I rather agree with you, it looked pretty MMO standard to me. I don't see much yet from this video or other videos of gameplay that reallymake it all that revolutionary or extraoirdinary. Maybe being able to physically play it in beta or something will change my perspective on it.
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
I rather agree with you, it looked pretty MMO standard to me. I don't see much yet from this video or other videos of gameplay that reallymake it all that revolutionary or extraoirdinary. Maybe being able to physically play it in beta or something will change my perspective on it.
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
Still it looks very "WoW-ish" in combat. But GW2 fans love to point out how other games aren't innovative. The PvE here is pushing a bunch of hotkeys... And joining public quests that are visible in the upper right panel...
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
Still it looks very "WoW-ish" in combat. But GW2 fans love to point out how other games aren't innovative. The PvE here is pushing a bunch of hotkeys... And joining public quests that are visible in the upper right panel...
Well two things...
First, I think it's all relative. If you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Street Fighter, then yeah...it's pretty similar to WoW. But if you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Rift and Aion, then I think it may seem significantly different from WoW.
Second, I can't be sure until I play the game, but from what I've heard...combat in GW2 is supposed to involve a lot more "active" movement and dynamic switching of abilities than other WoW and its clones. Basically in WoW, if you were a healer in a group, you healed. That's what you did. You either healed or ran around frantically if you were getting wiped.
In GW2, everyone will be capable of healing, tanking, and DPSing in any given fight; but not all at the same time. If the guy tanking is getting hammered and you're an elementalist, you can switch to earth attunement and tank for a bit while he recovers. If you were trying to heal and support but your group just can't do enough damage, you could switch weapons and go DPS.
The fact that you can and are encouraged to actively switch roles in combat, makes the combat different from WoW.
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
Still it looks very "WoW-ish" in combat. But GW2 fans love to point out how other games aren't innovative. The PvE here is pushing a bunch of hotkeys... And joining public quests that are visible in the upper right panel...
Well two things...
First, I think it's all relative. If you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Street Fighter, then yeah...it's pretty similar to WoW. But if you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Rift and Aion, then I think it may seem significantly different from WoW.
Second, I can't be sure until I play the game, but from what I've heard...combat in GW2 is supposed to involve a lot more "active" movement and dynamic switching of abilities than other WoW and its clones. Basically in WoW, if you were a healer in a group, you healed. That's what you did. You either healed or ran around frantically if you were getting wiped.
In GW2, everyone will be capable of healing, tanking, and DPSing in any given fight; but not all at the same time. If the guy tanking is getting hammered and you're an elementalist, you can switch to earth attunement and tank for a bit while he recovers. If you were trying to heal and support but your group just can't do enough damage, you could switch weapons and go DPS.
The fact that you can and are encouraged to actively switch roles in combat, makes the combat different from WoW.
Thank gawd for the shift in paradigm from rigid class roles to a more realistic one. Very few of us in real life are good or even excellent at only one given task, we have many talents and are capable of doing many things well. Why we have put up with such rigid roles in games that are suppose to be entertaining is one of the reasons why I hated the old games and have been hopeful about the evolution of the genre.
I rather agree with you, it looked pretty MMO standard to me. I don't see much yet from this video or other videos of gameplay that reallymake it all that revolutionary or extraoirdinary. Maybe being able to physically play it in beta or something will change my perspective on it.
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
Still it looks very "WoW-ish" in combat. But GW2 fans love to point out how other games aren't innovative. The PvE here is pushing a bunch of hotkeys... And joining public quests that are visible in the upper right panel...
Well that's due to technical limitation. Generally you can have 3 types of combat. 1 is pure hotkey (WoW, EQ, and it's ilk), 2 is a pure action combat based on click-combos (Vindictus), and third is a mix of two styles. You have hotkeys for skills rather than combos, but your skills can hit in arcs in front of you, they combat is much faster than pure hotkey based games, you have active dodge, you don't just stand in 1 place and spam your skills till the thing infront of you dies, you can move freely while casting and opt for maximum performance rather than being limited by tab target locks.
As for the whole joining public quests - those are pretty much The Quests. There doesn't really seem to be much of that really detached questing most of MMOs have where you run to NPC with ! above their head, and get a quest to kill 10 wolves 5 meters away without any impact on anything. You have events that happen and that have a branching progression paths. You fail a stage it reverts, fail enough the story changes and actually affects the surrounding.
If you opt to not kill 10 wolves in WoW, Rift, EQ or anything else you just maybe won't get next quest in chain, but that's about how far the consequences go. Isin't that what people were crying for all the time, saying they are sick of generic ! above head questing ?
And i'm not GW fanboi, i just know that making a combat against npcs fun is not really something you can do. It always will be predictable and dull after a while. No matter what the game is. RPGs, Brawlers, ARPGs, shooters ... after 2-3 hours it just repeating yourself. I'm moslty interested in GW2 due to competetive PvP system so tha's where my focus will be anyway, with enough PvE to support WvWvW and probably finish the story, because i'm one of those rare gamers that actually read/listen to quest texts.
I rather agree with you, it looked pretty MMO standard to me. I don't see much yet from this video or other videos of gameplay that reallymake it all that revolutionary or extraoirdinary. Maybe being able to physically play it in beta or something will change my perspective on it.
In any other MMORPG I've seen or played, a squishy rogue-like character have gotten chewed out by taking on more mobs than they can handle, yet GW2 allows a skilled player to handle such situations by avoiding damage completely. Personally I call such a possibility revolutionary, amongst the current batch tab-target MMOROGs.
No, I wouldn't call it revolutionary since there are a few MMOs that allow a rogue-like character to handle a mass of mobs. It might to be revolutionary to someone who isn't aware of those other examples though.
Then please show me an example of another MMORPG handling such a situation in the exact same way, because besides Tera Online, I can't think of any.
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
Still it looks very "WoW-ish" in combat. But GW2 fans love to point out how other games aren't innovative. The PvE here is pushing a bunch of hotkeys... And joining public quests that are visible in the upper right panel...
Well two things...
First, I think it's all relative. If you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Street Fighter, then yeah...it's pretty similar to WoW. But if you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Rift and Aion, then I think it may seem significantly different from WoW.
Second, I can't be sure until I play the game, but from what I've heard...combat in GW2 is supposed to involve a lot more "active" movement and dynamic switching of abilities than other WoW and its clones. Basically in WoW, if you were a healer in a group, you healed. That's what you did. You either healed or ran around frantically if you were getting wiped.
In GW2, everyone will be capable of healing, tanking, and DPSing in any given fight; but not all at the same time. If the guy tanking is getting hammered and you're an elementalist, you can switch to earth attunement and tank for a bit while he recovers. If you were trying to heal and support but your group just can't do enough damage, you could switch weapons and go DPS.
The fact that you can and are encouraged to actively switch roles in combat, makes the combat different from WoW.
All I'm going to say to that is, it all depends on how someone WANTS to play the game. Its obvious from many of the videos we've seen, you can easily play the game very very similarly to the way you play WoW. While class mechanics will work differently (you can't outright tank, you can't outright heal, etc.) the gameplay could be done similarly. Likewise in other titles coming out that shall not be named in this thread.
Mechanically, there are some steps forward here for GW2, but they aren't topical differences.. watching it from afar... well.. honestly to me its mundane... but so was another game I was looking forward to- one of which I've gotten to play and one of which I enjoyed immensely so --- while GW2 might not look starkly different, I have no misapprehensions that it will likely be a lot of fun to play.
I rather agree with you, it looked pretty MMO standard to me. I don't see much yet from this video or other videos of gameplay that reallymake it all that revolutionary or extraoirdinary. Maybe being able to physically play it in beta or something will change my perspective on it.
In any other MMORPG I've seen or played, a squishy rogue-like character have gotten chewed out by taking on more mobs than they can handle, yet GW2 allows a skilled player to handle such situations by avoiding damage completely. Personally I call such a possibility revolutionary, amongst the current batch tab-target MMOROGs.
No, I wouldn't call it revolutionary since there are a few MMOs that allow a rogue-like character to handle a mass of mobs. It might to be revolutionary to someone who isn't aware of those other examples though.
Then please show me an example of another MMORPG handling such a situation in the exact same way, because besides Tera Online, I can't think of any.
Phantasy Star Online, DCUO, FE, most real time sandbox games, hell, even in CoX you could herd and kite, you just had to use skills (blasters with caltrops were big back in the day).
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
WTF!? Didn't know TB was going to Eurogamer rofl! Sadly I didnt see him. Maybe he was there on Thurs only. I went there today and played the GW2 demo myself.
I have to say, I really enjoyed GW2. Especially the Sparkfly Fen encounter. And hey, what pvp!? There was no pvp available :S...
Colin Johanson sounds exactly the same IRL as he does in Videos. xD Felt like I was talking to a video at times. . Very well spoken guy, I must say! Then again thats his job!
Asura Greatsword Warrior FTW!!!
There were a lot of noobs playing. Luckily I played as soon as I entered. That way I was fighting Tequatl with the people from Arena Net instead of the noobs at the Expo . Sadly I couldn't divulge any info out of the guy I was speaking to, the german guy or Colin.
Currently waiting for the MMO industry to put out something good.
I rather agree with you, it looked pretty MMO standard to me. I don't see much yet from this video or other videos of gameplay that reallymake it all that revolutionary or extraoirdinary. Maybe being able to physically play it in beta or something will change my perspective on it.
In any other MMORPG I've seen or played, a squishy rogue-like character have gotten chewed out by taking on more mobs than they can handle, yet GW2 allows a skilled player to handle such situations by avoiding damage completely. Personally I call such a possibility revolutionary, amongst the current batch tab-target MMOROGs.
As a UO, EVE and AC player, I didn't really see anything revolutionary about the encounter as I was expecting 'more mobs than they can handle' to be a dozen or two mobs if not more, but the graphics were great, the animations looked cool and the movement looked very fluid.
Thanks for posting the link. I really liked that video.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The most limiting thing about the demo videos are the limits so many players are placing on themselves. It's easy to jump into Guild Wars 2 and play your character in the way you are used to playing MMO characters in other games. However, standing still spamming skills is not the best or most effective way to play GW2. It will take time for players to adjust and start to take full advantage of the way the game plays. That's why the first 20 levels of the game are a learning experience, on top of the fun content.
Hopefully, by the time most people reach level 20, they will have had ample opportunity to shed most of the bad habits they've carried over from other games. Even in a number of these 40 minute demos, we often see game play start to improve and adapt as players get further in, but there is only so much of that you can expect from 40 minutes of game play, when youn are talking about MMO gaming habits that have been formed over hundreds or thousands of hours of game play.
Thanks for the link, looking forward to the 2nd one (and however many others he has pending).
In response to a vocal few of you in this thread who are complaining about the game looking WoW-ish, or the same as all the other MMOs out there, I have a hard time taking you guys seriously anymore. Do you guys really not see how this is different? After basically being smacked in the face repeatedly with multiple examples?
Anet isn't claiming that everything is different, but they have been very vocal about where they have changed the dynamics of this game vs. others in design. For one, being very action-oriented is something that has only recently begun to pickup steam in the MMO community. While the closest games to this type of play are the hero games (CoX, CO, DCUO), they are very much not the same, and they play very differently. They all have similarities in that they are action oriented, but (with the exception of CoX & CO) they have very different combat mechanics. For one, dodging attacks doesn't really work the same way in those games.
One of the key reasons (see the posted thief gameplay video within this thread) that the thief is able to herd as many mobs is because of the dodge mechanic in this game. This isn't something you really see in other MMOs. Everything is range based, and dodging is determined by a dice roll, not active.
I could go into much greater detail on this, but pleanty have already have, on all revealed aspects of the game thus far. It's almost like seeing an MMO uses numbers and writing it off for that. I hate to say it, but I honestly don't see why you're still following it if you don't seem to be all that interested.
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
Still it looks very "WoW-ish" in combat. But GW2 fans love to point out how other games aren't innovative. The PvE here is pushing a bunch of hotkeys... And joining public quests that are visible in the upper right panel...
Well two things...
First, I think it's all relative. If you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Street Fighter, then yeah...it's pretty similar to WoW. But if you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Rift and Aion, then I think it may seem significantly different from WoW.
Second, I can't be sure until I play the game, but from what I've heard...combat in GW2 is supposed to involve a lot more "active" movement and dynamic switching of abilities than other WoW and its clones. Basically in WoW, if you were a healer in a group, you healed. That's what you did. You either healed or ran around frantically if you were getting wiped.
In GW2, everyone will be capable of healing, tanking, and DPSing in any given fight; but not all at the same time. If the guy tanking is getting hammered and you're an elementalist, you can switch to earth attunement and tank for a bit while he recovers. If you were trying to heal and support but your group just can't do enough damage, you could switch weapons and go DPS.
The fact that you can and are encouraged to actively switch roles in combat, makes the combat different from WoW.
But is that enough to differentiate it from WoW to the average person? I play games because of the total experience, not just because the combat is fun. Cuz really the games that focus on just combat bore me to tears. I know the developers have said story is a feature in GW2 but from what we've seen it's not very immersive. There's a location in the main city that changes based on your quest choices, and every now and then you get a cutscene with NPCs standing in one spot, with a a static 2d background.
There's a lot of quest text in some spots. And then at the other extreme you have quests where there is no quest text at all and very little voice over, you just go right into a quest and with an objective bar on the side of your screen. Some players like that in their gameplay but it's definitely more WoW-like than The Secret World in terms of questing and storytelling.
If anything it feels like GW2's strength is combat and PvP, which still has elements very similar to WoW.
The animations, graphics, and scale of the architecture is AMAZING. I'll probably buy the game, but will probably be playing most The Secret World and SWTOR for a story and immersion experience that's more different from WoW.
First, I think it's all relative. If you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Street Fighter, then yeah...it's pretty similar to WoW. But if you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Rift and Aion, then I think it may seem significantly different from WoW.
Second, I can't be sure until I play the game, but from what I've heard...combat in GW2 is supposed to involve a lot more "active" movement and dynamic switching of abilities than other WoW and its clones. Basically in WoW, if you were a healer in a group, you healed. That's what you did. You either healed or ran around frantically if you were getting wiped.
In GW2, everyone will be capable of healing, tanking, and DPSing in any given fight; but not all at the same time. If the guy tanking is getting hammered and you're an elementalist, you can switch to earth attunement and tank for a bit while he recovers. If you were trying to heal and support but your group just can't do enough damage, you could switch weapons and go DPS.
The fact that you can and are encouraged to actively switch roles in combat, makes the combat different from WoW.
But is that enough to differentiate it from WoW to the average person? I play games because of the total experience, not just because the combat is fun. Cuz really the games that focus on just combat bore me to tears. I know the developers have said story is a feature in GW2 but from what we've seen it's not very immersive. There's a location in the main city that changes based on your quest choices, and every now and then you get a cutscene with NPCs standing in one spot, with a a static 2d background.
There's a lot of quest text in some spots. And then at the other extreme you have quests where there is no quest text at all and very little voice over, you just go right into a quest and with an objective bar on the side of your screen. Some players like that in their gameplay but it's definitely more WoW-like than The Secret World in terms of questing and storytelling.
If anything it feels like GW2's strength is combat and PvP, which still has elements very similar to WoW.
The animations, graphics, and scale of the architecture is AMAZING. I'll probably buy the game, but will probably be playing most The Secret World and SWTOR for a story and immersion experience that's more different from WoW.
And yet, the funny thing is that those who are well informed and have been following GW2, will struggle to look at the features and say "It's just like WoW". WoW doesn't have dynamic questing that promotes exploration, WoW doesn't offer a fully voiced single player experience, WoW doesn't have scalable open-world content, WoW's PvP doesnn't put all players on a level playing field... I could just go on an on, yet you'll likely just reply with some weak strawman arguement, like saying that because NPCs provide players with the OPTION to talk to them it's just the same questing system as WoW.
Oh well... I never really replied to try and change your mind, since you are dead set on your idea that GW2 is just like WoW. I just find it quite amusing that you say the story of SW:TOR is enough to make it a completely different experience from WoW. Whereas GW2 is doing almost the same thing with it's personal story (and lots more) but in your eyes it's still a WoW clone.
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
Still it looks very "WoW-ish" in combat. But GW2 fans love to point out how other games aren't innovative. The PvE here is pushing a bunch of hotkeys... And joining public quests that are visible in the upper right panel...
Well two things...
First, I think it's all relative. If you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Street Fighter, then yeah...it's pretty similar to WoW. But if you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Rift and Aion, then I think it may seem significantly different from WoW.
Second, I can't be sure until I play the game, but from what I've heard...combat in GW2 is supposed to involve a lot more "active" movement and dynamic switching of abilities than other WoW and its clones. Basically in WoW, if you were a healer in a group, you healed. That's what you did. You either healed or ran around frantically if you were getting wiped.
In GW2, everyone will be capable of healing, tanking, and DPSing in any given fight; but not all at the same time. If the guy tanking is getting hammered and you're an elementalist, you can switch to earth attunement and tank for a bit while he recovers. If you were trying to heal and support but your group just can't do enough damage, you could switch weapons and go DPS.
The fact that you can and are encouraged to actively switch roles in combat, makes the combat different from WoW.
But is that enough to differentiate it from WoW to the average person? I play games because of the total experience, not just because the combat is fun. Cuz really the games that focus on just combat bore me to tears. I know the developers have said story is a feature in GW2 but from what we've seen it's not very immersive. There's a location in the main city that changes based on your quest choices, and every now and then you get a cutscene with NPCs standing in one spot, with a a static 2d background.
There's a lot of quest text in some spots. And then at the other extreme you have quests where there is no quest text at all and very little voice over, you just go right into a quest and with an objective bar on the side of your screen. Some players like that in their gameplay but it's definitely more WoW-like than The Secret World in terms of questing and storytelling.
If anything it feels like GW2's strength is combat and PvP, which still has elements very similar to WoW.
The animations, graphics, and scale of the architecture is AMAZING. I'll probably buy the game, but will probably be playing most The Secret World and SWTOR for a story and immersion experience that's more different from WoW.
I simply wonder why and since quest texts became something bad. If you are dyslectic I would understand it. Having seen videos from SWTOR beta, cutscenes for every kill 10 rats quests seem more annoying than helpfull.
Whatever happened to the cynical part of the cynical brit?
He is practically cheering out loud how much he loves everything about the game, even calling it the first Next Gen MMO.
Well that can only be a good thing:)
It is a good thing. And to be fair, he hasn't really bashed SWTOR either. He's said, on video, that both are good games, but that GW2 is what he (personally) is looking for in a game.
Hopefully the TOR fans can realize that this means that BOTH games are looking to be good in their own ways.
You really have to play the game to realize how innovative/fun/Kinda-out-of-the-box it is.
You really have to break the notion that you need to remain static in combat, and once you break free of those chains the game really changes (and there's not much footage [yet!] of people doing that).
Comments
Well we can always argue the semantics of revolutionary, but i'd say the mix of hotkey and action combat, the way the questing works, the impact of events on quests, the way you actually gain skills/spells and the PvP aspects are pretty ahead of the "generic" curve.
What you really expect so "new" from PvPe part of gameplay tho? It's not like gaming in general evolved that much since early 90ties in that regard. All that changes year after year is visuals and responsivness. Killing mobs always will feel repetetive and dull because that's not the reason you play the game, it's a filler content and a mean to advance your character.
Still it looks very "WoW-ish" in combat. But GW2 fans love to point out how other games aren't innovative. The PvE here is pushing a bunch of hotkeys... And joining public quests that are visible in the upper right panel...
Well two things...
First, I think it's all relative. If you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Street Fighter, then yeah...it's pretty similar to WoW. But if you compare combat in GW2 to combat in Rift and Aion, then I think it may seem significantly different from WoW.
Second, I can't be sure until I play the game, but from what I've heard...combat in GW2 is supposed to involve a lot more "active" movement and dynamic switching of abilities than other WoW and its clones. Basically in WoW, if you were a healer in a group, you healed. That's what you did. You either healed or ran around frantically if you were getting wiped.
In GW2, everyone will be capable of healing, tanking, and DPSing in any given fight; but not all at the same time. If the guy tanking is getting hammered and you're an elementalist, you can switch to earth attunement and tank for a bit while he recovers. If you were trying to heal and support but your group just can't do enough damage, you could switch weapons and go DPS.
The fact that you can and are encouraged to actively switch roles in combat, makes the combat different from WoW.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Thank gawd for the shift in paradigm from rigid class roles to a more realistic one. Very few of us in real life are good or even excellent at only one given task, we have many talents and are capable of doing many things well. Why we have put up with such rigid roles in games that are suppose to be entertaining is one of the reasons why I hated the old games and have been hopeful about the evolution of the genre.
Does look like next gen Guild wars/Themepark hybrid, a smart place to be. So far so good (but jury is still out)
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Well that's due to technical limitation. Generally you can have 3 types of combat. 1 is pure hotkey (WoW, EQ, and it's ilk), 2 is a pure action combat based on click-combos (Vindictus), and third is a mix of two styles. You have hotkeys for skills rather than combos, but your skills can hit in arcs in front of you, they combat is much faster than pure hotkey based games, you have active dodge, you don't just stand in 1 place and spam your skills till the thing infront of you dies, you can move freely while casting and opt for maximum performance rather than being limited by tab target locks.
As for the whole joining public quests - those are pretty much The Quests. There doesn't really seem to be much of that really detached questing most of MMOs have where you run to NPC with ! above their head, and get a quest to kill 10 wolves 5 meters away without any impact on anything. You have events that happen and that have a branching progression paths. You fail a stage it reverts, fail enough the story changes and actually affects the surrounding.
If you opt to not kill 10 wolves in WoW, Rift, EQ or anything else you just maybe won't get next quest in chain, but that's about how far the consequences go. Isin't that what people were crying for all the time, saying they are sick of generic ! above head questing ?
And i'm not GW fanboi, i just know that making a combat against npcs fun is not really something you can do. It always will be predictable and dull after a while. No matter what the game is. RPGs, Brawlers, ARPGs, shooters ... after 2-3 hours it just repeating yourself. I'm moslty interested in GW2 due to competetive PvP system so tha's where my focus will be anyway, with enough PvE to support WvWvW and probably finish the story, because i'm one of those rare gamers that actually read/listen to quest texts.
Then please show me an example of another MMORPG handling such a situation in the exact same way, because besides Tera Online, I can't think of any.
All I'm going to say to that is, it all depends on how someone WANTS to play the game. Its obvious from many of the videos we've seen, you can easily play the game very very similarly to the way you play WoW. While class mechanics will work differently (you can't outright tank, you can't outright heal, etc.) the gameplay could be done similarly. Likewise in other titles coming out that shall not be named in this thread.
Mechanically, there are some steps forward here for GW2, but they aren't topical differences.. watching it from afar... well.. honestly to me its mundane... but so was another game I was looking forward to- one of which I've gotten to play and one of which I enjoyed immensely so --- while GW2 might not look starkly different, I have no misapprehensions that it will likely be a lot of fun to play.
Phantasy Star Online, DCUO, FE, most real time sandbox games, hell, even in CoX you could herd and kite, you just had to use skills (blasters with caltrops were big back in the day).
Perhaps he is being sarcastic?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
That TotalBicuit is a nOOb playing this demo, I had to stop watching the video cuz the guy is just annoying.
WTF!? Didn't know TB was going to Eurogamer rofl! Sadly I didnt see him. Maybe he was there on Thurs only. I went there today and played the GW2 demo myself.
I have to say, I really enjoyed GW2. Especially the Sparkfly Fen encounter. And hey, what pvp!? There was no pvp available :S...
Colin Johanson sounds exactly the same IRL as he does in Videos. xD Felt like I was talking to a video at times. . Very well spoken guy, I must say! Then again thats his job!
Asura Greatsword Warrior FTW!!!
There were a lot of noobs playing. Luckily I played as soon as I entered. That way I was fighting Tequatl with the people from Arena Net instead of the noobs at the Expo . Sadly I couldn't divulge any info out of the guy I was speaking to, the german guy or Colin.
ahh pre-beta elitism, unusual.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
As a UO, EVE and AC player, I didn't really see anything revolutionary about the encounter as I was expecting 'more mobs than they can handle' to be a dozen or two mobs if not more, but the graphics were great, the animations looked cool and the movement looked very fluid.
Thanks for posting the link. I really liked that video.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I'd certainly love to see SpandexDroid's pro gameplay footage. Maybe he can give us noobs some pro-tips, on how to play this unreleased game. ^_^
Hahaha. That's funny right there.
The most limiting thing about the demo videos are the limits so many players are placing on themselves. It's easy to jump into Guild Wars 2 and play your character in the way you are used to playing MMO characters in other games. However, standing still spamming skills is not the best or most effective way to play GW2. It will take time for players to adjust and start to take full advantage of the way the game plays. That's why the first 20 levels of the game are a learning experience, on top of the fun content.
Hopefully, by the time most people reach level 20, they will have had ample opportunity to shed most of the bad habits they've carried over from other games. Even in a number of these 40 minute demos, we often see game play start to improve and adapt as players get further in, but there is only so much of that you can expect from 40 minutes of game play, when youn are talking about MMO gaming habits that have been formed over hundreds or thousands of hours of game play.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Thanks for the link, looking forward to the 2nd one (and however many others he has pending).
In response to a vocal few of you in this thread who are complaining about the game looking WoW-ish, or the same as all the other MMOs out there, I have a hard time taking you guys seriously anymore. Do you guys really not see how this is different? After basically being smacked in the face repeatedly with multiple examples?
Anet isn't claiming that everything is different, but they have been very vocal about where they have changed the dynamics of this game vs. others in design. For one, being very action-oriented is something that has only recently begun to pickup steam in the MMO community. While the closest games to this type of play are the hero games (CoX, CO, DCUO), they are very much not the same, and they play very differently. They all have similarities in that they are action oriented, but (with the exception of CoX & CO) they have very different combat mechanics. For one, dodging attacks doesn't really work the same way in those games.
One of the key reasons (see the posted thief gameplay video within this thread) that the thief is able to herd as many mobs is because of the dodge mechanic in this game. This isn't something you really see in other MMOs. Everything is range based, and dodging is determined by a dice roll, not active.
I could go into much greater detail on this, but pleanty have already have, on all revealed aspects of the game thus far. It's almost like seeing an MMO uses numbers and writing it off for that. I hate to say it, but I honestly don't see why you're still following it if you don't seem to be all that interested.
But is that enough to differentiate it from WoW to the average person? I play games because of the total experience, not just because the combat is fun. Cuz really the games that focus on just combat bore me to tears. I know the developers have said story is a feature in GW2 but from what we've seen it's not very immersive. There's a location in the main city that changes based on your quest choices, and every now and then you get a cutscene with NPCs standing in one spot, with a a static 2d background.
There's a lot of quest text in some spots. And then at the other extreme you have quests where there is no quest text at all and very little voice over, you just go right into a quest and with an objective bar on the side of your screen. Some players like that in their gameplay but it's definitely more WoW-like than The Secret World in terms of questing and storytelling.
If anything it feels like GW2's strength is combat and PvP, which still has elements very similar to WoW.
The animations, graphics, and scale of the architecture is AMAZING. I'll probably buy the game, but will probably be playing most The Secret World and SWTOR for a story and immersion experience that's more different from WoW.
And yet, the funny thing is that those who are well informed and have been following GW2, will struggle to look at the features and say "It's just like WoW". WoW doesn't have dynamic questing that promotes exploration, WoW doesn't offer a fully voiced single player experience, WoW doesn't have scalable open-world content, WoW's PvP doesnn't put all players on a level playing field... I could just go on an on, yet you'll likely just reply with some weak strawman arguement, like saying that because NPCs provide players with the OPTION to talk to them it's just the same questing system as WoW.
Oh well... I never really replied to try and change your mind, since you are dead set on your idea that GW2 is just like WoW. I just find it quite amusing that you say the story of SW:TOR is enough to make it a completely different experience from WoW. Whereas GW2 is doing almost the same thing with it's personal story (and lots more) but in your eyes it's still a WoW clone.
I simply wonder why and since quest texts became something bad. If you are dyslectic I would understand it. Having seen videos from SWTOR beta, cutscenes for every kill 10 rats quests seem more annoying than helpfull.
Well that can only be a good thing:)
It is a good thing. And to be fair, he hasn't really bashed SWTOR either. He's said, on video, that both are good games, but that GW2 is what he (personally) is looking for in a game.
Hopefully the TOR fans can realize that this means that BOTH games are looking to be good in their own ways.
You really have to break the notion that you need to remain static in combat, and once you break free of those chains the game really changes (and there's not much footage [yet!] of people doing that).