Originally posted by Scalpless I agree with pretty much everything, except more Personal Story. PS is GW2's least innovative feature and I don't think it needs any more of it.
The personal story is probably the worst part of all of ANET's Innovations. But it's not really an innovation. It's really just the ugly side of one of ANET's better innovations. DE's are one of the best PVE mechanics GW2 offers. However, the heavy use of DEs has a down side. They really cannot be used to convey the lore that well. Although there are some dynamic events that do tell a story, (Malchor's Leap) being one, but it's a self contained story. Since they cannot be specifically chained in an order, DEs are just not an overall effective way to advance lore in a cohesive way. They cannot really advance your character into critical points in the game's development Getting specific quested gear items at specific times in a character's advancement. The personal story was their answer. To give players the option to do solo activiteis while at the same time advacne the game's Lore and even at a very personal level. Sounds great in theory, but execution left something to be desired.
To address the OP, I think there are 2 things ANET did wrong with this game.
1. It was far too ambitious. They tried to do far too many things at once. To step back and look at what they actually accomplished, they did an amazing job. But in the end, I feel they needed more time and they just didn't have it.
2. I personally felt GW2 is as influenced by WoW as any other. While everyone else was busy trying to replicate WoW, GW2 was trying to hard to not be WoW. Instead of making their own game and paving their own way, They intentionally chose or made a road that hadn't been traveled. Sounds great in theory, but, I think it's a direct contributor to my 1st opinion. It's clear there was an element of ex-WoW players they were targeting with Anti-WoW mechanics. Sure it works. But in some cases, I didn't feel like the trade off was actually better, just different. They re invented some wheels, but do they actually roll better? They could have taken some things that are known to work, refine them, hone them, make them work better then incorporate them.
They should have kept GW1 missions or at least the way missions cinematics and dialogues played.
Even then the first few personal stories, dealing with your character background and the land surroundings, are fine.
I actually enjoyed the personal story up through Claw Island. after that..................Yikes!
Op I agree I think the things you listed are things that need to change but I also feel that there is more as well to change. But you hit alot on the head. I don't want the trinity in the game cause it really does not need it with the way it is.
For WvWvW I would like it to where maybe if you control an area you get resources that you cant get anywhere else so you could in turn craft some different items like armor and weapons you can only get from those resources not like legendary just a different skin we can't get from PvE. Maybe make the quagian you get on your side more robust so you can decide which area they attack to help your group push in on an area then just sending a small pack of them in to fight. but yeah they could make it more robust or something.
For dungeons you are right change the theme from dps zerker only to more I dont know but more.
As for other things you hit the nail on it. And yeah theres alot more they could do to make it better from adding more weapon choice to adding more weapon skill chains.
As for the personal story yeah its not Lord of the rings epic but it works and hes right on this to the storys need to continue what about the fact as a sylvari you learn there could be other trees but nothing after that it gets dropped same with the asura stuff with many things they left alot of plot holes unfinished.
the first 20 levels of the story are fantastic after that you get in this almost mix matched story that leaves alot of holes that don't get filled but they could just add them in in living story maybe make them a on going thing in the living story one on each race class thing to even storys based on the 3 groups Order of Whispers to the Vigil they left holes in those stories as well what about your mentor we know they stay behind to fight but what else happens.
I also think they need to slowly work the hearts out of areas besides the 1-15 starter areas cause they don't add much flavor and they could make them more but why not just make them dynamic event's and then as for the DE's not having a reward yeah it could use some thing but not gear cause then it becomes the gear chase game.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
These 5 words (a shot in the dark) describe Guild Wars 2 better than most. "Good game," "bad game," and most other labels just don't suffice. They don't encompass the aspects that Guild Wars 2 sought to get right, which ones it actually did, where it has succeeded, where it has failed, or why.
Guild Wars 2 had nothing to steal from.
Unlike roughly 90% of the MMO market, Guild Wars 2 did not merely throw new wallpaper onto World of Warcraft. It's an entirely new creature - one that attempts to apply the principles that make Single Player RPG's overall superior to MMOs, while adding the social, large-scale aspect that makes the MMO genre worth playing.
Nothing of this sort had been seriously attempted before. Granted, there were failed attempts at Dynamic Events (Warhammer Online), but nothing on the scale of Guild Wars 2's concepts. And it wasnt just one core concept that they intended to innovate. The list includes (but isn't limited to):
Dynamic Events over traditional questing.
Coordinated 5 man dungeons over 40 man raids.
Removal of a HARD trinity - by giving all professions the ability to play all roles at the same time or in different builds, the hard trinity was exchanged for a soft one. This in particular is something that hadn't been done before (and certainly not to any significant degree) and this is where most criticism of the game is aimed.
Individual loot and resource nodes, instead of mob tagging / mob stealing mechanics.
Waypoints.
Removal or reduction of REQUIRED grind (but not optional grind).
Downed state.
And more.
All of this is quite significant, but what's your point.
What do you typically see from a new title in the MMO genre. New classes? They'll generally be extremely similar to ones that already exist, if not shamelessly identical. New art? Well, that's generally expected of any game. New lore? MMO lore is rarely emphasized and even more rarely interesting. One or two small, almost meaningless changes? Oh, yeah, those wings in Aion really change a lot, don't they. Well, not really. It's basically a mount (albeit a bit more fun) with ridiculous restrictions. The gameplay is still the same. The vast majority of the game is something you've probably already experienced dozens of times.
When you compare that to the wild attempts at innovation that Guild Wars 2 represented, it's clear which is more significant to the genre. Aion, Rift, and WildStar may be strong titles, but they don't stand out. They represent stagnation - a refusal to move forward because of the possibility of a misstep. It doesn't matter that something amazing, or even "perfect" could be waiting on the other side; the grass here is green, so why not enjoy it? Guild Wars 2, on the other hand, represents a bold attempt to move forward. There may be traps and pitfalls along the path, but the treasure at the end is worth it.
There are really only a handful of games in this genre.
There's World of Warcraft. There's a million free to play World of Warcraft clones that are all basically the same game (and thus ARE the same game). There's Eve online. And then there's Guild Wars 2. Am I leaving some noteworthy, semi-unique (or even unique) titles out? Probably, but you get my point. Most of the games in this genre aren't just derivative - they're outright redundant and unnecessary. Guild Wars 2 is an actual, unique game, rather than a poor re-skin of something that already exists in a better form.
You won't find this kind of redundancy in other genres. As much as shooters tend to be criticized for this, there are major, if subtle differences between each and every one. Halo is not Call of Duty which is not Battlefield which is not Unreal Tournament which is not Team Fortress 2 which is not Tribes and so on and so forth.
At their core, all WoW clones ARE just inferior versions of WoW.
If it's not broken, you're not innovating.
Innovation, while crucial for anything to move forward and progress, is rarely successful on its first attempt. Guild Wars 2's launch was merely the first attempt. In less than 2 weeks, it will hit its one year anniversary and progress into its second year. THIS is the time in which its potential must be realized and it must take major steps to fix its major issues to set the stage (or destroy the stage) for other games of its kind.
So what exactly is broken?
As is the case with any game (especially any vanilla MMO) a LOT. But these are the largest core issues:
Dungeon mechanics - overemphasis on dps.
Stale PvP - focus on Conquest style PvP was a bad idea from the start.
Overemphasis on zerging in WvW / Not enough incentive for split strategies or small group roaming.
Not enough skills, traits, and weapons to customize your character with.
Rewards issues - Dynamic Events aren't rewarding enough, and the effort vs. reward ratios for the different dungeons (and even paths within dungeons) just aren't anywhere near comparable.
Notice that I didn't list "lack of a trinity" as a core issue.
That's because it isn't one. It's a legitimate design choice that has potential pros and potential cons. Furthermore, it is NOT the cause of Guild Wars 2's gameplay problems.
So what is? Dungeon design. The Defiant/Unshakable buff on bosses needs to be reworked or completely removed for the control portion of the Damage/Support/Control soft trinity to work at all. There need to be more fights that involve steady enemy damage, as the current system of low sustained damage, with high burst damage only encourages glass cannon dps builds that use dodging, blocking, etc. to render tank and support gear pointless. Additionally, boss mechanics may need reworking to provide a wider variety of challenging content that demands more involved build changing and player adaptation.
Basically, the issue has never been that the game "lacks" a trinity. It's that the content fails to complement the system the game does have in place.
This is an entirely repairable issue - one that would NOT involve a complete restructuring of roles or a return to the trinity to fix.
The reason PvP has been dying is because Conquest is dull.
Can you name many good esport conquest games? I sure can't. In fact, I can't think of a single one.
League of Legends Dominion? It was initially popular, but now it basically only thrives because of the huge total community of the game. It's still an unpopular mode (by comparison) to Twisted Treeline or Summoner's Rift. Infinite Crisis ripped off of the Dominion map and the first demand of the community was a better map.
The Star Wars: Battlefronts series is arguably the best example of Conquest gameplay, but it's still not an esport, much less a huge one. It was fun. In fact, it was a lot of fun, but that's because it has a lot more depth than mere point capture. It was a real strategy game with a massive feel and fun gunplay.
Anything else? Not that I can think of. Conquest is rarely the main game mode for a reason. Why? Because it's repetitive and shallow when compared to most other PvP formats (with the only real exception being Deathmatch.) It actively encourages drawn out games, turtling/bunkering, and outright avoiding combat.
Arenanet can add on as many gimmicks as they want. Battle of Khylo may have a strategic trebuchet and Legacy of the Foefire may have a Guild Lord, but it's still the same basic Conquest map, just with different bells and whistles to play with.
What can Arenanet do to both stand out as a unique title and become a more impressive game?
Addition of Guild vs. Guild PvP or League of Legends/DotA style PvP. Shift in focus from Conquest to this mode.
Reworking of dungeon mechanics to better suit their soft trinity.
Reworking of rewards to encourage players to branch out, rather than concentrate in and farm certain areas.
Addition of more weapons, skills, and traits to all professions. Let no niche be unfilled and no aesthetic be unobtainable!
Addition of features that encourage smaller and more strategic WvW play. These could include additional goals, WvW rank skills that buff players when they are outnumbered, and other changes.
An extension on the personal story that happens after 80 and allows you to take huge turns (ie: continuing with the Pact or going off on your own).
Increased incentives for grouping and socialization. These could be as simple as higher rewards, more group-based achievements, and/or the inclusion of a team-oriented zone or two (Orr was intended to be this, but didn't go far enough with it and just wasn't fun in general).
What has Guild Wars 2 done that was just fundamentally.... right?
Individual loot and resource nodes. No more mob camping. No more mob tagging. No more cursing out every time another player enters the area you're farming.
The basis for adaptable team gameplay. While it certainly doesn't work perfectly, the foundation is there. Rather than mindlessly spamming a dps rotation on an enemy while two other players do the other 2/3rd of your job for you (aggro and healing), the soft-trinity ("no trinity"), if perfected, would greatly increase the amount of thought and judgment required to fit into a team.
Smaller dungeon groups. In a five man team, the impact of your actions is much higher and there is a much higher coordination requirement between each member - in theory. If Guild Wars 2 manages to fix their dungeon mechanics, it will be a much stronger system than the typical "you are an unimportant cog in a 40 man army" that has plagued the genre.
Downscaling. While being able to go back and one shot everything in a low level zone certainly has its merits, the downscaling system allows all content to be viable content. While Guild Wars 2 may only have 8 dungeons, that's 8 dungeons that are viable at max level - which is actually quite a bit more than most MMOs offer. Every location. Every zone. Every experience is viable at max level. And that's just..... amazing.
The cash shop. It is the perfect example of a non-invasive cash shop - the kind that should appear in more f2p and b2p games because it's just that good. No power selling. Cosmetics and convenience only. A number of fun little items. Everything obtainable with conversions from ingame currency. It just doesn't get any better.
Basically, Guild Wars 2 should be applauded, not frowned upon, for its innovations.
It's a breath of fresh air, even if the scent of it may not be to your particular liking. It has its market (as does the traditional MMO), and it still has a lot of potential, if Anet is able and willing to realize it. Most importantly, it's the first fundamentally NEW game the genre has seen in far too long.
It's easy to copy and paste. It's difficult to actually create something different and nearly impossible to make this difference work out immediately. Guild Wars 2 has a lot of issues (just like any other game), but it also makes a lot of legitimate and even great fundamental design decisions that have the potential to progress the genre more than any game has since WoW. And as the months pass, I predict that it will fix more and more of its core issues and we'll see something beautiful be produced as a result. And that's a good thing - because I for one was tired of playing bad re-textures of the same exact game for all these years.
You are kinda exaggerating/glorifying what gw2 has done as an mmo. The game wasn't really all that innovative and the #1 complaint I hear from people that didn't stick around was that the game was just way too easy and they got bored because of it.
When you make a game too easy you basically make any accomplishment feel less epic, and people get bored with that.
Nothing gw2 did hasn't been done in other mmos in the past, you may argue that their configuration of features is unique, but you can say that about any game, none of them are exactly identical to each other.
The PvP is lackluster, the PvE is lackluster... those are basically the 2 most important things in an mmo. All competitive pvpers knew conquest wouldn't be viable for a healthy competitive scene.
5 man dungeons were too easy, the less people you have in an encounter the less variables and tasks you can give the group to do to beat the encounter.
Personal story was kind of a gimmick... MMORPGs are supposed to be about massive players in a persistent world, I feel like all the resources used towards developing the personal story should have been allocated towards what MMOs are supposed to be about... Through internal QA there is no way they could have thought the personal story was amazing in their iteration of it.
Anyway GW2 didn't really try to be different, it was just marketed that way, just like every other MMO that comes out. It essentially tried to be the next wow, by seeing what current MMOs offered, and trying to make everything even more convenient. It should have learned from WoW, because WoW trapped itself by making the game too easy, and started hemorrhaging subscribers because they got bored quicker, as the game got easier.
Anyway GW2 didn't really try to be different, it was just marketed that way, just like every other MMO that comes out. It essentially tried to be the next wow, by seeing what current MMOs offered, and trying to make everything even more convenient. It should have learned from WoW, because WoW trapped itself by making the game too easy, and started hemorrhaging subscribers because they got bored quicker, as the game got easier.
These 5 words (a shot in the dark) describe Guild Wars 2 better than most. "Good game," "bad game," and most other labels just don't suffice. They don't encompass the aspects that Guild Wars 2 sought to get right, which ones it actually did, where it has succeeded, where it has failed, or why.
Guild Wars 2 had nothing to steal from.
Unlike roughly 90% of the MMO market, Guild Wars 2 did not merely throw new wallpaper onto World of Warcraft. It's an entirely new creature - one that attempts to apply the principles that make Single Player RPG's overall superior to MMOs, while adding the social, large-scale aspect that makes the MMO genre worth playing.
Nothing of this sort had been seriously attempted before. Granted, there were failed attempts at Dynamic Events (Warhammer Online), but nothing on the scale of Guild Wars 2's concepts. And it wasnt just one core concept that they intended to innovate. The list includes (but isn't limited to):
Dynamic Events over traditional questing.
Coordinated 5 man dungeons over 40 man raids.
Removal of a HARD trinity - by giving all professions the ability to play all roles at the same time or in different builds, the hard trinity was exchanged for a soft one. This in particular is something that hadn't been done before (and certainly not to any significant degree) and this is where most criticism of the game is aimed.
Individual loot and resource nodes, instead of mob tagging / mob stealing mechanics.
Waypoints.
Removal or reduction of REQUIRED grind (but not optional grind).
Downed state.
And more.
All of this is quite significant, but what's your point.
What do you typically see from a new title in the MMO genre. New classes? They'll generally be extremely similar to ones that already exist, if not shamelessly identical. New art? Well, that's generally expected of any game. New lore? MMO lore is rarely emphasized and even more rarely interesting. One or two small, almost meaningless changes? Oh, yeah, those wings in Aion really change a lot, don't they. Well, not really. It's basically a mount (albeit a bit more fun) with ridiculous restrictions. The gameplay is still the same. The vast majority of the game is something you've probably already experienced dozens of times.
When you compare that to the wild attempts at innovation that Guild Wars 2 represented, it's clear which is more significant to the genre. Aion, Rift, and WildStar may be strong titles, but they don't stand out. They represent stagnation - a refusal to move forward because of the possibility of a misstep. It doesn't matter that something amazing, or even "perfect" could be waiting on the other side; the grass here is green, so why not enjoy it? Guild Wars 2, on the other hand, represents a bold attempt to move forward. There may be traps and pitfalls along the path, but the treasure at the end is worth it.
There are really only a handful of games in this genre.
There's World of Warcraft. There's a million free to play World of Warcraft clones that are all basically the same game (and thus ARE the same game). There's Eve online. And then there's Guild Wars 2. Am I leaving some noteworthy, semi-unique (or even unique) titles out? Probably, but you get my point. Most of the games in this genre aren't just derivative - they're outright redundant and unnecessary. Guild Wars 2 is an actual, unique game, rather than a poor re-skin of something that already exists in a better form.
You won't find this kind of redundancy in other genres. As much as shooters tend to be criticized for this, there are major, if subtle differences between each and every one. Halo is not Call of Duty which is not Battlefield which is not Unreal Tournament which is not Team Fortress 2 which is not Tribes and so on and so forth.
At their core, all WoW clones ARE just inferior versions of WoW.
If it's not broken, you're not innovating.
Innovation, while crucial for anything to move forward and progress, is rarely successful on its first attempt. Guild Wars 2's launch was merely the first attempt. In less than 2 weeks, it will hit its one year anniversary and progress into its second year. THIS is the time in which its potential must be realized and it must take major steps to fix its major issues to set the stage (or destroy the stage) for other games of its kind.
So what exactly is broken?
As is the case with any game (especially any vanilla MMO) a LOT. But these are the largest core issues:
Dungeon mechanics - overemphasis on dps.
Stale PvP - focus on Conquest style PvP was a bad idea from the start.
Overemphasis on zerging in WvW / Not enough incentive for split strategies or small group roaming.
Not enough skills, traits, and weapons to customize your character with.
Rewards issues - Dynamic Events aren't rewarding enough, and the effort vs. reward ratios for the different dungeons (and even paths within dungeons) just aren't anywhere near comparable.
Notice that I didn't list "lack of a trinity" as a core issue.
That's because it isn't one. It's a legitimate design choice that has potential pros and potential cons. Furthermore, it is NOT the cause of Guild Wars 2's gameplay problems.
So what is? Dungeon design. The Defiant/Unshakable buff on bosses needs to be reworked or completely removed for the control portion of the Damage/Support/Control soft trinity to work at all. There need to be more fights that involve steady enemy damage, as the current system of low sustained damage, with high burst damage only encourages glass cannon dps builds that use dodging, blocking, etc. to render tank and support gear pointless. Additionally, boss mechanics may need reworking to provide a wider variety of challenging content that demands more involved build changing and player adaptation.
Basically, the issue has never been that the game "lacks" a trinity. It's that the content fails to complement the system the game does have in place.
This is an entirely repairable issue - one that would NOT involve a complete restructuring of roles or a return to the trinity to fix.
The reason PvP has been dying is because Conquest is dull.
Can you name many good esport conquest games? I sure can't. In fact, I can't think of a single one.
League of Legends Dominion? It was initially popular, but now it basically only thrives because of the huge total community of the game. It's still an unpopular mode (by comparison) to Twisted Treeline or Summoner's Rift. Infinite Crisis ripped off of the Dominion map and the first demand of the community was a better map.
The Star Wars: Battlefronts series is arguably the best example of Conquest gameplay, but it's still not an esport, much less a huge one. It was fun. In fact, it was a lot of fun, but that's because it has a lot more depth than mere point capture. It was a real strategy game with a massive feel and fun gunplay.
Anything else? Not that I can think of. Conquest is rarely the main game mode for a reason. Why? Because it's repetitive and shallow when compared to most other PvP formats (with the only real exception being Deathmatch.) It actively encourages drawn out games, turtling/bunkering, and outright avoiding combat.
Arenanet can add on as many gimmicks as they want. Battle of Khylo may have a strategic trebuchet and Legacy of the Foefire may have a Guild Lord, but it's still the same basic Conquest map, just with different bells and whistles to play with.
What can Arenanet do to both stand out as a unique title and become a more impressive game?
Addition of Guild vs. Guild PvP or League of Legends/DotA style PvP. Shift in focus from Conquest to this mode.
Reworking of dungeon mechanics to better suit their soft trinity.
Reworking of rewards to encourage players to branch out, rather than concentrate in and farm certain areas.
Addition of more weapons, skills, and traits to all professions. Let no niche be unfilled and no aesthetic be unobtainable!
Addition of features that encourage smaller and more strategic WvW play. These could include additional goals, WvW rank skills that buff players when they are outnumbered, and other changes.
An extension on the personal story that happens after 80 and allows you to take huge turns (ie: continuing with the Pact or going off on your own).
Increased incentives for grouping and socialization. These could be as simple as higher rewards, more group-based achievements, and/or the inclusion of a team-oriented zone or two (Orr was intended to be this, but didn't go far enough with it and just wasn't fun in general).
What has Guild Wars 2 done that was just fundamentally.... right?
Individual loot and resource nodes. No more mob camping. No more mob tagging. No more cursing out every time another player enters the area you're farming.
The basis for adaptable team gameplay. While it certainly doesn't work perfectly, the foundation is there. Rather than mindlessly spamming a dps rotation on an enemy while two other players do the other 2/3rd of your job for you (aggro and healing), the soft-trinity ("no trinity"), if perfected, would greatly increase the amount of thought and judgment required to fit into a team.
Smaller dungeon groups. In a five man team, the impact of your actions is much higher and there is a much higher coordination requirement between each member - in theory. If Guild Wars 2 manages to fix their dungeon mechanics, it will be a much stronger system than the typical "you are an unimportant cog in a 40 man army" that has plagued the genre.
Downscaling. While being able to go back and one shot everything in a low level zone certainly has its merits, the downscaling system allows all content to be viable content. While Guild Wars 2 may only have 8 dungeons, that's 8 dungeons that are viable at max level - which is actually quite a bit more than most MMOs offer. Every location. Every zone. Every experience is viable at max level. And that's just..... amazing.
The cash shop. It is the perfect example of a non-invasive cash shop - the kind that should appear in more f2p and b2p games because it's just that good. No power selling. Cosmetics and convenience only. A number of fun little items. Everything obtainable with conversions from ingame currency. It just doesn't get any better.
Basically, Guild Wars 2 should be applauded, not frowned upon, for its innovations.
It's a breath of fresh air, even if the scent of it may not be to your particular liking. It has its market (as does the traditional MMO), and it still has a lot of potential, if Anet is able and willing to realize it. Most importantly, it's the first fundamentally NEW game the genre has seen in far too long.
It's easy to copy and paste. It's difficult to actually create something different and nearly impossible to make this difference work out immediately. Guild Wars 2 has a lot of issues (just like any other game), but it also makes a lot of legitimate and even great fundamental design decisions that have the potential to progress the genre more than any game has since WoW. And as the months pass, I predict that it will fix more and more of its core issues and we'll see something beautiful be produced as a result. And that's a good thing - because I for one was tired of playing bad re-textures of the same exact game for all these years.
that's alot of text that doesn't say very much. I underlined the interesting bit
It takes time to build things. And you need to fail at things a long the way to get to a sweet spot. Because every game when they come goes through the same process. What separates the good from the bad is this. Who learned and fixed things and who didn't. For Anet's credit they actually do make valid attempts. And historically at an faster pace then anyone ever has.
Remember the days of blue posts and 6 months later that blue post finally made sense? Almost every company doesn't want to be "that" company now. But you have impatient people who constantly compare infant games to 10 year installments. Who failed the same or even worse in their days. Also whoever said AV used to be strat LMAO......Av from the very first day was who could ZERG faster harder and then who gave up zerging.
Only thing that breaks the zerg mentality is the "premade" mentality. Which is usually just a coordinated zerg instead of the mindless one. It wasn't intended to be that way but that's how it turned out. All these games try to make in depth play. But the communities dumb it down with ZERG mentalities. Don't blame the game creators for that blame the community. And it's almost impossible to stop that. You can give people the gold star depth of secret of the universe. And they will still drive a tank through it to the end game.
Comments
I actually enjoyed the personal story up through Claw Island. after that..................Yikes!
Op I agree I think the things you listed are things that need to change but I also feel that there is more as well to change. But you hit alot on the head. I don't want the trinity in the game cause it really does not need it with the way it is.
For WvWvW I would like it to where maybe if you control an area you get resources that you cant get anywhere else so you could in turn craft some different items like armor and weapons you can only get from those resources not like legendary just a different skin we can't get from PvE. Maybe make the quagian you get on your side more robust so you can decide which area they attack to help your group push in on an area then just sending a small pack of them in to fight. but yeah they could make it more robust or something.
For dungeons you are right change the theme from dps zerker only to more I dont know but more.
As for other things you hit the nail on it. And yeah theres alot more they could do to make it better from adding more weapon choice to adding more weapon skill chains.
As for the personal story yeah its not Lord of the rings epic but it works and hes right on this to the storys need to continue what about the fact as a sylvari you learn there could be other trees but nothing after that it gets dropped same with the asura stuff with many things they left alot of plot holes unfinished.
the first 20 levels of the story are fantastic after that you get in this almost mix matched story that leaves alot of holes that don't get filled but they could just add them in in living story maybe make them a on going thing in the living story one on each race class thing to even storys based on the 3 groups Order of Whispers to the Vigil they left holes in those stories as well what about your mentor we know they stay behind to fight but what else happens.
I also think they need to slowly work the hearts out of areas besides the 1-15 starter areas cause they don't add much flavor and they could make them more but why not just make them dynamic event's and then as for the DE's not having a reward yeah it could use some thing but not gear cause then it becomes the gear chase game.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
Channel:http://https//www.youtube.com/channel/UCrgYNgpFTRAl4XWz31o2emw
You are kinda exaggerating/glorifying what gw2 has done as an mmo. The game wasn't really all that innovative and the #1 complaint I hear from people that didn't stick around was that the game was just way too easy and they got bored because of it.
When you make a game too easy you basically make any accomplishment feel less epic, and people get bored with that.
Nothing gw2 did hasn't been done in other mmos in the past, you may argue that their configuration of features is unique, but you can say that about any game, none of them are exactly identical to each other.
The PvP is lackluster, the PvE is lackluster... those are basically the 2 most important things in an mmo. All competitive pvpers knew conquest wouldn't be viable for a healthy competitive scene.
5 man dungeons were too easy, the less people you have in an encounter the less variables and tasks you can give the group to do to beat the encounter.
Personal story was kind of a gimmick... MMORPGs are supposed to be about massive players in a persistent world, I feel like all the resources used towards developing the personal story should have been allocated towards what MMOs are supposed to be about... Through internal QA there is no way they could have thought the personal story was amazing in their iteration of it.
Anyway GW2 didn't really try to be different, it was just marketed that way, just like every other MMO that comes out. It essentially tried to be the next wow, by seeing what current MMOs offered, and trying to make everything even more convenient. It should have learned from WoW, because WoW trapped itself by making the game too easy, and started hemorrhaging subscribers because they got bored quicker, as the game got easier.
Indeed. Nothing to add to that.
that's alot of text that doesn't say very much. I underlined the interesting bit
also:
http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/08/16/guild-wars-2-claims-the-fastest-selling-mmo-of-all-time-title/
I sometimes make spelling and grammar errors but I don't pretend it's because I'm using a phone
It takes time to build things. And you need to fail at things a long the way to get to a sweet spot. Because every game when they come goes through the same process. What separates the good from the bad is this. Who learned and fixed things and who didn't. For Anet's credit they actually do make valid attempts. And historically at an faster pace then anyone ever has.
Remember the days of blue posts and 6 months later that blue post finally made sense? Almost every company doesn't want to be "that" company now. But you have impatient people who constantly compare infant games to 10 year installments. Who failed the same or even worse in their days. Also whoever said AV used to be strat LMAO......Av from the very first day was who could ZERG faster harder and then who gave up zerging.
Only thing that breaks the zerg mentality is the "premade" mentality. Which is usually just a coordinated zerg instead of the mindless one. It wasn't intended to be that way but that's how it turned out. All these games try to make in depth play. But the communities dumb it down with ZERG mentalities. Don't blame the game creators for that blame the community. And it's almost impossible to stop that. You can give people the gold star depth of secret of the universe. And they will still drive a tank through it to the end game.