Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

[Review] Guild Wars 2: Raising the Bar

1131416181921

Comments

  • Creslin321Creslin321 Member Posts: 5,359
    Originally posted by Randayn
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by Randayn
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by Randayn
    Combat: +1

    Particularly when combat is so tough. Bosses in the game’s dungeons – currently eight story-led runs through gauntlets of tough enemies, necessitating a powerful group – can feel more like a Dark Souls enemy than a World Of Warcraft foe, forcing assailants to learn attack patterns and movements, not simply their own skill rotation.

     

    I would give combat a -1 because it's strategy is revolved around twitch rather than preparation and thought.  If I wanted to have play a twitch combat game, I'd play an FPS...I play RPG's/MMORPG's because I'd rather have to think on my way to battle, before battle and during battle....I said it before, twitch/instinct is the absence of thought.  RPG's/MMORPGs, at least I thought, were more a thinking person's game than anything.  This game has destroyed this concept and set a new precident...you don't have to think to play.  To prove that, I can make a video of my 8 year old son playing the game flawlessly if you'd like.  He even uses his skill points and moves his skills over to be able to use.

    He tried to play Ryzom, Anarchy Online, AoC (even though this isnt even a thinking person's game really) and TSW and could not....died ALOT and the skill system for each (except for AoC) baffled him.

    I don't usually use my child as a psychology experiment, but this time it proved useful.

     Twitch and strategy are not mutually exclusive.  Look at Starcraft, it is basically equal parts twitch and strategy.

    I don't think GW2 is as strategical as SC (but then again no MMO is), but I don't think it's pure twitch.  There are plenty of tactics you can do in GW2 that actual require thought and oftentimes coordination.  For example, a mesmer can trait himself so that anytime people enter or exit his fields (glamors) they get a stack of confusion.

    He can then go to a busy control point and put down a portal field, and proceed to just kite everyone around as they run through the portal field (it's small) over and over again, getting 2 stacks of confusion each time, and proceed to kill themselves by attacking him.

    When I say twitch, I mean "in the moment"....the skill system in GW2 is definitely setup for "in the moment" combat.  Compare it to Ryzom, Anarchy Online or TSW where every decision you make as far as skills to choose goes and the difference is obvious.  I could spend hours trying to figure out how to properly alot points into the right places for my MA in AO.  I can spend hours trying to craft together new spells, attacks and such in Ryzom.  Took me a complete re-roll just get my skills selection right in TSW...you don't get it right and you'll know by the fact that you get pwnd every fight.  

    GW2 is plug 'n' play....don't have to worry about all the skill stuff...sure you have to worry about it in dungeons, but that's any game, including the unVanilla WoW...

     You can spend hours trying to come up with a build in GW2 as well...there are really TONS of combinations when you take into account:

    1.  Equipment (and sigils/runes on equipment)

    2.  Traits (lots of combinations here)

    3.  Skill selection

    4.  Weapon selection

    There are probably tens of thousands of different build combinations you can try and experiment with so I really don't see how GW2 is any less deep than the other games you mention.  And even once you create that build, you need to make the right decisions about when you use your skills...many of them have long cooldowns.

    And no, it's no purely reactive like you seem to indicate.  There are plenty of tactics that involve planning...like the mesmer one I mentioned before.

    The only argument I can see is that the open world stuff can (at times) be so zerged that your build really doesn't matter much.  But this is just a small part of the game.  At this point, most DEs aren't zerged.

    And your build/decisions definitely matter there.

    I think we're on the same page then.  As far as open world, I never once had to worry about skills and such....dungeons don't count though, because as I said, you must develop a strategy in any dungeon in any game....if that wasn't the case then the developers should feel ashamed of themselves.

    But why would anyone want an open world that can be run through spamming any button? (my son has done this and to my amazement, did not die....this was with my 22 norn warrior I dont play anymore)

     In some locations, and in some situations, you most definitely can run through the open world spamming 1 and do fine...but these situations only occur when you are in such a huge zerg that they wind up pulling your weight.  And TBH, it's fairly rare now that the population has spread and thinned out.

    I can tell you from personal experience, that if you are not in a massive zerg, or are very low level, then running through the world spamming 1 will result in your dying horribly ;).

    Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?

  • roo67roo67 Member Posts: 402

    I would say its one of the best mmos I've played in years along with Rift . It still fall short of that initial wow factor I had with Warcraft Vanilla . None the less still a great game and brilliant value .

    Looking forward to the War Z and Planetside 2 as well now which are both buy to play mmos .

    Dont really see any reason to pay a sub ever again .

    Well not unless theres something totally amazing and revolutionary comes out thats not completly casual .

  • Creslin321Creslin321 Member Posts: 5,359
    Originally posted by roo67

    I would say its one of the best mmos I've played in years along with Rift . It still fall short of that initial wow factor I had with Warcraft Vanilla . None the less still a great game and brilliant value .

    Looking forward to the War Z and Planetside 2 as well now which are both buy to play mmos .

    Dont really see any reason to pay a sub ever again .

    Well not unless theres something totally amazing and revolutionary comes out thats not completly casual .

    Yeah it's really hard for me to say whether I think that GW2 or vanilla WoW is the better game.  I'm totally loving GW2 now, and it's definitely been my favorite game since it came out...but I felt that way about vanilla WoW too lol :).  And on that note, I also felt that way about UO and EQ.

    So yeah, impossible to say, all I know is that, so far, GW2 is up in the pantheon of champions for me with EQ, WoW, and UO.

    Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?

  • AerowynAerowyn Member Posts: 7,928
    Originally posted by roo67

    I would say its one of the best mmos I've played in years along with Rift . It still fall short of that initial wow factor I had with Warcraft Vanilla . None the less still a great game and brilliant value .

    Looking forward to the War Z and Planetside 2 as well now which are both buy to play mmos .

    Dont really see any reason to pay a sub ever again .

    Well not unless theres something totally amazing and revolutionary comes out thats not completly casual .

    feel the same.. although think the initial wow factor in warcraft was more due to the time and  I have played sooooo many MMOs since then it takes a lot to really excite me in this genre.. luckily GW2 is the first since vanilla wow to really bring back my enjoyment of MMOs.. although i did have an enjoyable time in Rift and TSW recently

    I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,855
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Originally posted by Randayn

    Originally posted by Torgrim

    Originally posted by Randayn


    GW2 is linear...sure you can go back levels, but you can't progress without leveling.  

     

    If GW2 is linear as you say then RIFT,WOW,LOTRO,AoC,EQ2,TSW,STO,SWTOR are on rails.

    I never said they were'nt actually....the comment came from the other poster that GW2 wasn't linear...

    Any themepark is going to be linear in one way or another...that's what themeparks are....


     

    Read my post again, I said there was no linear questing!!!! The game has horizontal game design. If you dont get it watch this video.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zn81sY7pqI

     

    Taugrim is only just a little biased in that video. He's not comparing the good and the bad of both. He's comparing the good of one against the bad of the other. He points out all the flaws that apply to Vertical scaling. Too bad 90% of the issue in PVE revolves around Raiding and raid gear. If you are in these games, and you don't raid, you don't have these isues, and I'll still argue that you don't need BiS to compete in heroic/Expert dungeons. I do just fine without top teir raid gear...More than just fine. I hold my own quite well. So how's that relevant to GW2 with no raiding? It's not, it's comparing apples to.....well, nothing.  Then he spells out all the benefits to Horizontal levleing without mentioning any of the drawbacks either. That's always good for an unbiased opinion. 

  • ShakyMoShakyMo Member CommonPosts: 7,207
    I agree with taugrim, all the mmo I've liked didn't have this never ending power curve and expanded horizontally

    Daoc, eve, perpetuum, coh, gw2, planetside
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 7,591
     
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by KhinRunite
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by Ethos86
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    Today I learned that:

    1) an MMO with its endgame in the cons list can get more than 5/10 in the overall score.

    Definition of endgame is "things to do once level cap is hit". By this definition there are tons of stuff to do after you hit 80. Depending on how you reached 80 you could still do personal story, craft legendary, complete dungeons and paths (story and explorable), complete the world map, WvWvW. I personally don't know why you'd put endgame in the cons list unless you're looking for themepark raids, arenas, and basically gear for power up treadmill. It's not required for MMOs to have those. ANet is probably more interested in catering to the demographic that dislike large scale scheduled raids. Also, I believe currently unavailable zones will be opened via patch much like WoW opening raids in major patches.

    2) GW2 has "fantastic story and dungeons"

    The difficulty of dungeons are putting off some players. I haven't done any yet, but the mini dungeons are fun. Also you need to let the personal story gain some momentum. It starts out slow as it introduces the player's backstory, but on my story I can feel things are about to get big.

    3) GW2's copy pasted dynamic events are somehow better than classic questing.

    Dunno why you had to associate "copy-pasted" with DEs, but omit them from classic quests. They're equally repetitive in nature, but DEs help make the world appear more alive. They give incentive to revisiting an area. Starting an event for the first time gives the feeling of discovery. That's not to say the current implementation of DEs are perfect, but I personally prefer the GW2 way over, say...WoW.

    4) GW2 losing 40-50% of its player base within a month (see xfire+raptr) means it has longevity 9/10

    Xfire is only meritable on discussions revolving around Xfire. I'm not in denial that population is stabilizing, but I could post server status displaying Full, High, Medium, etc. and that still won't prove anything because there's no actual numbers. As for longetivity, like I said there's tons of things to do, and let's not forget ANet will keep new (free) content coming.

    5) not having to group or interact with anyone from 1 to 80+full exotics gives the game a social 8/10

    You may have chosen not to interact with others, but asking for POIs, vistas, assistance with more difficult SP challenges, secret puzzles, and champion mob have to count for interaction. I see people do these. I do these. It's shortsighted to think that just because we're no longer forced to interact there's no more interaction to be had. Forced grouping isn't a metric for Socialization.

    6) the dungeon grind can be a con while at the same time the dungeons are "fantastic". How does that work exactly? If the dungeons were fun the grind would be fun.

    No comment. Haven't done dungeons. Maybe someone else will take this.

    Haters, it's amusing.

    I hope at least you were paid to create a new account over here and post this on your first day's first post. So funny to see these account stats right below your name.

    Here's what I learned today: Trolls are too obvious.

    Yet you don't even attempt to counter my arguments.

    I said I wouldn't do this anymore, but you asked for it...

    Unfortunately I couldn't give firsthand comments on some stuff as I haven't even experienced half of the game yet (my main is  only at level 48)

    Your whole text in green is invalidated by the fact that you are level 48 and haven't done a dungeon yet. Trust me, I was just as excited at level 48. Come back to us after you spend 1-2 weeks at level 80. (if you make it that far) 

     

    And btw I tried to be social. I tried inviting people who were on the same quest and got either ignored or yelled at ("we can do everything without having to group" etc), I tried grouping with friends but the hearts drove us to solo all the time(some of them are slower players than me and it's painful to always have to wait for them to finish their heart) . Also grouping gave us NO advantage whatsoever(soloing is faster actually), so why do it?

    Funny... What I read into your last paragraph is that you are quite anti social.

     

    There is absolutley no problem socializing in the game it's certain type of people that are the problem. I dont need any kind of advantage to socialize and have a good time with people in game or out.

     

    [mod edit]

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • ZylaxxZylaxx Member Posts: 2,574
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    Originally posted by roo67

    I would say its one of the best mmos I've played in years along with Rift . It still fall short of that initial wow factor I had with Warcraft Vanilla . None the less still a great game and brilliant value .

    Looking forward to the War Z and Planetside 2 as well now which are both buy to play mmos .

    Dont really see any reason to pay a sub ever again .

    Well not unless theres something totally amazing and revolutionary comes out thats not completly casual .

    feel the same.. although think the initial wow factor in warcraft was more due to the time and  I have played sooooo many MMOs since then it takes a lot to really excite me in this genre.. luckily GW2 is the first since vanilla wow to really bring back my enjoyment of MMOs.. although i did have an enjoyable time in Rift and TSW recently

    I too feel the same and agree with you it will take alot to really excite me since ive been in this genre for 14+ years now.  As for Rift and TSW was really excited for the potential of those 2 until they decided to blow it all to hell with their endgame model of vertical gear threadmill/WoW clone.

    Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online

    Playing: GW2
    Waiting on: TESO
    Next Flop: Planetside 2
    Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.

    image

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Member CommonPosts: 2,556
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by roo67

    I would say its one of the best mmos I've played in years along with Rift . It still fall short of that initial wow factor I had with Warcraft Vanilla . None the less still a great game and brilliant value .

    Looking forward to the War Z and Planetside 2 as well now which are both buy to play mmos .

    Dont really see any reason to pay a sub ever again .

    Well not unless theres something totally amazing and revolutionary comes out thats not completly casual .

    Yeah it's really hard for me to say whether I think that GW2 or vanilla WoW is the better game.

    Really? One was built on the broken systems of an older MMO and never did anything new or innovative.

    The other actually brought some new ideas to the table and brought back some great old ones.

    Then again, I'm of the camp that thought WoW was a bad, boring, uninspired game all the way through.

    GW2 will always get praise from me for doing away with the moronic practice of quest based leveling.

  • Creslin321Creslin321 Member Posts: 5,359
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by roo67

    I would say its one of the best mmos I've played in years along with Rift . It still fall short of that initial wow factor I had with Warcraft Vanilla . None the less still a great game and brilliant value .

    Looking forward to the War Z and Planetside 2 as well now which are both buy to play mmos .

    Dont really see any reason to pay a sub ever again .

    Well not unless theres something totally amazing and revolutionary comes out thats not completly casual .

    Yeah it's really hard for me to say whether I think that GW2 or vanilla WoW is the better game.

    Really? One was built on the broken systems of an older MMO and never did anything new or innovative.

    The other actually brought some new ideas to the table and brought back some great old ones.

    Then again, I'm of the camp that thought WoW was a bad, boring, uninspired game all the way through.

    GW2 will always get praise from me for doing away with the moronic practice of quest based leveling.

     Yes, really.  I'm guessing you are referring to WoW when you say it was built off of the broken systems of older MMO's?

    Not sure if you recall what open-world PvE in MMORPGs were like before WoW, but they were basically about camping spawns.  EQ, DAoC, AC, UO...I spent a very long time camping spawns in ALL of those games...it made up the majority of my PvE leveling/skilling experience.

    WoW actually made it so there was a cohesive quest line to go through all the way to max level.  I think that's a big deal.  I also think it wasn't perfect, but still a big deal. 

    Also, even if there was some game that had this before WoW...it doesn't matter.  The implementation of an idea is way way way WAY more important than the idea itself.  The fact of the matter is that WoW implemented quest-node leveling far better than any MMORPG to come before it.

    Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?

  • immodiumimmodium Member RarePosts: 2,610
    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    GW2 will always get praise from me for doing away with the moronic practice of quest based leveling.

    But your still doing the "moronic quest based leveling" in GW2. Its just presented differently. It's still there, you just find it more fun than the traditional method.

    Yeah, you can level through crafting but most level through combat/gather questing.

    image
  • marcusfaithmarcusfaith Member Posts: 5
    When a game loses its challenge or goal, then it has lost fun factor. GW2 was fun for the first 80 levels because there is, at least, a level up factor being considered. Once you hit level 80, it's a grind. The end-game is simply PvP and gear grinding. For people who love those, the game is fun. For others, the game has ended.

    For me, the game almost ended once I realized that all zones are the same: you go from one quest heart to another, while trying to complete everything in the map. There is no social value in the game, no in-game economy, and no real events (dynamic events do not count) that shape and alter how the world will be.

    However, when I step back and look at the game title, the game did fulfill its goal. It is Guild Wars. It is meant for people who are into PvP. The PvE elements are there to attract those who aren't into PvP. As such, it is a success. At the same time, it can only hold that type of players' interest for so long until they realize the game is mediocre at best.

    Still, it's a lot of fun for me. I just hope upcoming MMORPGs will do more in terms of the way socializing, in-game economy and diverse gameplay types (not just quest hubs everywhere) are being implemented. If that can be done, then the longevity of the game can be guaranteed based on the degree of the implementation.
  • Creslin321Creslin321 Member Posts: 5,359
    Originally posted by marcusfaith
    When a game loses its challenge or goal, then it has lost fun factor. GW2 was fun for the first 80 levels because there is, at least, a level up factor being considered. Once you hit level 80, it's a grind. The end-game is simply PvP and gear grinding. For people who love those, the game is fun. For others, the game has ended.

    For me, the game almost ended once I realized that all zones are the same: you go from one quest heart to another, while trying to complete everything in the map. There is no social value in the game, no in-game economy, and no real events (dynamic events do not count) that shape and alter how the world will be.

    However, when I step back and look at the game title, the game did fulfill its goal. It is Guild Wars. It is meant for people who are into PvP. The PvE elements are there to attract those who aren't into PvP. As such, it is a success. At the same time, it can only hold that type of players' interest for so long until they realize the game is mediocre at best.

    Still, it's a lot of fun for me. I just hope upcoming MMORPGs will do more in terms of the way socializing, in-game economy and diverse gameplay types (not just quest hubs everywhere) are being implemented. If that can be done, then the longevity of the game can be guaranteed based on the degree of the implementation.

     What game ever had real events that shape and alter how the world will be?

    Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?

  • marcusfaithmarcusfaith Member Posts: 5

    Originally posted by Creslin321

    Originally posted by marcusfaith

    When a game loses its challenge or goal, then it has lost fun factor. GW2 was fun for the first 80 levels because there is, at least, a level up factor being considered. Once you hit level 80, it's a grind. The end-game is simply PvP and gear grinding. For people who love those, the game is fun. For others, the game has ended.

    For me, the game almost ended once I realized that all zones are the same: you go from one quest heart to another, while trying to complete everything in the map. There is no social value in the game, no in-game economy, and no real events (dynamic events do not count) that shape and alter how the world will be.

    However, when I step back and look at the game title, the game did fulfill its goal. It is Guild Wars. It is meant for people who are into PvP. The PvE elements are there to attract those who aren't into PvP. As such, it is a success. At the same time, it can only hold that type of players' interest for so long until they realize the game is mediocre at best.

    Still, it's a lot of fun for me. I just hope upcoming MMORPGs will do more in terms of the way socializing, in-game economy and diverse gameplay types (not just quest hubs everywhere) are being implemented. If that can be done, then the longevity of the game can be guaranteed based on the degree of the implementation.
    What game ever had real events that shape and alter how the world will be?

     
    That's the thing: it's almost impossible to implement without having to troubleshoot all types of problems that may come out of it after launch. Game companies have to decide what gaming audience they have to cater to. In that aspect, GW2 is successful in the path they've chosen.

    However, think for a second: if the game world can be altered based on the events made by gamers, wouldn't you want to play in that living, breathing world? I, for one, do.

  • RandaynRandayn Member UncommonPosts: 904
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Originally posted by Randayn

    Originally posted by Torgrim

    Originally posted by Randayn


    GW2 is linear...sure you can go back levels, but you can't progress without leveling.  

     

    If GW2 is linear as you say then RIFT,WOW,LOTRO,AoC,EQ2,TSW,STO,SWTOR are on rails.

    I never said they were'nt actually....the comment came from the other poster that GW2 wasn't linear...

    Any themepark is going to be linear in one way or another...that's what themeparks are....


     

    Read my post again, I said there was no linear questing!!!! The game has horizontal game design. If you dont get it watch this video.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zn81sY7pqI

     

    Im good...no need to see the video...Please explain to me how leveling from 1-80 by going to different zones is horizontal game design?  And there is no horizontal skill progression, so please explain to me what's horizontal about this game??  if I turn the box 90 degrees from standing position, that is horizontal...but that's it...

    Again, it's a farce...just because a designer says it, doesnt mean it's true...

    image
  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Member CommonPosts: 2,556
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by roo67

    I would say its one of the best mmos I've played in years along with Rift . It still fall short of that initial wow factor I had with Warcraft Vanilla . None the less still a great game and brilliant value .

    Looking forward to the War Z and Planetside 2 as well now which are both buy to play mmos .

    Dont really see any reason to pay a sub ever again .

    Well not unless theres something totally amazing and revolutionary comes out thats not completly casual .

    Yeah it's really hard for me to say whether I think that GW2 or vanilla WoW is the better game.

    Really? One was built on the broken systems of an older MMO and never did anything new or innovative.

    The other actually brought some new ideas to the table and brought back some great old ones.

    Then again, I'm of the camp that thought WoW was a bad, boring, uninspired game all the way through.

    GW2 will always get praise from me for doing away with the moronic practice of quest based leveling.

     Yes, really.  I'm guessing you are referring to WoW when you say it was built off of the broken systems of older MMO's?

    Not sure if you recall what open-world PvE in MMORPGs were like before WoW, but they were basically about camping spawns. They were in EQ, I never EVER camped a spawn in DAoC. EQ, DAoC, AC, UO...I spent a very long time camping spawns in ALL of those games...it made up the majority of my PvE leveling/skilling experience. You must have been doing something wrong then, because there were no mobs in demand enough in DAoC to be worth camping. And that problem was solved in WoW through instancing, which, other MMOS also had and used before WoW, EQ, specifically.

    WoW actually made it so there was a cohesive quest line to go through all the way to max level. DAoC had a cohesive quest line from level 5 to level 50 called the Epic Quest, and it actually felt like a quest, not busy work.  I think that's a big deal.  I also think it wasn't perfect, but still a big deal. 

    Also, even if there was some game that had this before WoW...it doesn't matter. Kinda does, yeah. The implementation of an idea is way way way WAY more important than the idea itself. Exactly, and the implementation was better or the same in most other games.  The fact of the matter is that WoW implemented quest-node leveling far better than any MMORPG to come before it. Incorrect.

     

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Member CommonPosts: 2,556
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by marcusfaith
    When a game loses its challenge or goal, then it has lost fun factor. GW2 was fun for the first 80 levels because there is, at least, a level up factor being considered. Once you hit level 80, it's a grind. The end-game is simply PvP and gear grinding. For people who love those, the game is fun. For others, the game has ended.

    For me, the game almost ended once I realized that all zones are the same: you go from one quest heart to another, while trying to complete everything in the map. There is no social value in the game, no in-game economy, and no real events (dynamic events do not count) that shape and alter how the world will be.

    However, when I step back and look at the game title, the game did fulfill its goal. It is Guild Wars. It is meant for people who are into PvP. The PvE elements are there to attract those who aren't into PvP. As such, it is a success. At the same time, it can only hold that type of players' interest for so long until they realize the game is mediocre at best.

    Still, it's a lot of fun for me. I just hope upcoming MMORPGs will do more in terms of the way socializing, in-game economy and diverse gameplay types (not just quest hubs everywhere) are being implemented. If that can be done, then the longevity of the game can be guaranteed based on the degree of the implementation.

     What game ever had real events that shape and alter how the world will be?

    Darkfall, Asheron's Call, Ultima Online... but especially Asheron's Call.

  • RandaynRandayn Member UncommonPosts: 904
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by marcusfaith
    When a game loses its challenge or goal, then it has lost fun factor. GW2 was fun for the first 80 levels because there is, at least, a level up factor being considered. Once you hit level 80, it's a grind. The end-game is simply PvP and gear grinding. For people who love those, the game is fun. For others, the game has ended.

    For me, the game almost ended once I realized that all zones are the same: you go from one quest heart to another, while trying to complete everything in the map. There is no social value in the game, no in-game economy, and no real events (dynamic events do not count) that shape and alter how the world will be.

    However, when I step back and look at the game title, the game did fulfill its goal. It is Guild Wars. It is meant for people who are into PvP. The PvE elements are there to attract those who aren't into PvP. As such, it is a success. At the same time, it can only hold that type of players' interest for so long until they realize the game is mediocre at best.

    Still, it's a lot of fun for me. I just hope upcoming MMORPGs will do more in terms of the way socializing, in-game economy and diverse gameplay types (not just quest hubs everywhere) are being implemented. If that can be done, then the longevity of the game can be guaranteed based on the degree of the implementation.

     What game ever had real events that shape and alter how the world will be?

    Darkfall, Asheron's Call, Ultima Online... but especially Asheron's Call.

    Don't forget Ryzom....cmon man

    image
  • The_KorriganThe_Korrigan Member RarePosts: 3,455
    Originally posted by Randayn

    GW2 is linear...sure you can go back levels, but you can't progress without leveling.  

    Every single MMORPG is linear then. Even pure sandbox games like Minecraft are linear. You can't progress without improving your character in a way or another. UO is linear (raise those skills). EvE is linear (raise... those skills). There's no other way to progress than to raise those skills or levels.

    What's your point, exactly?

    Respect, walk, what did you say?
    Respect, walk
    Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
    - PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
    Yes, they are back !

  • Creslin321Creslin321 Member Posts: 5,359
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by roo67

    I would say its one of the best mmos I've played in years along with Rift . It still fall short of that initial wow factor I had with Warcraft Vanilla . None the less still a great game and brilliant value .

    Looking forward to the War Z and Planetside 2 as well now which are both buy to play mmos .

    Dont really see any reason to pay a sub ever again .

    Well not unless theres something totally amazing and revolutionary comes out thats not completly casual .

    Yeah it's really hard for me to say whether I think that GW2 or vanilla WoW is the better game.

    Really? One was built on the broken systems of an older MMO and never did anything new or innovative.

    The other actually brought some new ideas to the table and brought back some great old ones.

    Then again, I'm of the camp that thought WoW was a bad, boring, uninspired game all the way through.

    GW2 will always get praise from me for doing away with the moronic practice of quest based leveling.

     Yes, really.  I'm guessing you are referring to WoW when you say it was built off of the broken systems of older MMO's?

    Not sure if you recall what open-world PvE in MMORPGs were like before WoW, but they were basically about camping spawns. They were in EQ, I never EVER camped a spawn in DAoC. EQ, DAoC, AC, UO...I spent a very long time camping spawns in ALL of those games...it made up the majority of my PvE leveling/skilling experience. You must have been doing something wrong then, because there were no mobs in demand enough in DAoC to be worth camping. And that problem was solved in WoW through instancing, which, other MMOS also had and used before WoW, EQ, specifically.

    WoW actually made it so there was a cohesive quest line to go through all the way to max level. DAoC had a cohesive quest line from level 5 to level 50 called the Epic Quest, and it actually felt like a quest, not busy work.  I think that's a big deal.  I also think it wasn't perfect, but still a big deal. 

    Also, even if there was some game that had this before WoW...it doesn't matter. Kinda does, yeah. The implementation of an idea is way way way WAY more important than the idea itself. Exactly, and the implementation was better or the same in most other games.  The fact of the matter is that WoW implemented quest-node leveling far better than any MMORPG to come before it. Incorrect.

     

     Hey what does DAoC stand for?  I thought it was Dark Age of Camelot...but maybe I'm wrong lol.  Because I know that in Dark Age of Camelot I spent a long time camping wolves with my scottish Albion dude...whatever that race was called.  Willam Wallaces?  But whatever.

    And when I wasn't camping, I was just wandering around an area killing stuff...basically like camping except you walk every now and then.  EQ had this too.  And DAoC had open dungeons just like most other games in that era, so I spent some time there grouped up as well.

    Don't get me wrong, I loved DAoC, but I'm pretty sure it did NOT have the amount or diversity of quests that WoW had.  Also, I stopped playing DAoC before ToA came out, so maybe they added questing like this later?  No clue, but I definitely don't remember it.

    Also, combat in DAoC wasn't the most responsive, and melee had to use /stick to stay on people otherwise it was very difficult.  WoW was the first MMORPG I played that was responsive enough to be able to just "keyboard it" as melee and stick to a player.

    Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 7,591
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by laserit
     
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by KhinRunite
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by Ethos86
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    Today I learned that:

    1) an MMO with its endgame in the cons list can get more than 5/10 in the overall score.

    Definition of endgame is "things to do once level cap is hit". By this definition there are tons of stuff to do after you hit 80. Depending on how you reached 80 you could still do personal story, craft legendary, complete dungeons and paths (story and explorable), complete the world map, WvWvW. I personally don't know why you'd put endgame in the cons list unless you're looking for themepark raids, arenas, and basically gear for power up treadmill. It's not required for MMOs to have those. ANet is probably more interested in catering to the demographic that dislike large scale scheduled raids. Also, I believe currently unavailable zones will be opened via patch much like WoW opening raids in major patches.

    2) GW2 has "fantastic story and dungeons"

    The difficulty of dungeons are putting off some players. I haven't done any yet, but the mini dungeons are fun. Also you need to let the personal story gain some momentum. It starts out slow as it introduces the player's backstory, but on my story I can feel things are about to get big.

    3) GW2's copy pasted dynamic events are somehow better than classic questing.

    Dunno why you had to associate "copy-pasted" with DEs, but omit them from classic quests. They're equally repetitive in nature, but DEs help make the world appear more alive. They give incentive to revisiting an area. Starting an event for the first time gives the feeling of discovery. That's not to say the current implementation of DEs are perfect, but I personally prefer the GW2 way over, say...WoW.

    4) GW2 losing 40-50% of its player base within a month (see xfire+raptr) means it has longevity 9/10

    Xfire is only meritable on discussions revolving around Xfire. I'm not in denial that population is stabilizing, but I could post server status displaying Full, High, Medium, etc. and that still won't prove anything because there's no actual numbers. As for longetivity, like I said there's tons of things to do, and let's not forget ANet will keep new (free) content coming.

    5) not having to group or interact with anyone from 1 to 80+full exotics gives the game a social 8/10

    You may have chosen not to interact with others, but asking for POIs, vistas, assistance with more difficult SP challenges, secret puzzles, and champion mob have to count for interaction. I see people do these. I do these. It's shortsighted to think that just because we're no longer forced to interact there's no more interaction to be had. Forced grouping isn't a metric for Socialization.

    6) the dungeon grind can be a con while at the same time the dungeons are "fantastic". How does that work exactly? If the dungeons were fun the grind would be fun.

    No comment. Haven't done dungeons. Maybe someone else will take this.

    Haters, it's amusing.

    I hope at least you were paid to create a new account over here and post this on your first day's first post. So funny to see these account stats right below your name.

    Here's what I learned today: Trolls are too obvious.

    Yet you don't even attempt to counter my arguments.

    I said I wouldn't do this anymore, but you asked for it...

    Unfortunately I couldn't give firsthand comments on some stuff as I haven't even experienced half of the game yet (my main is  only at level 48)

    Your whole text in green is invalidated by the fact that you are level 48 and haven't done a dungeon yet. Trust me, I was just as excited at level 48. Come back to us after you spend 1-2 weeks at level 80. (if you make it that far) 

     

    And btw I tried to be social. I tried inviting people who were on the same quest and got either ignored or yelled at ("we can do everything without having to group" etc), I tried grouping with friends but the hearts drove us to solo all the time(some of them are slower players than me and it's painful to always have to wait for them to finish their heart) . Also grouping gave us NO advantage whatsoever(soloing is faster actually), so why do it?

    Funny... What I read into your last paragraph is that you are quite anti social.

     

    There is absolutley no problem socializing in the game it's certain type of people that are the problem. I dont need any kind of advantage to socialize and have a good time with people in game or out.

     

    [mod edit]

    [mod edit]

    I didnt make a personal attack, just an observation. The facts are written in your own paragraph which contains some very anti social comments.

     

    There is nothing in the game that hinder's socialization. People do that all on their own. I've made many freinds in game, usually by saving some ones ass or vice versa, I've rezzed tons of people and most are very freindly and polite, the ones who are not...  are jerks pure and simple and would be jerks no matter what the game.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 10,606

    Originally posted by Randayn

    Originally posted by Nanfoodle



    Originally posted by Randayn




    Originally posted by Torgrim




    Originally posted by Randayn





    GW2 is linear...sure you can go back levels, but you can't progress without leveling.  

     

    If GW2 is linear as you say then RIFT,WOW,LOTRO,AoC,EQ2,TSW,STO,SWTOR are on rails.

    I never said they were'nt actually....the comment came from the other poster that GW2 wasn't linear...

    Any themepark is going to be linear in one way or another...that's what themeparks are....






     

    Read my post again, I said there was no linear questing!!!! The game has horizontal game design. If you dont get it watch this video.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zn81sY7pqI

     

    Im good...no need to see the video...Please explain to me how leveling from 1-80 by going to different zones is horizontal game design?  And there is no horizontal skill progression, so please explain to me what's horizontal about this game??  if I turn the box 90 degrees from standing position, that is horizontal...but that's it...

    Again, it's a farce...just because a designer says it, doesnt mean it's true...


     

    Its smiple. Most MMOs design 75% of their content for leveling and 2/3 of their dungeons on launch of a game are lower level content. Like GW2 first dungeon is level 30. But by say level 45 if you have not found a team to do that dungeon run, then that dungeon is a drag to do because its to low level for you and the loot would not be worth doing since its not for your level. Same with being level 80 and going back to a level 60 zone. Why do it? The mobs are easy to kill and the loot is usless. Thats vertical scaling game. As you out level the area there is very little reason to go back to it. All you have is the 25% of the content designed for top level to chalange you. Very linear scaling content/questing.

    A horizontally scaled game like GW2 make all content playable. At level 80 you can go back to a level 30 dungeon and not only is it scaled for your level but the boss drops are for your level. So now you are having fun and getting great loot. Same with zones. I have been playing with guildies at level 80 in level 30-60 areas and getting loot I can use and having fun. I have never played a MMO thats done that. All content is relevant to me. I can go anywhere and have fun. Sure the level 5-15 areas are a little dry but thats the starter areas where the game is teaching you how to play. Also there are 33 different dungeon runs I get to go explore that all drop loot for my level. To me that makes so much more sense.

  • Creslin321Creslin321 Member Posts: 5,359
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by marcusfaith
    When a game loses its challenge or goal, then it has lost fun factor. GW2 was fun for the first 80 levels because there is, at least, a level up factor being considered. Once you hit level 80, it's a grind. The end-game is simply PvP and gear grinding. For people who love those, the game is fun. For others, the game has ended.

    For me, the game almost ended once I realized that all zones are the same: you go from one quest heart to another, while trying to complete everything in the map. There is no social value in the game, no in-game economy, and no real events (dynamic events do not count) that shape and alter how the world will be.

    However, when I step back and look at the game title, the game did fulfill its goal. It is Guild Wars. It is meant for people who are into PvP. The PvE elements are there to attract those who aren't into PvP. As such, it is a success. At the same time, it can only hold that type of players' interest for so long until they realize the game is mediocre at best.

    Still, it's a lot of fun for me. I just hope upcoming MMORPGs will do more in terms of the way socializing, in-game economy and diverse gameplay types (not just quest hubs everywhere) are being implemented. If that can be done, then the longevity of the game can be guaranteed based on the degree of the implementation.

     What game ever had real events that shape and alter how the world will be?

    Darkfall, Asheron's Call, Ultima Online... but especially Asheron's Call.

     When I read these posts, I just think "did you ever play those games???"

    I remember when I played UO I would hear about some seer doing some event in some city and how awesome it was, but over years of playing I NEVER once saw one of these so-called events.  The only thing that "changed the world" in UO was housing placement.  And while this did result in player-made towns, which were cool, the VAST majority of it was just urban sprawl.  You would literally be exploring in what looks like wilderness and then BAM you run into an invisible wall which resolves into a castle and tons of random houses around it.

    Darkfall?  Are you talking about the player towns that have plots that say "blacksmith goes here" and then people pay money and a blacksmith appears?  Yeah, that's a huge world changer.  Or maybe you're talking about the wars between player towns so that one guild can destroy another guild's town.  Which honestly, is just like WvW in GW2 except on a much, much longer and more drawn out timeline.  I remember being at one of those sieges once...it consisted of guys hitting buildings with hammers for what seemed like hours.

    AC...can't really comment.  I did play AC, and I liked it.  I can't say I remembered any world changing stuff, but I didn't play it for all that long.  All I really remember from it is trying to get a Mattekar coat, how my room-mate hated the "bitch system" (vassal system), and how their idea that magic would become less powerful when a lot of people know your spells was stupid.

    Also...weren't you talking about PvE stuff in your post?  So I'm assuming you were trying to refer to PvE events that changed the world?

    Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?

  • BladestromBladestrom Member UncommonPosts: 5,001
    I agree. In real life you can walk into a pub and you can just start talking to people, but in reality you walk into a pub with a group and then you network from there. That's what a guild is, that group, but furthermore you as an individual need to make an effort. All gw2 has done is thing like saying there is one pint on the bar every half hour, first to touch it gets it- be social in that scenario I dare ya!

    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

  • BladestromBladestrom Member UncommonPosts: 5,001
    Bloody phone ^^ gw2 removed the pint scenario!

    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

Sign In or Register to comment.