionary, then what is". It's like certain people got this concept in their head that an MMO was going to do everything and make them a sandwich to eat while playing it.
We're given pretty clear evidence that they are handling things quite a bit differently. Yes, there are similarities (you still have a character that you play, you still have armor & weapons, you still have skills and a map), but i think it can be called a fact that this game has new features. The only thing that should be debated on now is whether or not those new features look appealing to you.
I think it's kind of foolish to even rate an MMO as a 'savior' or 'messiah' for it's industry, especially when it's not even released yet. Those sort of critiques are always blown way out of proportion, and can only really be made after a game has released & had an impact (or lack thereof) on the industry.
Your clear evidence isn't clear evidence though, it is grasping at straws by people who don't want to admit wrong in gw2. It's pretty obvious how their game is really just a polishing up of already common features in other mmos, and the hype while it can be partially player generated, is due in large part to their articles and manifesto. They come off confident/arrogant as hell like their game is going to utterly blow people's minds, but nothing they have done is mindblowing, just decent polish. I mean often times dealing with a fanboy (i'm not naming names) is much like dealing with a fanatic from another walk in life. Not only do you need proof of your claims, which is fine, but they will scrutinize every little thing and try to bog you down with poorly constructed arguments. For example, it was clear in the demos and leaked videos that the event alerter functioned very similarly to what a gold exclamation mark does for a quest based mmorpg. However, despite the fact that it was very obvious from the footage, people were trying to scrutinize whether it functioned the way it did, and demanded screenshots. That is basically a classic case of denial when something is presented clearly to you and you have some sorta mental block on seeing it for what it actually is. I personally was not going to sit there screenshotting videos that everyone has access to and can clearly see. It is great that stormwatch's review covered it so clearly though but I wouldn't be surprised if people are still in denial about the functionality of the event alerter. I find it funny that anet is still misleading people, I recently read an interview where one of their devs was dogging on other mmorpgs and saying that their mmorpg would never have you collecting wolf tails. Yet instead they may have you collect harpy glands.you never have evicence. so what are you talking about? you never make a clear case, and you always discredit everythign said by anyone who does not agree with you without backing it up.
This goes back to the example of denial, you may not want to see it as evidence, because you think gw2 can do no wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that it is evidence.For example my slam on the event alerter, the videos were my evidence, but there were some fans that did not want to accept what they saw in the videos, so they further demanded screenshots. The videos are already there, they are clear as day, you can see the event alerter pop up and mark nearby event locations for you, sorta like how quest givers in WoW will have gold exclamation marks on your radar. One thing smart people learn growing up is that you should not enable fanatical behavior. You need to learn when to move past certain types of people in favor of people that practice objective analysis.
yet you troll the TOR forums going against what you just said...ironic....
@Robertdinh: I admit, I'm puzzled why you even post here.
While you claim you like to play GW2, I haven't even seen one post in which you were positive or enthusiastic about GW2, which is a strange way to behave for someone who's interested to learn more of a game in order to play it.
Furthermore you keep accusing anyone not agreeing with you to be blinded by fanboism, but you're making the same mistake by ignoring anything not conform your view of ANet and GW2, which in short seems to be "ANet is not to be trusted, they're lying to hype" and "GW2 offers nothing new and is the same as all the other current MMO's".
I agree that it's not healthy to just blindly follow any hype - better to gather more information but also play yourself in the beta to commit yourself - but in the same way it's not reasonable to discredit and discard anything positive regarding the MMO game you're following. At the least it's not the behaviour of someone who's interested in a game in order to play it, so I have to ask: if you find GW2 offering nothing special to your taste, then which MMO are you truly interested in or do you consider innovative, if not GW2?
For as for now to any objective observer, you're acting more the fanatic you're accusing so many others to be.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
yet you troll the TOR forums going against what you just said...ironic....
That's cause gw2 can do no wrong but competition is the devil! On a more serious note (responding to the guy you quoted), yes being experienced with things is good, but at the same time people who have a wealth of experience already can quickly understand the mechanics of new things presented to them.I do not need to use my mouse and keyboard personally to understand the vibe of a game. I can see event alerters, collection quests, unintuitive UIs, aion style animations, and that doesn't change the moment i'm the one playing and not just spectating.
I've never said the game wouldn't be fun, I just said it isn't anything aside from a few touchups on previous mmorpgs. No different than what wow did to the industry when it came out, except wow was better funded and had better hype. I'd also say what wow did to the industry is probably a much greater jump than what gw2 will do to the current industry, but that may be because wow was polishing upon a more archaic 1st generation set of mmorpgs, where gw2 is only polishing on games that are already going through extensive polish all the time.
Being positive and enthusiastic is only good when it is objectively based. Doing it just to do it is sorta fanboyish. The problem is while people may understand the benefit of being objective and not blindly following hype and gathering information, if their lens is already tinted with fanboism then everything they see through that lens is already inaccurate because of their perception.There is a difference between looking at something objectively, and just saying you are when your perspective is already skewed and distorts what you see. Sorta like how some people took anet's confidence in their manifesto as bold statements, while others seem to think that just because anet is confident it automatically means gw2 is god's gift to mmorpgs. Their logic being "if they are confident it must be because the game is so amazing that it makes them confident, so them being confident is proof that the game is amazing" Unfortunately logic doesn't work that way. As far as the current market goes there aren't really any innovative mmorpgs in development, they all play it safe and simply polish up on already successful formulas. Though I am seeing more of companies behaving like anet, promising you they got this groundbreaking mmorpg that doesn't settle for current industry standards and try to imply they go way above and beyond, but they are always pretty much playing it safe despite what they claim.
Nice story, but I still don't understand: why are you following GW2 if you see nothing in it that makes you enthusiastic about it? Is there even a MMO that you are enthusiastic about? You say that you find them all the same, nothing much difference between them, it sounds like you've dismissed them all as games you won't even consider to play.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
See this ties into my example of a lens and how a tinted lens can skew your perspective. I have clarified many times that gw2 will be fine for "casual fun" but it isn't going to be as groundbreaking and innovative as anet has claimed. Yet this is somehow interpreted as having zero enthusiasm for the game. Just because I can objectively identify that the game isn't going to live up to the dev created hype, doesn't mean there is no enthusiasm. The lens is tinted in this regard because people who are overzealous about gw2 think that if you don't just absolutely go wild about it like they do, you are at the opposite end of the spectrum. Sort of like a realist may seem pessimistic to an optimist, even if they are only really at a point of neutrality and equally as distant from pessimism as they are from optimism.RobertDinh,
Oh dear....still on the attack eh? You are so critical against GW 2 now that you can't even see past that yourself, therefore you are no better than the fanboy. In ways I think it's worse. At least the fan-boy actually sees the positives, the hope and enjoyment to their tastes, what you are portraying here is that you would rather take the negatives and start off as the critical type. I certainly hope your attitude is not like this in how you lead your life.
As I said before, maybe you should take a break on trying to find out any new info on GW 2 since you have your own "lens" on now and it's clear you can't seem to see past it. You are animate that you think GW 2 is not revolutionary, rather just a touch-up on existing conventions. That is fine. But now it seems as though you are no longer trying to debate what it is that you think is not revolutionary about GW 2 but rather attempting to pull apart people's positive outlook on the game. I think deep down that you envy them. You envy them because they see an outlook that is one of enjoyment and hope which through your own doing ie beyond your reach. You really don't want people to be excited about a game do you??
I also laugh at your personal view on logic and how you say that your logic is more logical than others, yes logic really applies to people's emotions and feelings about a game am I right?