That (the link the OP gave) was actually a very, very well written and unbiased review.
It started out rather negative, and as it went the author seemed surprised and generally impressed and continued to find more and more to like about the game.
The ending gave me the impression that the authoer didn't go into their play time with unrealistic or overhyped expectations, rather quite the opposite, and were happily surprised and excited by what they found.
I wouldn't quite call it a "skeptic becomes a believer" piece but I would say it'd be fair to bet that this person may have not been too excited or interested in GW2 before playing, but now that they have is likely really looking forward to spending more time with the game.
How the hell do people think this piece or overly fluffy and biased?
Not sure why the hate on this preview. I thought it was rather balanced and the criticism fair. The overall theme of the piece was very positive and dented the obvious skepticism he had entering the game for the first time.
About the part on female models. He has a point. When was the last time a game let you make a fat/ugly female? You can fiddle with some of the face settings to make a face look out of proportion, but from the start the models are overly beautified. More to the point you have adventuring females running around in ice cold mountains during a snow storm wearing little more than a leather bikini. GW2 is certainly not as bad about this as other games, see Tera the pedobear theme park, but it is a disturbing continuation of female objectification which I personally think adds quite a bit to the horny teen misogynistic atmosphere female gamers have to contend with. Female toons can certainly be made to look good if the player wants, but it should be a concious choice and not something that is built into the character creation.
Personally I would love to run with a 300 lb Valkerie looking female toon named Bertha wearing a full breastplate armor and chewing nails. That is the kind of woman you want running with you and not towards you at the start of battle. Throw me up against a ninty lb child who looks like she came from a Victoria Secret store and all you will get from me is disdain.
Yeah, if I had a choice about who would be 'thrown up against me', I'll always go with the Victoria's Secret model. If that makes me a misogynist, so be it. I'm well past apologizing for my aesthetic preferences.
By the way, a woman needn't be young to be attractive.
No body is asking you to apologise but that doesn't mean that other players should be forced into playing characters out of baywatch. Options are good.
My impression was that the article writer was impressed with GW2. Even though he didn't like the artstyle for the human characters. But that is just personal preference like he also mentioned. I don't see why some here are bitching about that writer. He liked the game and had some expected questions regarding events (how do they hold up when a server becomes empty etc)
Not sure why the hate on this preview. I thought it was rather balanced and the criticism fair. The overall theme of the piece was very positive and dented the obvious skepticism he had entering the game for the first time.
About the part on female models. He has a point. When was the last time a game let you make a fat/ugly female? You can fiddle with some of the face settings to make a face look out of proportion, but from the start the models are overly beautified. More to the point you have adventuring females running around in ice cold mountains during a snow storm wearing little more than a leather bikini. GW2 is certainly not as bad about this as other games, see Tera the pedobear theme park, but it is a disturbing continuation of female objectification which I personally think adds quite a bit to the horny teen misogynistic atmosphere female gamers have to contend with. Female toons can certainly be made to look good if the player wants, but it should be a concious choice and not something that is built into the character creation.
Personally I would love to run with a 300 lb Valkerie looking female toon named Bertha wearing a full breastplate armor and chewing nails. That is the kind of woman you want running with you and not towards you at the start of battle. Throw me up against a ninty lb child who looks like she came from a Victoria Secret store and all you will get from me is disdain.
Yeah, if I had a choice about who would be 'thrown up against me', I'll always go with the Victoria's Secret model. If that makes me a misogynist, so be it. I'm well past apologizing for my aesthetic preferences.
By the way, a woman needn't be young to be attractive.
No body is asking you to apologise but that doesn't mean that other players should be forced into playing characters out of baywatch. Options are good.
And that doesn't mean we have to have this service /feature provided to us. Opinions are good. Stop forcing yours on me.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
Not sure why the hate on this preview. I thought it was rather balanced and the criticism fair. The overall theme of the piece was very positive and dented the obvious skepticism he had entering the game for the first time.
About the part on female models. He has a point. When was the last time a game let you make a fat/ugly female? You can fiddle with some of the face settings to make a face look out of proportion, but from the start the models are overly beautified. More to the point you have adventuring females running around in ice cold mountains during a snow storm wearing little more than a leather bikini. GW2 is certainly not as bad about this as other games, see Tera the pedobear theme park, but it is a disturbing continuation of female objectification which I personally think adds quite a bit to the horny teen misogynistic atmosphere female gamers have to contend with. Female toons can certainly be made to look good if the player wants, but it should be a concious choice and not something that is built into the character creation.
Personally I would love to run with a 300 lb Valkerie looking female toon named Bertha wearing a full breastplate armor and chewing nails. That is the kind of woman you want running with you and not towards you at the start of battle. Throw me up against a ninty lb child who looks like she came from a Victoria Secret store and all you will get from me is disdain.
Yeah, if I had a choice about who would be 'thrown up against me', I'll always go with the Victoria's Secret model. If that makes me a misogynist, so be it. I'm well past apologizing for my aesthetic preferences.
By the way, a woman needn't be young to be attractive.
No body is asking you to apologise but that doesn't mean that other players should be forced into playing characters out of baywatch. Options are good.
And that doesn't mean we have to have this service /feature provided to us. Opinions are good. Stop forcing yours on me.
I think when i said 'options are good' it was clear indication that i am not into forcing my opinion on anyone. Next time i will draw pictures so that you do not mis understand me.
That (the link the OP gave) was actually a very, very well written and unbiased review.
It started out rather negative, and as it went the author seemed surprised and generally impressed and continued to find more and more to like about the game.
The ending gave me the impression that the authoer didn't go into their play time with unrealistic or overhyped expectations, rather quite the opposite, and were happily surprised and excited by what they found.
I wouldn't quite call it a "skeptic becomes a believer" piece but I would say it'd be fair to bet that this person may have not been too excited or interested in GW2 before playing, but now that they have is likely really looking forward to spending more time with the game.
How the hell do people think this piece or overly fluffy and biased?
+1 Completely agree was just going to ask the same question why all the hate? I really think it was a good review and well written
Originally posted by BadSpock That (the link the OP gave) was actually a very, very well written and unbiased review. It started out rather negative, and as it went the author seemed surprised and generally impressed and continued to find more and more to like about the game. The ending gave me the impression that the authoer didn't go into their play time with unrealistic or overhyped expectations, rather quite the opposite, and were happily surprised and excited by what they found. I wouldn't quite call it a "skeptic becomes a believer" piece but I would say it'd be fair to bet that this person may have not been too excited or interested in GW2 before playing, but now that they have is likely really looking forward to spending more time with the game. How the hell do people think this piece or overly fluffy and biased?
That's exactly how I felt about it, I really can't see why people have got up in arms about it? Sure he was put off by the scanty clothing but then so am I, it's a tired concept now in fantasy games, just bored of it. He goes on to write lot's of positives about his experience, I thought it was a well rounded and honest preview.
Not sure why the hate on this preview. I thought it was rather balanced and the criticism fair. The overall theme of the piece was very positive and dented the obvious skepticism he had entering the game for the first time.
About the part on female models. He has a point. When was the last time a game let you make a fat/ugly female? You can fiddle with some of the face settings to make a face look out of proportion, but from the start the models are overly beautified. More to the point you have adventuring females running around in ice cold mountains during a snow storm wearing little more than a leather bikini. GW2 is certainly not as bad about this as other games, see Tera the pedobear theme park, but it is a disturbing continuation of female objectification which I personally think adds quite a bit to the horny teen misogynistic atmosphere female gamers have to contend with. Female toons can certainly be made to look good if the player wants, but it should be a concious choice and not something that is built into the character creation.
Personally I would love to run with a 300 lb Valkerie looking female toon named Bertha wearing a full breastplate armor and chewing nails. That is the kind of woman you want running with you and not towards you at the start of battle. Throw me up against a ninty lb child who looks like she came from a Victoria Secret store and all you will get from me is disdain.
Yeah, if I had a choice about who would be 'thrown up against me', I'll always go with the Victoria's Secret model. If that makes me a misogynist, so be it. I'm well past apologizing for my aesthetic preferences.
By the way, a woman needn't be young to be attractive.
No body is asking you to apologise but that doesn't mean that other players should be forced into playing characters out of baywatch. Options are good.
And that doesn't mean we have to have this service /feature provided to us. Opinions are good. Stop forcing yours on me.
I think when i said 'options are good' it was clear indication that i am not into forcing my opinion on anyone. Next time i will draw pictures so that you do not mis understand me.
"but that doesn't mean that other players should be forced into playing characters out of baywatch."
This is an opinion , stating that others shouldn't be forced to endur such practice , incurs that i will be forced to play in a game without these or with female models that are not attractive. Thus a forced opinion. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I would like to point out this section on the review.
"GW2’s event system and emphasis on casual co-op are solutions to these same problems. Guild Wars 2 feels less like a successor to WoW and more like a parallel evolution from a common ancestor. It’s an exciting new direction for the genre.
It’s not, however, without issues. GW2’s structure creates a sense of society that WoW – with its emphasis on grouping and private adventure – lacks. Conversely, not needing to find players with particular skill-sets means that in my weekend with the game I hardly spoke to anyone, and made no lasting relationships. The circumstances will have played a role in this, but there was none of the development of trust and respect that goes with knowing, for example, that someone is a great healer. It will be great if players get to become friends without being forced, but it would be nice to see some more robust social incentives on release."
This is interesting and why attention to the facts count. The writer is addressing the freeness .. chaotic orderness of the game and its play, then he move into the fact that he didn't meet anyone that stuck out, that "not needing to find players with particular skill-sets", but doesn't address where this comes from .. to a read it may seem from the easy of use of the system. But in reality this is a direct result of soloability and lack very defined class roles. To be sure this is a mistake in any game (its less diverse where greaer diversity is in general superior).
You can create a world and pve system that anet has with a specified class system and keep best of both worlds, but that is not the route they took and if critized for the lack of this feeling in the game it should be placed on their class system not on their pve system.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
The GW2 fanboys are just flaming because it wasnt completely full of wild praise for the game, as they do for anything that isnt 110% positive.
I really am liking the sound of how the DE's work, allowing you to randomly come across HUGE battles and conribute even if they are meant for higher or lower levels than you, and if they are half way through. You dont have to wait for a reset or anything
This however worries me:
not needing to find players with particular skill-sets means that in my weekend with the game I hardly spoke to anyone, and made no lasting relationships. The circumstances will have played a role in this, but there was none of the development of trust and respect that goes with knowing, for example, that someone is a great healer
This makes it sound like levelling could be a very lonely experience. Of course, being in a guild will help this, but there should be incentives for people to actually talk to each other and interact with each other.
A common concern. If you want to have a social experience, make sure you talk to the people you meet. Everyone seems to think that if they leave it up to someone else, the game will just make it happen. In another game, where the social aspects are forced upon you with artificial means, yes. In this one, it's up to you. Incentives are for children and the socially maladjusted. If you want to make friends, do what human beings have been doing for ages -- say "hello".
It's not up to ArenaNet to make friends for you. If it's important to you, see that it happens. Otherwise, it really wasn't all that important after all.
Those complaining should have taken the fan boy belt off for a sec and continued reading. Those weren't comparisons in the beginning, they were a set-up for the article he was about to tell. He actually gave a very favorable impression of the game, and if anything saying it's not like those games ends up a compliment.
Also as someone that played Rift well into endgame, I'd like to know exactly what part of anything the author said sounded like Rift's rifts, which were...stand there and kill things till the rift closes. Over and over. And over.
His only real criticisms were that he would have liked to make less modelesque characters (which is a valid criticism, these are warriors both male and female, more options isn't a bad thing) and that he didn't feel the need to socially interact much. It happened so naturally that he was essentially in and out of teams of adventurers, but that he never felt the need to talk to anyone. This is less of a valid critique, because his short playtime didn't account for dungeons, pvp and guilds all of which are going to enforce more social interation.
That's not to bomb the author, especially since he specifically mentions what I just said as part of why he missed out. I think when it comes to PvE, it's going to be up to the people that want that social interaction to enforce it, which is fine with me. I honestly don't want to be bothered until I decide I want to be bothered. And spare me the "why are you playing MMOs" diatribe, when I need your approval on how I game, I'll seek it. Thanks for the concern, though.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
Very interesting article, found it to be a good read.
Also find it extremely funny that while the article gives GW2 a lot of praise overall, the GW2 fanboys/girls cant help themselves.....
From the very beginning, he makes it clear that he doesn't think there is anything wrong with MMO's currently. <--Huge Red Flag.
And why does he keep comparing so many things to SWTOR? And he doesn't do it in a way that is unbiased (and yes thats his job). He is not responding to trolls on mmorpg forums, he is writing for PC Gamer.
So, his opinion differs to yours about the state of the whole MMO genre, and that makes him completely wrong and you completely right?
As for comparing so many things to SWTOR, which article are you reading? he compares to EQ and WoW more than he compares to SWTOR, so maybe, just maybe, you being a SWTOR hater is blinding you a bit.
Players are voiced, but you don’t have any choice about what they say: it’s not The Old Republic.
These missions operate differently to the class-locked caves and bunkers of The Old Republic.
And really, how are those two comments, even taken out of the context of the rest of what the article is saying, that bad?
For starters, I just don't like the way this guy writes. That shouldn't be hard to understand.
Most of the people that post on these forums are not happy with the state of the genre. I am not alone in that belief.
We all know that GW2 is to some degree breaking the mold and this guy from the get go says that he doesn't have a problem with the current state of mmo's. At the very least it makes me question his knowledge of mmo's if he thinks they are all fine now. I think he knows as much about MMOs as the typical WoW subscriber.
Do I hate swtor? I don't think it deserves the attention it gets. I think I could paint a turd and call it a star wars cookie and people would buy it. If I was a huge star wars fan and had played SWG I would be severely let down.
But do I hate it? Naw. But don't hold it up as the standard when you review the game I am looking forward to.
You mean most people on this forum aren't happy with the state of the genre? These forums? An MMO forum where everyone complains about MMO's non stop; and even when a game gives them everything they ask for they still talk about how much it sucks.
I am sorry the author of the review isn't as Jaded about MMO's as those of us on MMORPG, but I still liked his very positive review of GW2, while I won't be buying the game at launch (I just really don't like mmo launches) I hope the game is as good as advertised and will probably buy it after a few months, if people are still talking good about it.
Comments
That (the link the OP gave) was actually a very, very well written and unbiased review.
It started out rather negative, and as it went the author seemed surprised and generally impressed and continued to find more and more to like about the game.
The ending gave me the impression that the authoer didn't go into their play time with unrealistic or overhyped expectations, rather quite the opposite, and were happily surprised and excited by what they found.
I wouldn't quite call it a "skeptic becomes a believer" piece but I would say it'd be fair to bet that this person may have not been too excited or interested in GW2 before playing, but now that they have is likely really looking forward to spending more time with the game.
How the hell do people think this piece or overly fluffy and biased?
No body is asking you to apologise but that doesn't mean that other players should be forced into playing characters out of baywatch. Options are good.
My impression was that the article writer was impressed with GW2. Even though he didn't like the artstyle for the human characters. But that is just personal preference like he also mentioned. I don't see why some here are bitching about that writer. He liked the game and had some expected questions regarding events (how do they hold up when a server becomes empty etc)
And that doesn't mean we have to have this service /feature provided to us. Opinions are good. Stop forcing yours on me.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I think when i said 'options are good' it was clear indication that i am not into forcing my opinion on anyone. Next time i will draw pictures so that you do not mis understand me.
+1 Completely agree was just going to ask the same question why all the hate? I really think it was a good review and well written
That's exactly how I felt about it, I really can't see why people have got up in arms about it? Sure he was put off by the scanty clothing but then so am I, it's a tired concept now in fantasy games, just bored of it. He goes on to write lot's of positives about his experience, I thought it was a well rounded and honest preview.
"but that doesn't mean that other players should be forced into playing characters out of baywatch."
This is an opinion , stating that others shouldn't be forced to endur such practice , incurs that i will be forced to play in a game without these or with female models that are not attractive. Thus a forced opinion. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I would like to point out this section on the review.
"GW2’s event system and emphasis on casual co-op are solutions to these same problems. Guild Wars 2 feels less like a successor to WoW and more like a parallel evolution from a common ancestor. It’s an exciting new direction for the genre.
It’s not, however, without issues. GW2’s structure creates a sense of society that WoW – with its emphasis on grouping and private adventure – lacks. Conversely, not needing to find players with particular skill-sets means that in my weekend with the game I hardly spoke to anyone, and made no lasting relationships. The circumstances will have played a role in this, but there was none of the development of trust and respect that goes with knowing, for example, that someone is a great healer. It will be great if players get to become friends without being forced, but it would be nice to see some more robust social incentives on release."
This is interesting and why attention to the facts count. The writer is addressing the freeness .. chaotic orderness of the game and its play, then he move into the fact that he didn't meet anyone that stuck out, that "not needing to find players with particular skill-sets", but doesn't address where this comes from .. to a read it may seem from the easy of use of the system. But in reality this is a direct result of soloability and lack very defined class roles. To be sure this is a mistake in any game (its less diverse where greaer diversity is in general superior).
You can create a world and pve system that anet has with a specified class system and keep best of both worlds, but that is not the route they took and if critized for the lack of this feeling in the game it should be placed on their class system not on their pve system.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
A common concern. If you want to have a social experience, make sure you talk to the people you meet. Everyone seems to think that if they leave it up to someone else, the game will just make it happen. In another game, where the social aspects are forced upon you with artificial means, yes. In this one, it's up to you. Incentives are for children and the socially maladjusted. If you want to make friends, do what human beings have been doing for ages -- say "hello".
It's not up to ArenaNet to make friends for you. If it's important to you, see that it happens. Otherwise, it really wasn't all that important after all.
Those complaining should have taken the fan boy belt off for a sec and continued reading. Those weren't comparisons in the beginning, they were a set-up for the article he was about to tell. He actually gave a very favorable impression of the game, and if anything saying it's not like those games ends up a compliment.
Also as someone that played Rift well into endgame, I'd like to know exactly what part of anything the author said sounded like Rift's rifts, which were...stand there and kill things till the rift closes. Over and over. And over.
His only real criticisms were that he would have liked to make less modelesque characters (which is a valid criticism, these are warriors both male and female, more options isn't a bad thing) and that he didn't feel the need to socially interact much. It happened so naturally that he was essentially in and out of teams of adventurers, but that he never felt the need to talk to anyone. This is less of a valid critique, because his short playtime didn't account for dungeons, pvp and guilds all of which are going to enforce more social interation.
That's not to bomb the author, especially since he specifically mentions what I just said as part of why he missed out. I think when it comes to PvE, it's going to be up to the people that want that social interaction to enforce it, which is fine with me. I honestly don't want to be bothered until I decide I want to be bothered. And spare me the "why are you playing MMOs" diatribe, when I need your approval on how I game, I'll seek it. Thanks for the concern, though.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
You mean most people on this forum aren't happy with the state of the genre? These forums? An MMO forum where everyone complains about MMO's non stop; and even when a game gives them everything they ask for they still talk about how much it sucks.
I am sorry the author of the review isn't as Jaded about MMO's as those of us on MMORPG, but I still liked his very positive review of GW2, while I won't be buying the game at launch (I just really don't like mmo launches) I hope the game is as good as advertised and will probably buy it after a few months, if people are still talking good about it.