I'm confident that GW2 will be an excellent game and find a dedicated audience that will really enjoy it. I am not confident that GW2 will be a hit with more mainstream MMO players though, for the following reasons and these are the same reasons that is wrong with mmos today.
1. Players don’t want to look cool, they want to be cool.
Every time a player makes a choice based on a 1% dodge bonus, or wears stupid looking armor with great stats over visual aesthetics they are opting for substance over style. GW2 getting rid of these substantive differences between the races and high-level gear means that while a player may look cooler than another, they aren’t actually better than anyone else, and players will quickly realize it is a shallow system.
It's EASY to say that at the launch of a title, but when a game is going on 5 years old or more then it's a completely different argument I'm afraid & this point is rather blinkered & lacking of in-depth knowledge.
2. Players want to be the best without actually being the best.
Players want an advantage over everyone else, especially if they can achieve that with mediocre ability spread out over countless hours of monotony that the next guy can’t or won’t invest; a weapon that provides both a stat advantage and exclusive access to a dungeon to get an increased advantage allows mediocre players to get better simply through willpower and time invested versus actual skill or growth. GW2 goes the opposite direction of this, so far as to de-level players going backward in content, almost negating in total what advances they attained through gear and stats alone to keep things interesting. When stats fail to make players better, most players will have nowhere to turn.
No, players do NOT want to have an advantage over everyone else, not good ones anyway, the majority want a platform that is fair in the game so that their personal skills & aptitudes will be what shine through, the frustration players feel when they are not the best is easily attributable to class balance is a lot of games because so few ever get anywhere close to balanced & Guild Wars 2 will not be any different in that respect.
MMO's are based on gear progression so stats need to have an effect to have a point in wanting to improve them, when players "de-level" & the stats on their gear are adjusted this is more to do with making that lower level content still relevant, challenging & exciting rather than pointless due to overgearing, it has nothing at all to do with the players having a desire for an unfair advantage.
3. When players can’t be the best they want somebody (preferably) or something else (works too) to blame instead of themselves.
Only bad losers do
Eventually things don’t work out as many players wish, and when that happens it’s easier to blame the healers or the tank, or the opposing faction, or the guildie who picked the dumbest class and is wasting a raid slot, etc. instead of doing a self-examination and figuring out how they can improve and then acting to do so. Considering that GW2 is more reliant on player-skill than any other MMO, and that professions are essentially jacks of all trades, finger-pointing will be awkward at best and accusations against balance issues or ad hominem attacks against ArenaNet just won’t work long-term for bad players.
Wrong, player-skill is not as important as player knowledge, knowing how a event, mob or dungeon functions is almost all of what you need to learn, the skill is a small percentage, much like driving a car the skill of driving is a tiny portion of the overall act, the biggest part is observation, this part of the post is just completely lacking in understanding of how MMO's & a lot of games in general operate.
4. Players don’t want to have to think, they just want to act.
Wrong, some players prefer action-leaning games with a bit of thinking, others prefer thinking games with a bit of action & everything inbetween is liked by some too.
Many MMOs cater to skill rotations, cool-down management, and provide high-reward abilities with no risks associated with their use. A perceived “I Win” button like Moa Morph that can actually miss is a foreign concept to many players, and one that will probably ruin their sense of fun in the face of more skillful opponents or challenging NPCs.
Pure misguided conjecture, you are making huge assumptions about how players behave & perceive their actions, this is crass generalisation.
While some players are sighing in relief about the “low” number of skills in GW2, this is an illusion or an oversimplification, as many of the traits really do add an unparalleled level of depth to profession customization. That there is no one “right” answer for a profession, coupled with the fact that the “right traits and skills” would still require skillful and thoughtful use by the player, will only frustrate players more accustomed to traditional MMORPG gameplay conventions.
Wow, genius you know that a ton of MMO's have things that affect the abilities right? GW2 may have a slightly altered approach but it's a variation on a theme & has been seen before in various guises, you are blowing the proverbial smoke up people's butts here.
5. Players need validation.
In most MMOs it’s a simple matter to find one or two character builds that are optimal for the way the game is designed. In higher-level content, if a build can fulfill a role in a raid, and the raid succeeds, the build is successful, and the feedback is readily apparent. GW2’s reliance on player-skill and player-choice throws this system of evaluation out the window, and every request to evaluate a given build veils thinly the requestor’s doubts about having enough personal skill to succeed in spite of mistakes, oversights, and/or shortcomings at the trait and skill picking level. With player-skill being such an integral variable that many players won't honestly want to evaluate, validation will be difficult to come by.
If people are willing to accept new changes in GW2, I think its going to be a smashing hit. At some point, there has to mmo that tries to differentiate standard EQ/WOW based system and you know what, Guild Wars decided to do that.
GW2 doesn't have raiding, & I already addressed your misconceptions about player skill above, so what is your point here?
Overall this post is rather ill-informed fanboism, but I took the time to argue the points it made poorly.
You do know that the point of playing an RPG, whether it be an MMO or not, is to play the character. With its strengths and weaknesses, with the class or skill structure based on dice rolls modified by character stats, not twitch skills. What you're talking about is a bastardization of the genre or a complete over running of it by FPS action junkies.
You do know that the point of playing an RPG, whether it be an MMO or not, is to play the character. With its strengths and weaknesses, with the class or skill structure based on dice rolls modified by character stats, not twitch skills. What you're talking about is a bastardization of the genre or a complete over running of it by FPS action junkies.
Playing a character have nothing to do with combat mechanics.You can easily make a good RPG game with very FPS like mechanics or you can make it turnbased, it doesn't really matter.
RPG games is about telling a story together with other people, many of the best RPGs games around have been semi twitched-based like Daggerfall.
Heck, there is even pen and paper RPGs without dicerolls, like "Amber" (It is great, try it). P&P games have a myriad of different mechanics even if many people seems to think that there only is D&D.
Originally posted by aesperus? A game that's #1 best feature by a landslide is the story, while everything else is rather sub-par.
Thats Bioware in a nutshell, at least since around 2003-4.
Oh no doubt. And definitely after early 2000s.
Personally, I was not one of the people that was fooled w/ SWTOR. I was vocal about it's flaws prior to release, and I'm vocal now. I did play it, but only for the story. I haven't played it in a while, though. I only found a couple stories to my liking.
Honestly, I haven't been dissapointed w/ an MMO since EQ2. I've generally known what I'm getting. I've been pleasantly surprised by games like LotRO, and WoW, but I can't think of a game that's really let me down since EQ2. I suppose I could say WAR (as it was buggy, and some of the features they promised didn't make it to launch), but I honestly had a damn good time w/ their PvP system. I actually liked being able to PvP tank, and I enjoyed playing some of the classes everyone thought sucked, but still managed to do well w/ them. But that's just me.
I still think people are projecting other game's failures onto this one, even if it's not warranted. I may be wrong, it might flop, but if it does I highly doubt it'll be for any of the reasons people are saying currently.
You do know that the point of playing an RPG, whether it be an MMO or not, is to play the character. With its strengths and weaknesses, with the class or skill structure based on dice rolls modified by character stats, not twitch skills. What you're talking about is a bastardization of the genre or a complete over running of it by FPS action junkies.
Playing a character have nothing to do with combat mechanics.You can easily make a good RPG game with very FPS like mechanics or you can make it turnbased, it doesn't really matter.
RPG games is about telling a story together with other people, many of the best RPGs games around have been semi twitched-based like Daggerfall.
Heck, there is even pen and paper RPGs without dicerolls, like "Amber" (It is great, try it). P&P games have a myriad of different mechanics even if many people seems to think that there only is D&D.
Wow, talk about a purist, lol.
I think Loke said best. RPG is about telling a story, not combat mechanics. While I do enjoy interesting combat, I don't think for a second that they have to be any certain way (other than balanced). Hell, Kingdom of Amalur is a really fun RPG, and it's very much based on twitch skills as well as gear / abilities. Or even better yet, Skyrim. Or hell, what about DeusEx? All really good RPG games, with very compelling stories, and mechanics that are more based on your ability to aim & avoid damage, than trading numbers with a stationary mob.
You do know that the point of playing an RPG, whether it be an MMO or not, is to play the character. With its strengths and weaknesses, with the class or skill structure based on dice rolls modified by character stats, not twitch skills. What you're talking about is a bastardization of the genre or a complete over running of it by FPS action junkies.
Playing a character have nothing to do with combat mechanics.You can easily make a good RPG game with very FPS like mechanics or you can make it turnbased, it doesn't really matter.
RPG games is about telling a story together with other people, many of the best RPGs games around have been semi twitched-based like Daggerfall.
Heck, there is even pen and paper RPGs without dicerolls, like "Amber" (It is great, try it). P&P games have a myriad of different mechanics even if many people seems to think that there only is D&D.
Wow, talk about a purist, lol.
I think Loke said best. RPG is about telling a story, not combat mechanics. While I do enjoy interesting combat, I don't think for a second that they have to be any certain way (other than balanced). Hell, Kingdom of Amalur is a really fun RPG, and it's very much based on twitch skills as well as gear / abilities. Or even better yet, Skyrim. Or hell, what about DeusEx? All really good RPG games, with very compelling stories, and mechanics that are more based on your ability to aim & avoid damage, than trading numbers with a stationary mob.
Errr, no, it does not have to have a single word of story to be a RPG. Several RPGs can be pure dungeon-crawlers without any stories and still be considered to be RPGs. RPGs are about "Role-Playing" and not necessarely only in the MMORPG "roleplaying server" sense.
Errr, no, it does not have to have a single word of story to be a RPG. Several RPGs can be pure dungeon-crawlers without any stories and still be considered to be RPGs. RPGs are about "Role-Playing" and not necessarely only in the MMORPG "roleplaying server" sense.
By that definition, almost every game can be considered an RPG. In BF3 you're assuming the 'role' of a soldier. In mario you're assuming the role of a plumber rescuing his princess from bizarre creatures.
This is the definition found on wiki:
"A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting, or through a process of structured decision-making or character development."
While it's true that nowadays games tend to blur the line between genres more often, there seems to be a clear understanding that there is an element of story required to be considered an RPG. This is why diablo is considered an RPG, even though it's a dungeon crawler. There is a story being played out, even if you are ignoring it.
Originally posted by aesperus? A game that's #1 best feature by a landslide is the story, while everything else is rather sub-par.
Thats Bioware in a nutshell, at least since around 2003-4.
Oh no doubt. And definitely after early 2000s.
Personally, I was not one of the people that was fooled w/ SWTOR. I was vocal about it's flaws prior to release, and I'm vocal now. I did play it, but only for the story. I haven't played it in a while, though. I only found a couple stories to my liking.
Honestly, I haven't been dissapointed w/ an MMO since EQ2. I've generally known what I'm getting. I've been pleasantly surprised by games like LotRO, and WoW, but I can't think of a game that's really let me down since EQ2. I suppose I could say WAR (as it was buggy, and some of the features they promised didn't make it to launch), but I honestly had a damn good time w/ their PvP system. I actually liked being able to PvP tank, and I enjoyed playing some of the classes everyone thought sucked, but still managed to do well w/ them. But that's just me.
I still think people are projecting other game's failures onto this one, even if it's not warranted. I may be wrong, it might flop, but if it does I highly doubt it'll be for any of the reasons people are saying currently.
I haven't been disappointed since SWG's NGE really, maybe it was the fact that was so bad. But at that time I learned to never really put much into an MMO instead just try and enjoy the ride. Since then I've been content with those I've played, even TOR.
Yes there's a lot of projecting going on, gamers as a whole are just like that today, we're really a negative bunch if you view us collectively. Maybe it's a lack of sun lol. We seem to overly strive off negative vibes, just look how many emote smiles while talking about someone else who failed. To me (this has been a while now) it seems in large part many would rather watch a game fail than watch one succeed.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Errr, no, it does not have to have a single word of story to be a RPG. Several RPGs can be pure dungeon-crawlers without any stories and still be considered to be RPGs. RPGs are about "Role-Playing" and not necessarely only in the MMORPG "roleplaying server" sense.
By that definition, almost every game can be considered an RPG. In BF3 you're assuming the 'role' of a soldier. In mario you're assuming the role of a plumber rescuing his princess from bizarre creatures.
This is the definition found on wiki:
"A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting, or through a process of structured decision-making or character development."
While it's true that nowadays games tend to blur the line between genres more often, there seems to be a clear understanding that there is an element of story required to be considered an RPG. This is why diablo is considered an RPG, even though it's a dungeon crawler. There is a story being played out, even if you are ignoring it.
I suppose the focus of the game must lie on the role-playing rather than other elements. That would exclude a lot of games where they have a different focus.
Edit: The reason why it wouldn't make sense to require a story to be categorized as a RPG, is because genre-categorization is supposed to be a way to sort games. If a game without its story practically remains the same game, then the resulting game ought to be put in the same category. Just imagine Final Fantasy I without its story: it remains very much the same game. A better example is Etrian Odyssey (http://ds.ign.com/articles/788/788909p1.html), which has practically no story and remains very identical without the small story; yet there is no doubt about it being a RPG.
No, you didn't get it. Illum's kill-trade flaw was not a bug which you would be able to quickly see by just looking in a video, it was a strictly mechanical flaw which arose due to a combination of reward system and penalty system. No matter how many videos you saw before the game was released, you would not be able to see the kill-trade flaw unless someone explicitly showed it.
If Arenanet released the numbers associated with World vs World mechanics, then yes, we may be able to try to find mechanical flaws.
The kill-trade thing is indeed the result of bad design, I agree. Fortunately, that won't work in WvW. "Winning" in WvW isn't about the number of kills, it's not about capturing structures... its' about being able to hold structures. When the scores are tallied every few minutes or whatever it is you get points for the keeps, castles, towers, etc. that you hold at that moment. No points are given for a capture or for killing a foe. Plus, the absence of "required" PvP gear (PvP gear has it's own look, not uber stats and no resilience!) removes the need or even desire to set up a kill-sharing type of scenario.
What's funny is that ANet designed this system, which solves all these problems, before Illum was ever out there to be abused. You can see the major difference in companies that focus on doing it right and those that focus on profit over product.
No, you didn't get it. Illum's kill-trade flaw was not a bug which you would be able to quickly see by just looking in a video, it was a strictly mechanical flaw which arose due to a combination of reward system and penalty system. No matter how many videos you saw before the game was released, you would not be able to see the kill-trade flaw unless someone explicitly showed it.
If Arenanet released the numbers associated with World vs World mechanics, then yes, we may be able to try to find mechanical flaws.
The kill-trade thing is indeed the result of bad design, I agree. Fortunately, that won't work in WvW. "Winning" in WvW isn't about the number of kills, it's not about capturing structures... its' about being able to hold structures. When the scores are tallied every few minutes or whatever it is you get points for the keeps, castles, towers, etc. that you hold at that moment. No points are given for a capture or for killing a foe. Plus, the absence of "required" PvP gear (PvP gear has it's own look, not uber stats and no resilience!) removes the need or even desire to set up a kill-sharing type of scenario.
What's funny is that ANet designed this system, which solves all these problems, before Illum was ever out there to be abused. You can see the major difference in companies that focus on doing it right and those that focus on profit over product.
Point being, that mechanical flaws are hard to spot and can't expected to be spot easiily. For instance, there may be super-efficient World vs World strategies which are essential to stand any chance of winning. Such strategies, if they exist, are hard to spot early on.
Dunno about you, but I know a lot of people that saw Illum being garbage before TOR was released. The writing was definitely on the wall. They promised epic battles, but they didn't show any of the mechanics delivering on that promise. Shortly prior to release they just showed a last minute video saying 'look we're telling the truth!'. That's not the same has having dozens of videos from different people showing a mechanic is working. Not even close.
That said, again, GW2 isn't perfect. It will have errors & mistakes. However, that's not important. What's important is whether or not there's a good enough foundation there to fix these issues & expand upon. Furthermore, it's important to have a developer that actually seems willing to do the work necessary to make it happen. Anet has proven themselves so far on both fronts.
They've built a strong foundation for their game, and they're willing to make changes if something isn't working.
Why was the writing on the wall? How could the writing be on the wall, when something wasn't really seen? Have we seen much of GW2's competitive PVP? Nope, but does that mean the writing is on the wall that it is bad? Not shown =/= bad? That's no better than those doing that to GW2 right now, you folks get all up in arms about that. What about the races that will not be present in this BWE? Not shown, not in build, obviously means it's a broken shamble of a design.. How about Biowares plague outbreak event, was that obviously broken? As it wasn't shown really at all or talked about before they released 1.2.
Ilum was fun the first few times my guild and I went there, aside from lag, but we figured that was because we had two full guilds on repub and I believe almost 3 on the imp side fighting it out, lowbies and all, it was a blast, and it worked. but the true problems hadn't shown their face yet. It wasn't until a few weeks later that they did.
Point being everything looks all rosey when you first see/experience it. At that point players are just playing, doing as the mechanics expect of them, they haven't begun to explore how they can exploit or cheat them.
Every company wants to fix things, every company is willing to expand things, it's a matter of priority and time, do you think Bioware is content with something they took months to years to design being scrapped altogether? If you do you really need to lay off the (insert)-aid.
Even I had to go "what!!" on this one. We have hours of footage from various unbiased sources on Dynamic events, structured pvp and WVw. We're talking HOURs of footage. A simple youtube video search will show u anything you need. Heck, there's so much information that you can plug in race and class and what you want to find and find a video of it somewhere.
I agree on Tor, just no information before hand. They wer riding the IP of Star Wars to the grave. I don't blame them though. This is how video games are markted these days. No one shows you ingame play, they just show you cool cut scenes or cut scenes not eve nin the game (see Prototype 2 commercials).
GW2 is taking a different marketing approach. They justshow their product andf allow others to judge. That's confidence in your product.
No, you didn't get it. Illum's kill-trade flaw was not a bug which you would be able to quickly see by just looking in a video, it was a strictly mechanical flaw which arose due to a combination of reward system and penalty system. No matter how many videos you saw before the game was released, you would not be able to see the kill-trade flaw unless someone explicitly showed it.
If Arenanet released the numbers associated with World vs World mechanics, then yes, we may be able to try to find mechanical flaws.
The kill-trade thing is indeed the result of bad design, I agree. Fortunately, that won't work in WvW. "Winning" in WvW isn't about the number of kills, it's not about capturing structures... its' about being able to hold structures. When the scores are tallied every few minutes or whatever it is you get points for the keeps, castles, towers, etc. that you hold at that moment. No points are given for a capture or for killing a foe. Plus, the absence of "required" PvP gear (PvP gear has it's own look, not uber stats and no resilience!) removes the need or even desire to set up a kill-sharing type of scenario.
What's funny is that ANet designed this system, which solves all these problems, before Illum was ever out there to be abused. You can see the major difference in companies that focus on doing it right and those that focus on profit over product.
Point being, that mechanical flaws are hard to spot and can't expected to be spot easiily. For instance, there may be super-efficient World vs World strategies which are essential to stand any chance of winning. Such strategies, if they exist, are hard to spot early on.
They can be traded, it's called playtesting. And TOR just didnt have time. I've done the math before. They started actual programming design (not story design) in 2007/2008, that's just 3 years to bring this complex game to the market. Even their star flag mechanic, Legacy, wasn't ready until an entire 6 months after release (if you count partial release released).
GW2 is doing what it can to make sure thta by the time its released, the product doesnt have a glaring mechanical error such as Ilum. That's glaring. That's not a jump cheat in some obscure area of the world, that's a pure lack of not evaluting playtesting.
so what the OP is saying is that traditional MMO gamers will suck at this game because of the playstyle. I am pretty sure that Guild Wars 1 veterans will have a huge advantage because GW1 took skill to play, not gear.
Yah, the op is right in a sense that if you are looking for the same old same old GW2 is not your game. There are other MMOs out there with different styles and taste. OP GW2 is not your game because you value time spent over actual skill.
They can be traded, it's called playtesting. And TOR just didnt have time. I've done the math before. They started actual programming design (not story design) in 2007/2008, that's just 3 years to bring this complex game to the market. Even their star flag mechanic, Legacy, wasn't ready until an entire 6 months after release (if you count partial release released).
GW2 is doing what it can to make sure thta by the time its released, the product doesnt have a glaring mechanical error such as Ilum. That's glaring. That's not a jump cheat in some obscure area of the world, that's a pure lack of not evaluting playtesting.
Nah
You're missing the main point: SWTOR is a traditional gear-grind PVE game with gear-grind scenario PVP and world PVP tacked on as an afterthought. It was never built for world PvP and Ilium just shows it. This is why they have admited that they won't be doing much with Ilium any time soon until they figure out a way to re-design it.
GW2 WvW has been designed from the ground up with DAoC RvR as the starting point and they have enhanced it from there bringing it up to 2012 standards. To start, 3-sided battles makes a huge strategic difference because just when you think you have the 2nd team locked down, the third one is likely to show-up and change everything. On top of that you have destructible and repairable structures that are key PvP focus points. But best of all, the emphasis is on team/server victories that benefit everyone--not the selfish individual gold/gear rewards that are at the root of what's wrong with games like WOW, SWTOR, etc.
And that, is just one of the games that is GW2. If you're a short PvP scenario junkie, you've got that too and if PvE is your thing that's also there.
Testing and coding time are, of course, factors in what makes games play well and feel polished but that's just details. it's design goals and vision that makes world PVP fun in some but not others. GW2 has it, SWTOR does not.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
No, you didn't get it. Illum's kill-trade flaw was not a bug which you would be able to quickly see by just looking in a video, it was a strictly mechanical flaw which arose due to a combination of reward system and penalty system. No matter how many videos you saw before the game was released, you would not be able to see the kill-trade flaw unless someone explicitly showed it.
If Arenanet released the numbers associated with World vs World mechanics, then yes, we may be able to try to find mechanical flaws.
The kill-trade thing is indeed the result of bad design, I agree. Fortunately, that won't work in WvW. "Winning" in WvW isn't about the number of kills, it's not about capturing structures... its' about being able to hold structures. When the scores are tallied every few minutes or whatever it is you get points for the keeps, castles, towers, etc. that you hold at that moment. No points are given for a capture or for killing a foe. Plus, the absence of "required" PvP gear (PvP gear has it's own look, not uber stats and no resilience!) removes the need or even desire to set up a kill-sharing type of scenario.
What's funny is that ANet designed this system, which solves all these problems, before Illum was ever out there to be abused. You can see the major difference in companies that focus on doing it right and those that focus on profit over product.
Point being, that mechanical flaws are hard to spot and can't expected to be spot easiily. For instance, there may be super-efficient World vs World strategies which are essential to stand any chance of winning. Such strategies, if they exist, are hard to spot early on.
There is. Control the supply, control the structures.
Of course, simple in concept, difficult in practice.
I feel like this needs to be said, cause people seem to pick sides, for example WoW vs GW2
All games require some sort of skill whether it be knowledge of what to do, or twitch hand eye coordination or both.
The classic WoW takes no skill vs Guild Wars 2 is all about skill is kind of a silly argument because infact both take skill and while they might not both require the same skill set neither is worse for it.
The following is all regarding Pvp which is where alot of the no skillz trolling comes from etc.
WoW is a gear based game, if you do not have the gear you are not going to compete with those that do, but at the same time when you do eventually get that gear running all those BGs and Arenas, there is no garentee you will be any better at pvp than the next guy. The gear deficit allows players with higher gear a pretty large advantage to ones starting out and any intelligant person would realize that this does not mean the lower geared player is less skilled. On the flip side if Gear was all that mattered people everywhere would be in Arena tournaments going to MLG but they are not and in fact that pool of amazing WoW arena players is fairly tiny compared to its overall player base.
Now Guild Wars 2 just shortens the process by eliminating the need to spend hours upon hours acquiring gear while you get rofl stomped by BG and Arena vets. It allows players to go in with equal gear from the start and begin working on the skills that will in the end make them an amazing pvper. This difference does not mean that guild wars 2 takes more skill than WoW and infact it requires many of the same skills. It just means that at the beginning of the game and for the years to come players will be atleast equally geared and the only difference left between them and the "pro's" now is only skill. In WoW average pvp players could be at a gear disadvantage and a skill disadvantage or they might be more skillful than the other guy but since the gear plays such a heavy roll its hard to distinguish consistenly who is the "better" player. Guild wars 2 on the other hand gets right down to it, the person who wins will be the better player, cause of knowledge, time, and skill he has acquired naturally or through practice.
This doesnt make GW2 a better game or take more skill, I think it just will be a better arena to display those skills and not be criticized for real issues like gear imbalance and the such. Note im not going to talk about class imbalances because while they do exist in GW2 you can make any character and instantly pvp with them at max level and max gear with all the skills unlocked, Pro teams will create strategies that play to the games strengths during each patch based on which classes are the best at that time(think league of legends tier lists etc). While playing the "OP" classes might seem stupid or imbalanced its what it is and when the objective is to win good players will always do what is nessecary to complete that goal
Wow really, 3 dozen MMO games, games designed to be played for months if not years to get the full effect, and you average playing them 5 months before moving on to the next game. Yeah, that's a low attention span.
And to piggy back on the responder, it displays the problem with the current generation of MMOs. Look at the nickname, they've dropped the RPG. The part about hte engrossing worlds, the saving the world quests that RPGs are made of. All MMOs were suppose to do was allow you to no longer have to control a party of 6 on your own, but go on these adventures with your friends.
So fine, have your MMO genre. I'd like to think that GW2 is the first MMORPG to come around in a long time. An emphasis on the adventure you say. Challenging game game play you say. Allowing the acvtual RPG to be seperate from hybrid player versus player gameplay you say.
Threads like this validate ANET and the ame they've made. On the surface, the stat driven MMO player fearfully make posts like this, scared their game will become extinct. They stare blankly at the concept of not being better than your fellow hero, but actually being better than big bad threat of the world. This is not going to be the game where you run from mob to mob, targeting and repeating the same behavior 100 times to get the 10 beaver skins for a reason you don't know nor care about.
So I have a low attention span and represent everything that is wrong with the genre because I said people when excited about an impending MMO release feel emotions of excitement? That these feelings are maybe just emotions and not some clairvoyance or ESP or message from god saying "YOU ARE FEELING THE MOMENT IN HISTORY WHEN ALL WILL CHANGE! THIS GAME IS THE GAME YOU AND ALL OF MANKIND HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR!! YES, THIS IS THE MMO TO BRING BACK THE RPG INTO MMORPG!!!"
Here I thought I was just being a bit realistic. Ok, since I have no attention span and am everything that is wrong with the genre, I will be quiet now and be content being wrong.
You are right. GW2 will not only be the biggest success of every MMO, it will singlehandedly save the genre from itself. It is the penultimate MMO...the PERFECT GAME, Anet shall go down in history as doing the impossible.
Alright i'll be blunt. 14 years, 34 games. average of 5-6 months. that is low attention span for MMOs, let alone RPGs. This is the reason why most games don't hold that excitement 3-4 months later.
I understand some games lasted longer, but i'm sure others didn't get to that point. Hence, "average"
Noted. I clearly am not qualified to post on these forums.
You do know that the point of playing an RPG, whether it be an MMO or not, is to play the character. With its strengths and weaknesses, with the class or skill structure based on dice rolls modified by character stats, not twitch skills. What you're talking about is a bastardization of the genre or a complete over running of it by FPS action junkies.
Playing a character have nothing to do with combat mechanics.You can easily make a good RPG game with very FPS like mechanics or you can make it turnbased, it doesn't really matter.
RPG games is about telling a story together with other people, many of the best RPGs games around have been semi twitched-based like Daggerfall.
Heck, there is even pen and paper RPGs without dicerolls, like "Amber" (It is great, try it). P&P games have a myriad of different mechanics even if many people seems to think that there only is D&D.
Of course it matters. As a roleplayer, I want my character's stats to determine the outcome of combat, not my twitch skills. It's awfully arrogant of you to state that the style of combat doesn't matter. Story telling is only part of the RPG formula. Playing a role (Character) is another aspect of it. You're quibbling over the "dice roll vs. twitch". Dice rolls are historically part of the RPG genre. The only thing I have against action / twich combat coming into the genre is the fact that it seems to be completely over-running and possibly even forever removing "dice rolls" from RPG's and MMORPG's.
I'm confident that GW2 will be an excellent game and find a dedicated audience that will really enjoy it. I am not confident that GW2 will be a hit with more mainstream MMO players though, for the following reasons and these are the same reasons that is wrong with mmos today.
1. Players don’t want to look cool, they want to be cool.
Every time a player makes a choice based on a 1% dodge bonus, or wears stupid looking armor with great stats over visual aesthetics they are opting for substance over style. GW2 getting rid of these substantive differences between the races and high-level gear means that while a player may look cooler than another, they aren’t actually better than anyone else, and players will quickly realize it is a shallow system.
2. Players want to be the best without actually being the best.
Players want an advantage over everyone else, especially if they can achieve that with mediocre ability spread out over countless hours of monotony that the next guy can’t or won’t invest; a weapon that provides both a stat advantage and exclusive access to a dungeon to get an increased advantage allows mediocre players to get better simply through willpower and time invested versus actual skill or growth. GW2 goes the opposite direction of this, so far as to de-level players going backward in content, almost negating in total what advances they attained through gear and stats alone to keep things interesting. When stats fail to make players better, most players will have nowhere to turn.
3. When players can’t be the best they want somebody (preferably) or something else (works too) to blame instead of themselves.
Eventually things don’t work out as many players wish, and when that happens it’s easier to blame the healers or the tank, or the opposing faction, or the guildie who picked the dumbest class and is wasting a raid slot, etc. instead of doing a self-examination and figuring out how they can improve and then acting to do so. Considering that GW2 is more reliant on player-skill than any other MMO, and that professions are essentially jacks of all trades, finger-pointing will be awkward at best and accusations against balance issues or ad hominem attacks against ArenaNet just won’t work long-term for bad players.
4. Players don’t want to have to think, they just want to act.
Many MMOs cater to skill rotations, cool-down management, and provide high-reward abilities with no risks associated with their use. A perceived “I Win” button like Moa Morph that can actually miss is a foreign concept to many players, and one that will probably ruin their sense of fun in the face of more skillful opponents or challenging NPCs.
While some players are sighing in relief about the “low” number of skills in GW2, this is an illusion or an oversimplification, as many of the traits really do add an unparalleled level of depth to profession customization. That there is no one “right” answer for a profession, coupled with the fact that the “right traits and skills” would still require skillful and thoughtful use by the player, will only frustrate players more accustomed to traditional MMORPG gameplay conventions.
5. Players need validation.
In most MMOs it’s a simple matter to find one or two character builds that are optimal for the way the game is designed. In higher-level content, if a build can fulfill a role in a raid, and the raid succeeds, the build is successful, and the feedback is readily apparent. GW2’s reliance on player-skill and player-choice throws this system of evaluation out the window, and every request to evaluate a given build veils thinly the requestor’s doubts about having enough personal skill to succeed in spite of mistakes, oversights, and/or shortcomings at the trait and skill picking level. With player-skill being such an integral variable that many players won't honestly want to evaluate, validation will be difficult to come by.
If people are willing to accept new changes in GW2, I think its going to be a smashing hit. At some point, there has to mmo that tries to differentiate standard EQ/WOW based system and you know what, Guild Wars decided to do that.
EDIT: Changed Font and repost from Andre @SA forum
Aparently youve being palyingg too much WoW,those kind of players yes exists in abundance,but on 99% of the games only
The realy good games tends to build a decent comunity,Battleground europe (shooter,but still a mmo) a game that rewards strategists,serious players,and good listeners with sucess,victory and priceless joy and EVE,a long term play plan and where you have to be serious and work together with your mates to achive great things,specialy on PVP
Now the 3 real resons becouse GW2 will fail,in order
Its just a WoW clone (nothing to think-workout except your itens and lvls)
Archeage
The secret world
WoW 4ys,EVE 4ys,EU 4ys FH1942 best tanker for 4years Playing WWII OL for some years untill now many other for some months
Comments
You do know that the point of playing an RPG, whether it be an MMO or not, is to play the character. With its strengths and weaknesses, with the class or skill structure based on dice rolls modified by character stats, not twitch skills. What you're talking about is a bastardization of the genre or a complete over running of it by FPS action junkies.
Thats Bioware in a nutshell, at least since around 2003-4.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Playing a character have nothing to do with combat mechanics.You can easily make a good RPG game with very FPS like mechanics or you can make it turnbased, it doesn't really matter.
RPG games is about telling a story together with other people, many of the best RPGs games around have been semi twitched-based like Daggerfall.
Heck, there is even pen and paper RPGs without dicerolls, like "Amber" (It is great, try it). P&P games have a myriad of different mechanics even if many people seems to think that there only is D&D.
Oh no doubt. And definitely after early 2000s.
Personally, I was not one of the people that was fooled w/ SWTOR. I was vocal about it's flaws prior to release, and I'm vocal now. I did play it, but only for the story. I haven't played it in a while, though. I only found a couple stories to my liking.
Honestly, I haven't been dissapointed w/ an MMO since EQ2. I've generally known what I'm getting. I've been pleasantly surprised by games like LotRO, and WoW, but I can't think of a game that's really let me down since EQ2. I suppose I could say WAR (as it was buggy, and some of the features they promised didn't make it to launch), but I honestly had a damn good time w/ their PvP system. I actually liked being able to PvP tank, and I enjoyed playing some of the classes everyone thought sucked, but still managed to do well w/ them. But that's just me.
I still think people are projecting other game's failures onto this one, even if it's not warranted. I may be wrong, it might flop, but if it does I highly doubt it'll be for any of the reasons people are saying currently.
Wow, talk about a purist, lol.
I think Loke said best. RPG is about telling a story, not combat mechanics. While I do enjoy interesting combat, I don't think for a second that they have to be any certain way (other than balanced). Hell, Kingdom of Amalur is a really fun RPG, and it's very much based on twitch skills as well as gear / abilities. Or even better yet, Skyrim. Or hell, what about DeusEx? All really good RPG games, with very compelling stories, and mechanics that are more based on your ability to aim & avoid damage, than trading numbers with a stationary mob.
Errr, no, it does not have to have a single word of story to be a RPG. Several RPGs can be pure dungeon-crawlers without any stories and still be considered to be RPGs. RPGs are about "Role-Playing" and not necessarely only in the MMORPG "roleplaying server" sense.
By that definition, almost every game can be considered an RPG. In BF3 you're assuming the 'role' of a soldier. In mario you're assuming the role of a plumber rescuing his princess from bizarre creatures.
This is the definition found on wiki:
"A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting, or through a process of structured decision-making or character development."
While it's true that nowadays games tend to blur the line between genres more often, there seems to be a clear understanding that there is an element of story required to be considered an RPG. This is why diablo is considered an RPG, even though it's a dungeon crawler. There is a story being played out, even if you are ignoring it.
I haven't been disappointed since SWG's NGE really, maybe it was the fact that was so bad. But at that time I learned to never really put much into an MMO instead just try and enjoy the ride. Since then I've been content with those I've played, even TOR.
Yes there's a lot of projecting going on, gamers as a whole are just like that today, we're really a negative bunch if you view us collectively. Maybe it's a lack of sun lol. We seem to overly strive off negative vibes, just look how many emote smiles while talking about someone else who failed. To me (this has been a while now) it seems in large part many would rather watch a game fail than watch one succeed.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I suppose the focus of the game must lie on the role-playing rather than other elements. That would exclude a lot of games where they have a different focus.
Edit: The reason why it wouldn't make sense to require a story to be categorized as a RPG, is because genre-categorization is supposed to be a way to sort games. If a game without its story practically remains the same game, then the resulting game ought to be put in the same category. Just imagine Final Fantasy I without its story: it remains very much the same game. A better example is Etrian Odyssey (http://ds.ign.com/articles/788/788909p1.html), which has practically no story and remains very identical without the small story; yet there is no doubt about it being a RPG.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this thread... /facepalm
I love you, baby
MMO's are the ark of the gaming world. Let it take us in new directions.
The kill-trade thing is indeed the result of bad design, I agree. Fortunately, that won't work in WvW. "Winning" in WvW isn't about the number of kills, it's not about capturing structures... its' about being able to hold structures. When the scores are tallied every few minutes or whatever it is you get points for the keeps, castles, towers, etc. that you hold at that moment. No points are given for a capture or for killing a foe. Plus, the absence of "required" PvP gear (PvP gear has it's own look, not uber stats and no resilience!) removes the need or even desire to set up a kill-sharing type of scenario.
What's funny is that ANet designed this system, which solves all these problems, before Illum was ever out there to be abused. You can see the major difference in companies that focus on doing it right and those that focus on profit over product.
Oderint, dum metuant.
Point being, that mechanical flaws are hard to spot and can't expected to be spot easiily. For instance, there may be super-efficient World vs World strategies which are essential to stand any chance of winning. Such strategies, if they exist, are hard to spot early on.
Even I had to go "what!!" on this one. We have hours of footage from various unbiased sources on Dynamic events, structured pvp and WVw. We're talking HOURs of footage. A simple youtube video search will show u anything you need. Heck, there's so much information that you can plug in race and class and what you want to find and find a video of it somewhere.
I agree on Tor, just no information before hand. They wer riding the IP of Star Wars to the grave. I don't blame them though. This is how video games are markted these days. No one shows you ingame play, they just show you cool cut scenes or cut scenes not eve nin the game (see Prototype 2 commercials).
GW2 is taking a different marketing approach. They justshow their product andf allow others to judge. That's confidence in your product.
They can be traded, it's called playtesting. And TOR just didnt have time. I've done the math before. They started actual programming design (not story design) in 2007/2008, that's just 3 years to bring this complex game to the market. Even their star flag mechanic, Legacy, wasn't ready until an entire 6 months after release (if you count partial release released).
GW2 is doing what it can to make sure thta by the time its released, the product doesnt have a glaring mechanical error such as Ilum. That's glaring. That's not a jump cheat in some obscure area of the world, that's a pure lack of not evaluting playtesting.
so what the OP is saying is that traditional MMO gamers will suck at this game because of the playstyle. I am pretty sure that Guild Wars 1 veterans will have a huge advantage because GW1 took skill to play, not gear.
Yah, the op is right in a sense that if you are looking for the same old same old GW2 is not your game. There are other MMOs out there with different styles and taste. OP GW2 is not your game because you value time spent over actual skill.
-I am here to perform logic
Nah
You're missing the main point: SWTOR is a traditional gear-grind PVE game with gear-grind scenario PVP and world PVP tacked on as an afterthought. It was never built for world PvP and Ilium just shows it. This is why they have admited that they won't be doing much with Ilium any time soon until they figure out a way to re-design it.
GW2 WvW has been designed from the ground up with DAoC RvR as the starting point and they have enhanced it from there bringing it up to 2012 standards. To start, 3-sided battles makes a huge strategic difference because just when you think you have the 2nd team locked down, the third one is likely to show-up and change everything. On top of that you have destructible and repairable structures that are key PvP focus points. But best of all, the emphasis is on team/server victories that benefit everyone--not the selfish individual gold/gear rewards that are at the root of what's wrong with games like WOW, SWTOR, etc.
And that, is just one of the games that is GW2. If you're a short PvP scenario junkie, you've got that too and if PvE is your thing that's also there.
Testing and coding time are, of course, factors in what makes games play well and feel polished but that's just details. it's design goals and vision that makes world PVP fun in some but not others. GW2 has it, SWTOR does not.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Wow lots of trolling in this thread... Bet nobody got a warning for it..
- http://www.youtube.com/user/myfreestylegaming
AC>EQ>War>EVE>AoC>Aion>SWTOR>FireFall>Tera/GW2
There is. Control the supply, control the structures.
Of course, simple in concept, difficult in practice.
Oderint, dum metuant.
I feel like this needs to be said, cause people seem to pick sides, for example WoW vs GW2
All games require some sort of skill whether it be knowledge of what to do, or twitch hand eye coordination or both.
The classic WoW takes no skill vs Guild Wars 2 is all about skill is kind of a silly argument because infact both take skill and while they might not both require the same skill set neither is worse for it.
The following is all regarding Pvp which is where alot of the no skillz trolling comes from etc.
WoW is a gear based game, if you do not have the gear you are not going to compete with those that do, but at the same time when you do eventually get that gear running all those BGs and Arenas, there is no garentee you will be any better at pvp than the next guy. The gear deficit allows players with higher gear a pretty large advantage to ones starting out and any intelligant person would realize that this does not mean the lower geared player is less skilled. On the flip side if Gear was all that mattered people everywhere would be in Arena tournaments going to MLG but they are not and in fact that pool of amazing WoW arena players is fairly tiny compared to its overall player base.
Now Guild Wars 2 just shortens the process by eliminating the need to spend hours upon hours acquiring gear while you get rofl stomped by BG and Arena vets. It allows players to go in with equal gear from the start and begin working on the skills that will in the end make them an amazing pvper. This difference does not mean that guild wars 2 takes more skill than WoW and infact it requires many of the same skills. It just means that at the beginning of the game and for the years to come players will be atleast equally geared and the only difference left between them and the "pro's" now is only skill. In WoW average pvp players could be at a gear disadvantage and a skill disadvantage or they might be more skillful than the other guy but since the gear plays such a heavy roll its hard to distinguish consistenly who is the "better" player. Guild wars 2 on the other hand gets right down to it, the person who wins will be the better player, cause of knowledge, time, and skill he has acquired naturally or through practice.
This doesnt make GW2 a better game or take more skill, I think it just will be a better arena to display those skills and not be criticized for real issues like gear imbalance and the such. Note im not going to talk about class imbalances because while they do exist in GW2 you can make any character and instantly pvp with them at max level and max gear with all the skills unlocked, Pro teams will create strategies that play to the games strengths during each patch based on which classes are the best at that time(think league of legends tier lists etc). While playing the "OP" classes might seem stupid or imbalanced its what it is and when the objective is to win good players will always do what is nessecary to complete that goal
So I have a low attention span and represent everything that is wrong with the genre because I said people when excited about an impending MMO release feel emotions of excitement? That these feelings are maybe just emotions and not some clairvoyance or ESP or message from god saying "YOU ARE FEELING THE MOMENT IN HISTORY WHEN ALL WILL CHANGE! THIS GAME IS THE GAME YOU AND ALL OF MANKIND HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR!! YES, THIS IS THE MMO TO BRING BACK THE RPG INTO MMORPG!!!"
Here I thought I was just being a bit realistic. Ok, since I have no attention span and am everything that is wrong with the genre, I will be quiet now and be content being wrong.
You are right. GW2 will not only be the biggest success of every MMO, it will singlehandedly save the genre from itself. It is the penultimate MMO...the PERFECT GAME, Anet shall go down in history as doing the impossible.
Noted. I clearly am not qualified to post on these forums.
Of course it matters. As a roleplayer, I want my character's stats to determine the outcome of combat, not my twitch skills. It's awfully arrogant of you to state that the style of combat doesn't matter. Story telling is only part of the RPG formula. Playing a role (Character) is another aspect of it. You're quibbling over the "dice roll vs. twitch". Dice rolls are historically part of the RPG genre. The only thing I have against action / twich combat coming into the genre is the fact that it seems to be completely over-running and possibly even forever removing "dice rolls" from RPG's and MMORPG's.
Aparently youve being palyingg too much WoW,those kind of players yes exists in abundance,but on 99% of the games only
The realy good games tends to build a decent comunity,Battleground europe (shooter,but still a mmo) a game that rewards strategists,serious players,and good listeners with sucess,victory and priceless joy and EVE,a long term play plan and where you have to be serious and work together with your mates to achive great things,specialy on PVP
Now the 3 real resons becouse GW2 will fail,in order
Its just a WoW clone (nothing to think-workout except your itens and lvls)
Archeage
The secret world
WoW 4ys,EVE 4ys,EU 4ys
FH1942 best tanker for 4years
Playing WWII OL for some years untill now
many other for some months