The thing here is that there are kinds 4 variables we should think about, games just ins't sandboxes or themeparks.
Player created content
Linear gameplay Non linear gameplay
Developer created content
GW2 is developer created content, so in that way it isn't a sandbox. On the other hand is most of the game non linear, the dynamic events appear depending a lot of factors, you just don't do a long questline and are then done with it like in a regular thempark, that aspect of the game is sandboxy. And even that is simplifying things.
The whole themepark or sandbox thing is a kinda simplified label , games are often more complicated than the 2 extremes, Vanguard also mixes things from both and so do a few other games including upcomming Archeage and The secret world.
GW2 is neither a sandbox or a themepark, or it is both. We really need better termology to describe the games that aren't extreme cases. Vanguard have been called "hybrid" but it is not really a good name either.
Hopefully will the thempark and sandbox termes be gone in a few years and replaced with some better terms.
I've read a bit about gw2 so far, although never that sticky (on my to do list now). Wonder why they decided to go 5 or so years at lvl20 in GW and then bump it all the way up to 80 in GW2.
I hope it will be a nice combo of themepark and sandbox. In regards to exploration, I understand from the devs that the reason they're not implementing mounts is because they want you to experience their world as massive as they have built it. Mounts (particularly flying ones) would subtract from that experience according to their opinion. From what I've heard and seen in interviews, the world is Massive - which would indicate that you indeed have a lot to explore there.
I've read a bit about gw2 so far, although never that sticky (on my to do list now). Wonder why they decided to go 5 or so years at lvl20 in GW and then bump it all the way up to 80 in GW2.
Well, GW2 will be a completely different game in than GW1 in many ways, including levels. I guess they wanted to adapt the levelling process to the content of the game, wishing to avoid grind and reppetitiveness. Even though there are 80 levels, there wont be a steep levelling curve, so there woun't be too much different getting from 20-30 to 60-70.
I've read a bit about gw2 so far, although never that sticky (on my to do list now). Wonder why they decided to go 5 or so years at lvl20 in GW and then bump it all the way up to 80 in GW2.
There was a discussion about it in a forum a long time ago, Jeff Strain himself made a few posts and at the time he considered a lot of different options including no levels and even unlimited level cap.
The reason GW1 had 20 levels and stuck with it is because of PvP balance. GW is the only well balanced MMO ever. Whenever games like Wow raise the levelcap they become totally unbalanced again and in many cases arn't the balancing even done when they raise it again.
The number 20 comes from D&D, you can have 1000 or 5 levels as well, it really doesn't matter that much. What matters is how long time it takes to max out.
I think GW2 choosed 80 levels because it is the most popular number, I also think they will stick with those levels for the games lifespan. They could as well had 20 levels, but if most of the players prefer to have more why not give them it?
The big difference here is that GW2 will have level requirement on gear, GW1 had stats reqs on some weapons, and even the toughest reqs could be reached at level 8 or so. Armors only needed some cash and mats, except the faction armors.
I've read a bit about gw2 so far, although never that sticky (on my to do list now). Wonder why they decided to go 5 or so years at lvl20 in GW and then bump it all the way up to 80 in GW2.
There was a discussion about it in a forum a long time ago, Jeff Strain himself made a few posts and at the time he considered a lot of different options including no levels and even unlimited level cap.
The reason GW1 had 20 levels and stuck with it is because of PvP balance. GW is the only well balanced MMO ever. Whenever games like Wow raise the levelcap they become totally unbalanced again and in many cases arn't the balancing even done when they raise it again.
The number 20 comes from D&D, you can have 1000 or 5 levels as well, it really doesn't matter that much. What matters is how long time it takes to max out.
I think GW2 choosed 80 levels because it is the most popular number, I also think they will stick with those levels for the games lifespan. They could as well had 20 levels, but if most of the players prefer to have more why not give them it?
The big difference here is that GW2 will have level requirement on gear, GW1 had stats reqs on some weapons, and even the toughest reqs could be reached at level 8 or so. Armors only needed some cash and mats, except the faction armors.
Another reason to change it is the commonly held perception that a level 20 cap was just too low, without realizing that capping in GW1 meant very little and didn't signal the beginning of the all important "END GAME". Years later, that misconception persists, and is often cited as a negative. Switching to 80 simply nullifies that initial hesitiation people might have over a low level cap, after becoming so well acquainted with it over the years with popular games like WoW. Bigger numbers (in terms of health, energy, damage, etc.) is also another way to make the game relatable to a new crowd of people.
If your looking for a ruthless fantasy PvP sandbox Darkfall is where you should go. It's funny they don't have the subs though, since it's the sandboxers dream.
If your looking for a ruthless fantasy PvP sandbox Darkfall is where you should go. It's funny they don't have the subs though, since it's the sandboxers dream.
It's more of a ganker's dream....sandbox isn't equal with open world full loot FFA PvP. There are a lot of sandbox players who are eagerly waiting for a great sandbox without forced PvP.
Guild Wars to is not a sandbox. No that doesn't not make it bad. People give the term "themepark" a negative connotation because some games have done a terrible job at it. But overall think about it this way: where would you rather spend you time? You can either go to a themepark or play in a sandbox. Now me personally, I'd rather go with the themepark. Besides, Guild Wars 2 isn't just a themepark. It's also a waterpark!!! Two for the price of 1.
Anyways, I'd advise you to research Guild Wars 2 on your own. Don't take the second-hand information from a bunch of forum members. Go to gaming sites, and look for articles. Go to arenanet's blog: www.arena.net/blog, go to the guild wars 2 website: www.guildwars2.com. Basically research it for yourself. None of us can tell you whether it sound interesting as we aren't you. And none of us can tell you if it's fun, as most of us have never played it. Those who have played the demo have generally gave positive reviews.
Let's put it this way, if the biggest complaint coming from the demos the first time players have actually played it are the energy potions, that's probably a good sign. I'm serious. After gamescom/pax last year, the biggest complaint people had were the potions. You really didn't hear people complain about other things. In fact most people said it was ~fun~. Yes fun, such a foreign concept in MMOs. Just those darn energy potions. Which Anet commented on the all the complaints and stated their reasoning for going with energy potions.
ArenaNet is a good company. They are quick to quell any serious confusion in the community, and they read the forum posts (yes even here). You generally don't hear from the developers, mostly the community managers. Also I should advise you to go look around www.guildwars2guru.com. ArenaNet does most of it's posting on guild wars 2 over there. It's sort of the de facto official forum.
The biggest problem? Jagex used to be a great company, after they started getting money... they slowly lost touch with players, becoming like those bigtime companies. ex. Activision, EA...
I don't want that to ever happen.
Also I'd like to see long stretches of normal player gameplay on this.. but I guess that won't happen right now ;D
And yes I'd research it, but it's better to ask questions because usually I can't find EXACTLY the answer to my question off a website as many of you know to be true.
Change your thoughts and you change your world. -
Norman Vincent Peale
The biggest problem? Jagex used to be a great company, after they started getting money... they slowly lost touch with players, becoming like those bigtime companies. ex. Activision, EA...
I don't want that to ever happen.
Also I'd like to see long stretches of normal player gameplay on this.. but I guess that won't happen right now ;D
And yes I'd research it, but it's better to ask questions because usually I can't find EXACTLY the answer to my question off a website as many of you know to be true.
I used to hate Jagex, until about 4 months ago. I think they realy shaped up with the return of the wilderness and free trade, and the finishing of so many forgotten sagas in questing.
As for the topic, the research would have been pretty basic and easy to do, but let me give you what I believe to be true, that being that it will be the best sandbox game yet, with some good themepark elements. Hope that helped.
Nothing like runes of magic, some aspects of a theme parkish game, no massive personal game changing impact and not a sand box. Guild Wars is a PvP game and will be picked up by all national E-Sports leagues for yearly championships and cash tournaments.
"Sometimes people say stuff they don''t mean, but more often then that they don''t say things they do mean"
I never got interested in PvP due to the unbalancing in games like Runes of Magic, but what about PvE players? No place for them? Or do we get the best of both worlds.
Change your thoughts and you change your world. -
Norman Vincent Peale
How can anyone say that GW2 is anything but pure themepark? It's about as themepark as a game can get, but in the best way possible.
It's themepark the way themepark is supposed to be done.
How many real themeparks have a guy standing right at the entrance telling you which ride to go on first, restricting your access to any other rides? There aren't quest-givers in GW2. When you enter each park (each zone), you can run off in any direction you like and visit any of the attractions (dynamic events) in whichever order you like. Watch the videos of starter human gameplay, running around the farmlands. "Oh hey, that ride looks like fun," is like, "Oh hey, bandits are attacking. This'll be fun."
Being non-linear doesn't make GW2 any less themepark.
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
I never got interested in PvP due to the unbalancing in games like Runes of Magic, but what about PvE players? No place for them? Or do we get the best of both worlds.
GW2 have plenty of PvE and you can avoid all PvP if you so wishes.
GW1 is BTW more or less the only balanced MMO PvP wise so it might be worth to try the PvP as well again, it will be very different to RoM.
I would say it is not a sandbox but not quite a pure themepark game since you can affect whats going on around you. Realistically though after time goes on you will see most of the events and it won't seem very dynamic at all unless they keep adding new ones. I hope they do to keep it fresh, which I am sure they will. I just don't think the dynamic content system alone can make it a sandbox game though. To me a sandbox game is when you truly have control over everything, not a predetermined path. (which events are essentially that except you sorta choose the path)
It certainly travels off the beaten path though. I would say they are trying to innovate on the themepark formula by making it more dynamic and less "grindy" through interesting gameplay elements and dynamic events.
Originally posted by assault3hro I never got interested in PvP due to the unbalancing in games like Runes of Magic, but what about PvE players? No place for them? Or do we get the best of both worlds.
The bulk of the game seems to be PvE, or at least PvE is the only thing they've shown us so far. The PvE things they've shown us so far are the story mode ("Personal story"), dynamic events, and dungeons. They've briefly discussed some of the PvP, which is structured PvP (arena-like) and World vs World vs World. WvWvW is somewhat of a hybrid of PvP and PvE. From the little they've told us, it seems similar to WAR's open world PvP.
It looks like giving players the best of both worlds is definitely one of their goals.
Originally posted by Loke666 GW1 is BTW more or less the only balanced MMO PvP wise so it might be worth to try the PvP as well again, it will be very different to RoM.
Calling GW PvP balanced is going to depend on your definition of "balanced" as much as calling GW an MMO is going to depend on your definition of "an MMO".
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
The bulk of the game seems to be PvE, or at least PvE is the only thing they've shown us so far. The PvE things they've shown us so far are the story mode ("Personal story"), dynamic events, and dungeons. They've briefly discussed some of the PvP, which is structured PvP (arena-like) and World vs World vs World. WvWvW is somewhat of a hybrid of PvP and PvE. From the little they've told us, it seems similar to WAR's open world PvP.
It looks like giving players the best of both worlds is definitely one of their goals.
Calling GW PvP balanced is going to depend on your definition of "balanced" as much as calling GW an MMO is going to depend on your definition of "an MMO".
That is because they only shows the stuff that is already implemented and in the game. PvP tends to be the last thing you complete.
Feel free to mention a online game with better balance, it is still far from perfect but it is the best there. Mostly because gear is balanced as well as the classes.
And yes, it is a CORPG but that doesn't really affect balance so I left that long discussion out.
Sadly you are probably right. I have absolutely no idea how the development process works for a huge game like this, but I have a feeling the PvE stuff takes way more time to develop. I mean, it is the base of the game. The hardest part about developing PvP is more about balance then anything else. I think once you have balance to "the point you want it to be" (since you can't have a truly balanced game really) then pvp systems can start getting put in. PvP systems are usually not very complex in nature and pretty open ended. Infact, the less complicated the better. As long as the developer can tweak the numbers once they get the system in it should not be difficult to make it better.
Makes you kinda wonder why most (all cept like 2?) MMOs that have come out since as far back as DAOC had virtually no Open World PvP system. All it really takes is a carrot on a stick to lure people out there.
Sadly you are probably right. I have absolutely no idea how the development process works for a huge game like this, but I have a feeling the PvE stuff takes way more time to develop. I mean, it is the base of the game. The hardest part about developing PvP is more about balance then anything else. I think once you have balance to "the point you want it to be" (since you can't have a truly balanced game really) then pvp systems can start getting put in. PvP systems are usually not very complex in nature and pretty open ended. Infact, the less complicated the better. As long as the developer can tweak the numbers once they get the system in it should not be difficult to make it better.
Makes you kinda wonder why most (all cept like 2?) MMOs that have come out since as far back as DAOC had virtually no Open World PvP system. All it really takes is a carrot on a stick to lure people out there.
It isn't that easy. Good open world PvP is the hardest thing you can make.
It needs to be fun and entertaining without making you loose 75% of the players due to extensive griefing.
No MMO have sadly really succeded in that. It is the reason that most FPS players prefer PvP but few MMO players do, FPS just make PvP a lot better than MMOs.
We need a new approach to PvP altogether and frankly are few MMOs particualrly new thinking. My best bet right now is WoDO.
DaoC is still the game with the best World PvP 8 years after release and that is kinda sad.
Originally posted by Loke666 That is because they only shows the stuff that is already implemented and in the game. PvP tends to be the last thing you complete.
And that is why I said "so far" all over my post.
Originally posted by Loke666 Feel free to mention a online game with better balance, it is still far from perfect but it is the best there. Mostly because gear is balanced as well as the classes. And yes, it is a CORPG but that doesn't really affect balance so I left that long discussion out.
An online game with better balance? Team Fortress 2. Super Street Fighter 4. I'm sure I could name many, many more if I needed to.
Balance in GW is hard to describe. Balanced in what regard? Are the skills balanced? The classes? The builds?
I'm not saying it's one way or the other, but it's very easy to argue in either direction.
There are hundreds of combinations that are useless. Many skills aren't used. Many class combinations are pointless. In this regard, it isn't balanced. There are too many options.
On the other hand, in high-level play, there a far less options. Once you know all the builds, you only choose from those builds, but those builds are balanced.
One could argue that MvC2 is balanced because the only teams that are used are balanced. It's more common to argue that because so many characters and teams are unused, the game isn't balanced.
Regardless, GW PvP is extremely hard to get into, much the opposite of what ANet is attempting with GW2. I'm not sure if even ANet considers GW1 to be balanced. It certainly isn't balanced to their satisfaction, which is why they are changing so much in GW2. Their new objective is to prevent "bad builds". In TF2, you can take any random loadout and still do well, although some combinations will suit certain players better than others. They're aiming to accomplish something like this in GW2.
EDIT: To add, for the OP, a lot of players consider GW1 to be balanced. A lot of other players and possibly ANet themselves don't. GW2 is supposed to be balanced enough for everyone. It is a very big priority.
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
Comments
The thing here is that there are kinds 4 variables we should think about, games just ins't sandboxes or themeparks.
Player created content
Linear gameplay Non linear gameplay
Developer created content
GW2 is developer created content, so in that way it isn't a sandbox. On the other hand is most of the game non linear, the dynamic events appear depending a lot of factors, you just don't do a long questline and are then done with it like in a regular thempark, that aspect of the game is sandboxy. And even that is simplifying things.
The whole themepark or sandbox thing is a kinda simplified label , games are often more complicated than the 2 extremes, Vanguard also mixes things from both and so do a few other games including upcomming Archeage and The secret world.
GW2 is neither a sandbox or a themepark, or it is both. We really need better termology to describe the games that aren't extreme cases. Vanguard have been called "hybrid" but it is not really a good name either.
Hopefully will the thempark and sandbox termes be gone in a few years and replaced with some better terms.
I've read a bit about gw2 so far, although never that sticky (on my to do list now). Wonder why they decided to go 5 or so years at lvl20 in GW and then bump it all the way up to 80 in GW2.
I hope it will be a nice combo of themepark and sandbox. In regards to exploration, I understand from the devs that the reason they're not implementing mounts is because they want you to experience their world as massive as they have built it. Mounts (particularly flying ones) would subtract from that experience according to their opinion. From what I've heard and seen in interviews, the world is Massive - which would indicate that you indeed have a lot to explore there.
Well, GW2 will be a completely different game in than GW1 in many ways, including levels. I guess they wanted to adapt the levelling process to the content of the game, wishing to avoid grind and reppetitiveness. Even though there are 80 levels, there wont be a steep levelling curve, so there woun't be too much different getting from 20-30 to 60-70.
There was a discussion about it in a forum a long time ago, Jeff Strain himself made a few posts and at the time he considered a lot of different options including no levels and even unlimited level cap.
The reason GW1 had 20 levels and stuck with it is because of PvP balance. GW is the only well balanced MMO ever. Whenever games like Wow raise the levelcap they become totally unbalanced again and in many cases arn't the balancing even done when they raise it again.
The number 20 comes from D&D, you can have 1000 or 5 levels as well, it really doesn't matter that much. What matters is how long time it takes to max out.
I think GW2 choosed 80 levels because it is the most popular number, I also think they will stick with those levels for the games lifespan. They could as well had 20 levels, but if most of the players prefer to have more why not give them it?
The big difference here is that GW2 will have level requirement on gear, GW1 had stats reqs on some weapons, and even the toughest reqs could be reached at level 8 or so. Armors only needed some cash and mats, except the faction armors.
Another reason to change it is the commonly held perception that a level 20 cap was just too low, without realizing that capping in GW1 meant very little and didn't signal the beginning of the all important "END GAME". Years later, that misconception persists, and is often cited as a negative. Switching to 80 simply nullifies that initial hesitiation people might have over a low level cap, after becoming so well acquainted with it over the years with popular games like WoW. Bigger numbers (in terms of health, energy, damage, etc.) is also another way to make the game relatable to a new crowd of people.
If your looking for a ruthless fantasy PvP sandbox Darkfall is where you should go. It's funny they don't have the subs though, since it's the sandboxers dream.
Archlinux ftw
It's more of a ganker's dream....sandbox isn't equal with open world full loot FFA PvP. There are a lot of sandbox players who are eagerly waiting for a great sandbox without forced PvP.
Guild Wars to is not a sandbox. No that doesn't not make it bad. People give the term "themepark" a negative connotation because some games have done a terrible job at it. But overall think about it this way: where would you rather spend you time? You can either go to a themepark or play in a sandbox. Now me personally, I'd rather go with the themepark. Besides, Guild Wars 2 isn't just a themepark. It's also a waterpark!!! Two for the price of 1.
Anyways, I'd advise you to research Guild Wars 2 on your own. Don't take the second-hand information from a bunch of forum members. Go to gaming sites, and look for articles. Go to arenanet's blog: www.arena.net/blog, go to the guild wars 2 website: www.guildwars2.com. Basically research it for yourself. None of us can tell you whether it sound interesting as we aren't you. And none of us can tell you if it's fun, as most of us have never played it. Those who have played the demo have generally gave positive reviews.
Let's put it this way, if the biggest complaint coming from the demos the first time players have actually played it are the energy potions, that's probably a good sign. I'm serious. After gamescom/pax last year, the biggest complaint people had were the potions. You really didn't hear people complain about other things. In fact most people said it was ~fun~. Yes fun, such a foreign concept in MMOs. Just those darn energy potions. Which Anet commented on the all the complaints and stated their reasoning for going with energy potions.
ArenaNet is a good company. They are quick to quell any serious confusion in the community, and they read the forum posts (yes even here). You generally don't hear from the developers, mostly the community managers. Also I should advise you to go look around www.guildwars2guru.com. ArenaNet does most of it's posting on guild wars 2 over there. It's sort of the de facto official forum.
Dont compare Runes of magic to GW2. =D
The biggest problem? Jagex used to be a great company, after they started getting money... they slowly lost touch with players, becoming like those bigtime companies. ex. Activision, EA...
I don't want that to ever happen.
Also I'd like to see long stretches of normal player gameplay on this.. but I guess that won't happen right now ;D
And yes I'd research it, but it's better to ask questions because usually I can't find EXACTLY the answer to my question off a website as many of you know to be true.
I used to hate Jagex, until about 4 months ago. I think they realy shaped up with the return of the wilderness and free trade, and the finishing of so many forgotten sagas in questing.
As for the topic, the research would have been pretty basic and easy to do, but let me give you what I believe to be true, that being that it will be the best sandbox game yet, with some good themepark elements. Hope that helped.
Newb= Newly Enrolled Wannabe Badass.
Well, most MMORPG's if not all today, are more of a burden before you ever have any fun.
Nothing like runes of magic, some aspects of a theme parkish game, no massive personal game changing impact and not a sand box. Guild Wars is a PvP game and will be picked up by all national E-Sports leagues for yearly championships and cash tournaments.
"Sometimes people say stuff they don''t mean, but more often then that they don''t say things they do mean"
I never got interested in PvP due to the unbalancing in games like Runes of Magic, but what about PvE players? No place for them? Or do we get the best of both worlds.
How can anyone say that GW2 is anything but pure themepark? It's about as themepark as a game can get, but in the best way possible.
It's themepark the way themepark is supposed to be done.
How many real themeparks have a guy standing right at the entrance telling you which ride to go on first, restricting your access to any other rides? There aren't quest-givers in GW2. When you enter each park (each zone), you can run off in any direction you like and visit any of the attractions (dynamic events) in whichever order you like. Watch the videos of starter human gameplay, running around the farmlands. "Oh hey, that ride looks like fun," is like, "Oh hey, bandits are attacking. This'll be fun."
Being non-linear doesn't make GW2 any less themepark.
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
GW2 have plenty of PvE and you can avoid all PvP if you so wishes.
GW1 is BTW more or less the only balanced MMO PvP wise so it might be worth to try the PvP as well again, it will be very different to RoM.
I would say it is not a sandbox but not quite a pure themepark game since you can affect whats going on around you. Realistically though after time goes on you will see most of the events and it won't seem very dynamic at all unless they keep adding new ones. I hope they do to keep it fresh, which I am sure they will. I just don't think the dynamic content system alone can make it a sandbox game though. To me a sandbox game is when you truly have control over everything, not a predetermined path. (which events are essentially that except you sorta choose the path)
It certainly travels off the beaten path though. I would say they are trying to innovate on the themepark formula by making it more dynamic and less "grindy" through interesting gameplay elements and dynamic events.
Less grind, less burden, more of an actual game! There are very few f**k*ng MMORPG's that are actually enjoyable throughout the majority of it.
The bulk of the game seems to be PvE, or at least PvE is the only thing they've shown us so far. The PvE things they've shown us so far are the story mode ("Personal story"), dynamic events, and dungeons. They've briefly discussed some of the PvP, which is structured PvP (arena-like) and World vs World vs World. WvWvW is somewhat of a hybrid of PvP and PvE. From the little they've told us, it seems similar to WAR's open world PvP.
It looks like giving players the best of both worlds is definitely one of their goals.
Oh yeah, and read this thread: Everything We Know about GW2.
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
Calling GW PvP balanced is going to depend on your definition of "balanced" as much as calling GW an MMO is going to depend on your definition of "an MMO".
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
That is because they only shows the stuff that is already implemented and in the game. PvP tends to be the last thing you complete.
Feel free to mention a online game with better balance, it is still far from perfect but it is the best there. Mostly because gear is balanced as well as the classes.
And yes, it is a CORPG but that doesn't really affect balance so I left that long discussion out.
Sadly you are probably right. I have absolutely no idea how the development process works for a huge game like this, but I have a feeling the PvE stuff takes way more time to develop. I mean, it is the base of the game. The hardest part about developing PvP is more about balance then anything else. I think once you have balance to "the point you want it to be" (since you can't have a truly balanced game really) then pvp systems can start getting put in. PvP systems are usually not very complex in nature and pretty open ended. Infact, the less complicated the better. As long as the developer can tweak the numbers once they get the system in it should not be difficult to make it better.
Makes you kinda wonder why most (all cept like 2?) MMOs that have come out since as far back as DAOC had virtually no Open World PvP system. All it really takes is a carrot on a stick to lure people out there.
It isn't that easy. Good open world PvP is the hardest thing you can make.
It needs to be fun and entertaining without making you loose 75% of the players due to extensive griefing.
No MMO have sadly really succeded in that. It is the reason that most FPS players prefer PvP but few MMO players do, FPS just make PvP a lot better than MMOs.
We need a new approach to PvP altogether and frankly are few MMOs particualrly new thinking. My best bet right now is WoDO.
DaoC is still the game with the best World PvP 8 years after release and that is kinda sad.
And that is why I said "so far" all over my post.
An online game with better balance? Team Fortress 2. Super Street Fighter 4. I'm sure I could name many, many more if I needed to.
Balance in GW is hard to describe. Balanced in what regard? Are the skills balanced? The classes? The builds?
I'm not saying it's one way or the other, but it's very easy to argue in either direction.
There are hundreds of combinations that are useless. Many skills aren't used. Many class combinations are pointless. In this regard, it isn't balanced. There are too many options.
On the other hand, in high-level play, there a far less options. Once you know all the builds, you only choose from those builds, but those builds are balanced.
One could argue that MvC2 is balanced because the only teams that are used are balanced. It's more common to argue that because so many characters and teams are unused, the game isn't balanced.
Regardless, GW PvP is extremely hard to get into, much the opposite of what ANet is attempting with GW2. I'm not sure if even ANet considers GW1 to be balanced. It certainly isn't balanced to their satisfaction, which is why they are changing so much in GW2. Their new objective is to prevent "bad builds". In TF2, you can take any random loadout and still do well, although some combinations will suit certain players better than others. They're aiming to accomplish something like this in GW2.
EDIT: To add, for the OP, a lot of players consider GW1 to be balanced. A lot of other players and possibly ANet themselves don't. GW2 is supposed to be balanced enough for everyone. It is a very big priority.
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss