Excellent poing, GW2 is a "game" that is doing things differently.
Unfortunately flattening out the progression curve and capping it basically makes it closer to Planetside than it is to literally every other MMORPG ever made previously.
Like I said, like its predesesor, it really is creating an entirely new category of MMO or its really the next evolution of the MMOFPS genre.
Hard to say it has anything to do with the FPS genre...
If anything it's more like a Zelda game with limited progression and "action based" combat.
I look at it as the progression of games like Diablo. Without the focus on trinkets..
Well, whatever you want to categorize it, it's not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition surrounding progression.
Perhaps its a MMOARPG (MMO Action Role Playing Game) or something similar.
Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO.
There was no gear progression either.
Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition?
Perhaps not, at least as commonly defined by the need for progression of character. Maybe it was the first MMOARPG?
But as I recall, you could skill train in UO (capped?) which is a form of progression.
And over time did UO evolve and allow further character progression?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
We get it, you need gears and numbers to hide behind. Some people just can't play games well, so they use all these unfair virtual protections. That's perfectly fine.
When you want to play a game that is about how a good player is and not how high his gear is, then you come play GW2. When you want to play your carebear hide behind gear games, stay away. It's that simple.
I'm sorry, I'm a big fan of the entire GW2 project but the more I read, watch, and hear from others this game will be as "carebear" as WoWs Cataclysm. It is turning into a huge MMODisneyland. I hope I'm wrong, and all the discussion here is just a big blur of a hellish forecast, but there is no RPG here. It's truly just a playland for either the pvp or pve players. I know there is way more, but that is "my" thoughts in a short paragraph.
Well to my taste, every single MMO PvE is carebear. I really hope you didn't think PvE in WoW or SWTOR or RIFT was challenging. It wasn't.
I use PvE as a means to have fun. I use PvP if I want something more challenging. You can forecast GW2 as carebear, thats fine. I have forecasted every MMO in the last ten years as carebears... I was right.
Notice though, I was speaking of PvP in my first post. PvP is not carebear if you are on even playing fields. Those are my thoughts, and I much respect your thoughts, as I to some degree agree that GW2 will be carebear.
No, I agree with your entire statement there. Glad to have a rebuke that isn't hateful and I agree with!
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
Perhaps its a MMOARPG (MMO Action Role Playing Game) or something similar.
That seems to sum it up pretty well.
So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story? Were all those great true role playing games under some people definition overall stuff like you character background, wasn't it part of the more traditional rpg?
Well of course a lot of lines (features) are being blurred, as is so often the case. Personal story is a relatively new addition to the genre. The great role playing games (in MMO space) let the players be the story makers, not the developers.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO.
There was no gear progression either.
Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition?
Perhaps not, at least as commonly defined by the need for progression of character. Maybe it was the first MMOARPG?
But as I recall, you could skill train in UO (capped?) which is a form of progression.
And over time did UO evolve and allow further character progression?
Them's fighting words!
I'd go as far to say UO has been one of perhaps a very few "true" MMORPG's because it was NOT all about progression through gear and levels.
If you every played UO you'd know there wasn't very much about it that would be considered "MMOARPG"
It was click to move and 2D isometric lol
Hate to say it Kyleran, nothing but respect, but your argument in this case is poppycock.
Well, whatever you want to categorize it, it's not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition surrounding progression.
Perhaps its a MMOARPG (MMO Action Role Playing Game) or something similar.
Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO.
There was no gear progression either.
Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition?
Was SWG?
SWG had very "light" gear progression and you didn't even gain any stats while "leveling" per say.
What? SWG was all about stats...no single factor contributed more to winning in PVP.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Perhaps its a MMOARPG (MMO Action Role Playing Game) or something similar.
That seems to sum it up pretty well.
So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story? Were all those great true role playing games under some people definition overall stuff like you character background, wasn't it part of the more traditional rpg?
Well of course a lot of lines (features) are being blurred, as is so often the case. Personal story is a relatively new addition to the genre. The great role playing games (in MMO space) let the players be the story makers, not the developers.
Ye, well the background is not and never was the character story.
I'm even more for sperating the two overall. Personally I'd love for PvE to be more diablo like with gear and PvP to stay the way it is now. Sort of bummed the gear/crafting for PvE seems to be something they carried over from GW1. A little boring, but that's me.
Well, whatever you want to categorize it, it's not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition surrounding progression. Perhaps its a MMOARPG (MMO Action Role Playing Game) or something similar.
Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO. There was no gear progression either. Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition? Was SWG? SWG had very "light" gear progression and you didn't even gain any stats while "leveling" per say.
What? SWG was all about stats...no single factor contributed more to winning in PVP.
Ye i had the exact same thought about Uo and GW2 progression systems, they are both very different, no wonder here, they are really miles away. Well somehow it seam like they both want to reach similar goals, naturally one is like 15 years older so Uo had other things to deal with, but still. Ye i had the same though as you BadSpock. Honestly i still think Uo system is smoother, more organic, and make more sense, less on the coding but more on the design side. But i personally see some similitude.
I really see the 3 sections of gw2 (pve/structured/WvW) as 3 different games combined.
I can't fathom how the pve side of gw2 isnt RPG in its true form. you start at level 1, therese ton's of progressions level, gear, stat wise. exploration mobs, dungeons personal story quest and so on.
I think of structured pvp as a stand alone moba put into the game. and lore wise makes sense, the mist is a portal to the past. They battle at kylo and otheres already took place, which is why your max level, you go into the past to fight as someone that's your class in a battle that already happend.
WvW being the same as the pve side just with fighting real people instead of only A.I if you go in at level 10 you may have the stats of a level 80 but you can still progress stat gear and level wise. as even though your level 80 stats it shows like this: (80) 10.
i really dont get how its not a mmorpg because you can't get new gear past the cap of max level 80 gear. but you do get better gear from 1-80.
Ye i had the exact same thought about Uo and GW2 progression systems, they are both very different, no wonder here, they are really miles away. Well somehow it seam like they both want to reach similar goals, naturally one is like 15 years older so Uo had other things to deal with, but still. Ye i had the same though as you BadSpock. Honestly i still think Uo system is smoother, more organic, and make more sense, less on the coding but more on the design side. But i personally see some similitude.
I am a firm believer that GW2 appears to have some of the same design principles, on a meta "grand idea" level as some of the older sandbox titles.
So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story?
What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.
So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story?
What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.
Don't worry there are plenty of rat killings in GW2, you won't be disappointed.
Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO.
There was no gear progression either.
Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition?
Perhaps not, at least as commonly defined by the need for progression of character. Maybe it was the first MMOARPG?
But as I recall, you could skill train in UO (capped?) which is a form of progression.
And over time did UO evolve and allow further character progression?
Them's fighting words!
I'd go as far to say UO has been one of perhaps a very few "true" MMORPG's because it was NOT all about progression through gear and levels.
If you every played UO you'd know there wasn't very much about it that would be considered "MMOARPG"
It was click to move and 2D isometric lol
Hate to say it Kyleran, nothing but respect, but your argument in this case is poppycock.
UO not about progression??
I don't know if we played the same game, but I remember standing in a wall of fire for like hours on end trying to get my magic resist to raise one point. Or grinding daemon after daemon trying to get enough gold for a house.
I mean, sure it had player made towns and a lot of social aspects. But all those social aspects were constructed by people buying houses with gold that they grinded for. In fact...UO was almost more "purely" about progression because there were no quests or story to speak of. It was basically, here you are, you've got these skills...raise them. You're poor...get money.
Anyway, I'm not trying to say that a game with progression is better than one without...I'm just clarifying what the RPG genre means. And well, RPGs have to have progression. If they don't, they aren't RPGs.
Take Zelda for example. It's got a story, puzzles, dungeons, fantasy theme, magic, etc. And yet, it's not and RPG, it's an "action-adventure" game. And I'm pretty sure the reason for this is that it doesn't really have much progression other than getting new items.
If Link "leveled up," I'm betting Zelda would be billed as an RPG.
Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO.
There was no gear progression either.
Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition?
Perhaps not, at least as commonly defined by the need for progression of character. Maybe it was the first MMOARPG?
But as I recall, you could skill train in UO (capped?) which is a form of progression.
And over time did UO evolve and allow further character progression?
Them's fighting words!
I'd go as far to say UO has been one of perhaps a very few "true" MMORPG's because it was NOT all about progression through gear and levels.
If you every played UO you'd know there wasn't very much about it that would be considered "MMOARPG"
It was click to move and 2D isometric lol
Hate to say it Kyleran, nothing but respect, but your argument in this case is poppycock.
UO not about progression??
I don't know if we played the same game, but I remember standing in a wall of fire for like hours on end trying to get my magic resist to raise one point. Or grinding daemon after daemon trying to get enough gold for a house.
I mean, sure it had player made towns and a lot of social aspects. But all those social aspects were constructed by people buying houses with gold that they grinded for. In fact...UO was almost more "purely" about progression because there were no quests or story to speak of. It was basically, here you are, you've got these skills...raise them. You're poor...get money.
Anyway, I'm not trying to say that a game with progression is better than one without...I'm just clarifying what the RPG genre means. And well, RPGs have to have progression. If they don't, they aren't RPGs.
Take Zelda for example. It's got a story, puzzles, dungeons, fantasy theme, magic, etc. And yet, it's not and RPG, it's an "action-adventure" game. And I'm pretty sure the reason for this is that it doesn't really have much progression other than getting new items.
If Link "leveled up," I'm betting Zelda would be billed as an RPG.
The similitudes i see are that you can go anywhere on the map, there is no level crap, you can play with any kind of friend and bring them anywhere or almost anywhere in Uo, this kind of stuff. Pvp toon were also fast to develop, maybe a week tops, ye resist magic was slow to gain but you could just go pvp with 50 and the rest maxed, because it was really the only pvp skill that was slow. But ye it wasn't the same system for sure, its just that the level less design have some similitude with GW2.
I thought mmorpgs were about progression, if I automatically wanted to get into the fray of things and have a game about 100% skill, wouldnt I play a twitched based FPS, mmorpgs should be 50% skill, 50% progression
Yes, the equal playing field concept is spooking a lot of people who depend on their superior grinding ability to overcome their opponents. It will be a rough ride for those whose skills are subpar.
I thought mmorpgs were about progression, if I automatically wanted to get into the fray of things and have a game about 100% skill, wouldnt I play a twitched based FPS, mmorpgs should be 50% skill, 50% progression
Yes, the equal playing field concept is spooking a lot of people who depend on their superior grinding ability to overcome their opponents. It will be a rough ride for those whose skills are subpar.
It will be a rougher ride for those whose "twitch" skills and latency are subpar.
Well, what I do know is that I'll be able to run through all the PvE content that I want, and then still be able to jump into PvP with both feet because there won't be ubergeared nerds to faceroll me. Anyone who does, I know will be a better player than me and deserves the victory. But I'm sure there are many who won't accept that and will instead choose to blame everything from lag to the phases of the moon on their inability to win in a fair fight.
Guild wars 2 is three games, three games, three games in one!
Well, sort of, but close enough.
Let's look at what happens after you create a character and decide to participate in the three seperate game zones:
I make a character named Honora, a level 1 Thief and enter the game world.
I do the tutorial zone and she reaches level 2 before transitioning into the main PVE game world.
I have three major game mode choices as soon as I arrive outside my racial capitol city.
Play and progress in the PVE world, which might entail exploration, dynamic events, tasks, personal story or a combination of the above. I can earn levels, gain loot, unlock trait points and unlock/earn skills. Progress here carries through into WvW as well, one character, two game modes.
I can head right to the portal into The Mists, and chose the portal that will take me to the World vs World zones. My true level is level 2, so I only have a few skills and pretty limited gear, but while I'm in World vs World my character's effective level is 80. I can earn XP and loot in World vs. World, so my character can progress entirely in WvW, if I want to. Progress in WvW does carry over into the PVE world.
I can also head right to Competative PVP. In CPVP, you basically get a doppleganger of your PVE character. Your true level becomes 80, you have access to all skills and traits and also have access to max stat gear, at no cost. Nothing you do here carries over into PvE or WvW. It's all about skill based PVP in arena combat. Some matches are casual, others will be part of formal tournaments. Ratings and rankings track the best players and players can unlock alternative armor looks, (there are hundreds of cosmetic armor pieces that can be unlocked for each armor class, so people can pursue a very individualized look).
I hope that clears things up a bit, while remaining simple enough to understand for those recent to following the game.
So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story?
What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.
Don't worry there are plenty of rat killings in GW2, you won't be disappointed.
Bad day with reading comprehension? There'll be plenty of killing but as far as the info goes you're not going to be asked kill ten rats, then kill 15 wolves, then ... etc. But the post was about how in MMO's you'll typically be doing the exact same thing as everybody else, which doesn't make it very personal, whereas GW2 seems to be offering more options to follow a path, a story, that is different for each pc.
So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story?
What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.
Don't worry there are plenty of rat killings in GW2, you won't be disappointed.
Bad day with reading comprehension? There'll be plenty of killing but as far as the info goes you're not going to be asked kill ten rats, then kill 15 wolves, then ... etc. But the post was about how in MMO's you'll typically be doing the exact same thing as everybody else, which doesn't make it very personal, whereas GW2 seems to be offering more options to follow a path, a story, that is different for each pc.
No i am very good at reading. And yes DE's are full of objectives where npc ask you to collect, kill and fetch x number of things. This picture explains it the best...
Comments
Perhaps not, at least as commonly defined by the need for progression of character. Maybe it was the first MMOARPG?
But as I recall, you could skill train in UO (capped?) which is a form of progression.
And over time did UO evolve and allow further character progression?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
No, I agree with your entire statement there. Glad to have a rebuke that isn't hateful and I agree with!
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
edited incomprehensible text
Well of course a lot of lines (features) are being blurred, as is so often the case. Personal story is a relatively new addition to the genre. The great role playing games (in MMO space) let the players be the story makers, not the developers.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Them's fighting words!
I'd go as far to say UO has been one of perhaps a very few "true" MMORPG's because it was NOT all about progression through gear and levels.
If you every played UO you'd know there wasn't very much about it that would be considered "MMOARPG"
It was click to move and 2D isometric lol
Hate to say it Kyleran, nothing but respect, but your argument in this case is poppycock.
What? SWG was all about stats...no single factor contributed more to winning in PVP.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Ye, well the background is not and never was the character story.
I guess I don't remember then.
I thought your health/action/mind bars were static no matter how high you leveled profs (except for doctor buffs of course)
I'm even more for sperating the two overall. Personally I'd love for PvE to be more diablo like with gear and PvP to stay the way it is now. Sort of bummed the gear/crafting for PvE seems to be something they carried over from GW1. A little boring, but that's me.
Most builds were based off stats received, like I took pistoleer as a third profession simply for the bonuses to dodge, knockdown and dizzy defenses.
Don't remember the term Defense stackers hehe? TKM master brawler sword was the most popular of those builds, all for the stats.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Mmm.. moist Teris Kasi masters...
damnit you changed it!
ROFL yeah, I almost didn't though, I knew that would get some attention :P/
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I really see the 3 sections of gw2 (pve/structured/WvW) as 3 different games combined.
I can't fathom how the pve side of gw2 isnt RPG in its true form. you start at level 1, therese ton's of progressions level, gear, stat wise. exploration mobs, dungeons personal story quest and so on.
I think of structured pvp as a stand alone moba put into the game. and lore wise makes sense, the mist is a portal to the past. They battle at kylo and otheres already took place, which is why your max level, you go into the past to fight as someone that's your class in a battle that already happend.
WvW being the same as the pve side just with fighting real people instead of only A.I if you go in at level 10 you may have the stats of a level 80 but you can still progress stat gear and level wise. as even though your level 80 stats it shows like this: (80) 10.
i really dont get how its not a mmorpg because you can't get new gear past the cap of max level 80 gear. but you do get better gear from 1-80.
I am a firm believer that GW2 appears to have some of the same design principles, on a meta "grand idea" level as some of the older sandbox titles.
Yeah, you know, like how GW1 was only good for the people who played GW0
What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.
Don't worry there are plenty of rat killings in GW2, you won't be disappointed.
UO not about progression??
I don't know if we played the same game, but I remember standing in a wall of fire for like hours on end trying to get my magic resist to raise one point. Or grinding daemon after daemon trying to get enough gold for a house.
I mean, sure it had player made towns and a lot of social aspects. But all those social aspects were constructed by people buying houses with gold that they grinded for. In fact...UO was almost more "purely" about progression because there were no quests or story to speak of. It was basically, here you are, you've got these skills...raise them. You're poor...get money.
Anyway, I'm not trying to say that a game with progression is better than one without...I'm just clarifying what the RPG genre means. And well, RPGs have to have progression. If they don't, they aren't RPGs.
Take Zelda for example. It's got a story, puzzles, dungeons, fantasy theme, magic, etc. And yet, it's not and RPG, it's an "action-adventure" game. And I'm pretty sure the reason for this is that it doesn't really have much progression other than getting new items.
If Link "leveled up," I'm betting Zelda would be billed as an RPG.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
The similitudes i see are that you can go anywhere on the map, there is no level crap, you can play with any kind of friend and bring them anywhere or almost anywhere in Uo, this kind of stuff. Pvp toon were also fast to develop, maybe a week tops, ye resist magic was slow to gain but you could just go pvp with 50 and the rest maxed, because it was really the only pvp skill that was slow. But ye it wasn't the same system for sure, its just that the level less design have some similitude with GW2.
Yes, the equal playing field concept is spooking a lot of people who depend on their superior grinding ability to overcome their opponents. It will be a rough ride for those whose skills are subpar.
Well, what I do know is that I'll be able to run through all the PvE content that I want, and then still be able to jump into PvP with both feet because there won't be ubergeared nerds to faceroll me. Anyone who does, I know will be a better player than me and deserves the victory. But I'm sure there are many who won't accept that and will instead choose to blame everything from lag to the phases of the moon on their inability to win in a fair fight.
Guild wars 2 is three games, three games, three games in one!
Well, sort of, but close enough.
Let's look at what happens after you create a character and decide to participate in the three seperate game zones:
I make a character named Honora, a level 1 Thief and enter the game world.
I do the tutorial zone and she reaches level 2 before transitioning into the main PVE game world.
I have three major game mode choices as soon as I arrive outside my racial capitol city.
Play and progress in the PVE world, which might entail exploration, dynamic events, tasks, personal story or a combination of the above. I can earn levels, gain loot, unlock trait points and unlock/earn skills. Progress here carries through into WvW as well, one character, two game modes.
I can head right to the portal into The Mists, and chose the portal that will take me to the World vs World zones. My true level is level 2, so I only have a few skills and pretty limited gear, but while I'm in World vs World my character's effective level is 80. I can earn XP and loot in World vs. World, so my character can progress entirely in WvW, if I want to. Progress in WvW does carry over into the PVE world.
I can also head right to Competative PVP. In CPVP, you basically get a doppleganger of your PVE character. Your true level becomes 80, you have access to all skills and traits and also have access to max stat gear, at no cost. Nothing you do here carries over into PvE or WvW. It's all about skill based PVP in arena combat. Some matches are casual, others will be part of formal tournaments. Ratings and rankings track the best players and players can unlock alternative armor looks, (there are hundreds of cosmetic armor pieces that can be unlocked for each armor class, so people can pursue a very individualized look).
I hope that clears things up a bit, while remaining simple enough to understand for those recent to following the game.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Bad day with reading comprehension? There'll be plenty of killing but as far as the info goes you're not going to be asked kill ten rats, then kill 15 wolves, then ... etc. But the post was about how in MMO's you'll typically be doing the exact same thing as everybody else, which doesn't make it very personal, whereas GW2 seems to be offering more options to follow a path, a story, that is different for each pc.
No i am very good at reading. And yes DE's are full of objectives where npc ask you to collect, kill and fetch x number of things. This picture explains it the best...