Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Guild Wars 2: A New Breed of MMORPG?

2456

Comments

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Originally posted by Bigdaddyx

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Could disect this and say why these features are good for GW2 and the way GW2 is using them makes sense etc... but I doubt it'd make a difference.

    Enjoy playing what you like playing.

    IMO that can be said for just any MMO that the way they used it is good for them and makes sense.

    I would disagree.

    There are a lot of bad design decisions made that make no sense and are not good for a game.

  • Games888Games888 Chicago, ILPosts: 243Member

    not new breed, just not WoW clone. 

  • smh_alotsmh_alot Area 51Posts: 976Member
    Ok, I get the excitement of the article writer, but I don't get the sandbox comparison. In what way does GW2 use sandbox specific elements?? Now Arche Age, THAT I can understand that people describe it as a themepark/sandbox hybrid, with sandbox features like building your own houses, towns, keeps and ships and such. But GW2, nope, not really: best description imo would be themepark 2.0 or next-gen themepark. But still very solidly in the themepark or dev content driven branch of things.
  • BigdaddyxBigdaddyx California, WAPosts: 1,985Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Originally posted by Bigdaddyx


    Originally posted by BadSpock



    Could disect this and say why these features are good for GW2 and the way GW2 is using them makes sense etc... but I doubt it'd make a difference.

    Enjoy playing what you like playing.

    IMO that can be said for just any MMO that the way they used it is good for them and makes sense.

    I would disagree.

    There are a lot of bad design decisions made that make no sense and are not good for a game.

    And those bad designs suddenly make sense with GW2? sorry but it is not that simple.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Originally posted by smh_alot

    Ok, I get the excitement of the article writer, but I don't get the sandbox comparison. In what way does GW2 use sandbox specific elements?? Now Arche Age, THAT I can understand that people describe it as a themepark/sandbox hybrid, with sandbox features like building your own houses, towns, keeps and ships and such. But GW2, nope, not really: best description imo would be themepark 2.0 or next-gen themepark. But still very solidly in the themepark or dev content driven branch of things.

    From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

    Exploration + content.

     

  • FusionFusion VaasaPosts: 1,391Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    3 faction open world PvP which doesn't divide server/guild/friend alliances

    PvE themepark with many sandbox properties I miss from old UO days (only true sandbox)

    action oriented combat

    You know?

    The more I look at GW2, the more I think it is really the evolution of Ultima Online.

    Ultima Online, at its prime before the "2nd generation" games 2003-2004 was I think at its best post Renaissance pre Age of Shadows.

    Similarities?

    Minimal grind.

    No PvE end game.

    PvP from day one in a seperate world, faction vs. faction vs. faction with territorial control.

    focus on skill > gear

    PvE world focused on exploration, cooperation, without limited by strict group size or role/class restrictions.

    I mean, the 2nd generation sandboxes like EvE really followed the pre Renaissance UO model - which was very niche.

    Other sandboxes like FFXI and SWG followed more of the EQ1 model with tons of grinding.

    No game has really followed the UO post Renaissance model.

    And I'd argue, until now with GW2. That's why I'm excited about GW2.

    Looks to bring back a LOT of great memories from post-Trammel split UO, which (IMO) was the greatest MMORPG of all time.

    One thing it is missing? Housing.

    I mean, yeah we have our personal instances but... there was just something so fun and cool about UO housing, putting all your stuff on display, having a shared space for your friends/guildies...

    I didn't like the urban sprawl that kind of ruined many of the "wild" places in Brittania, but housing is really the only big thing for me that I feel GW2 is missing.

     

    Is this supposed to be a sarcastic post? Or are you seriously comparing GW2 to being UO?

    These two games have nothing in common, UO being a pure sandbox and GW2 being a pure themepark, like comparing a youghurt to wheatbread.

    Currently playing: -

    Waiting for: Class4.

    Dead and Buried: ESO, NWO, GW2, SWTOR, Darkfall, AO, AC2, Vanguard, CoH/V, EnB, EVE, Neocron, FE, EQ, EQ2, DAoC, FFXI, FFXIV, SWG, WoW, and billions of eastern junks!

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Originally posted by Bigdaddyx

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    I would disagree.

    There are a lot of bad design decisions made that make no sense and are not good for a game.

    And those bad designs suddenly make sense with GW2? sorry but it is not that simple.

    All systems in a MMORPG are related. You can't just pluck feature X from game Y and put it into game Z.

    All systems and features must work well in concert with each other to be "designed well."

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Originally posted by Fusion

    Is this supposed to be a sarcastic post? Or are you seriously comparing GW2 to being UO?

    These two games have nothing in common, UO being a pure sandbox and GW2 being a pure themepark, like comparing a youghurt to wheatbread.

    Nope, very serious.

    I don't define sandbox as "being able to build stuff and having FFA PvP."

    I define sandbox as minimal grind, emergant game play, limit on restrictions.

    Just like Skyrim is a sandbox RPG in comparison to something like Mass Effect.

    Skyrim still has quests and a main story and levels/skills... obviously single player and no PvP... but it's no less a sandbox.

  • raistlinmraistlinm new orleans, LAPosts: 673Member

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Originally posted by smh_alot

    Ok, I get the excitement of the article writer, but I don't get the sandbox comparison. In what way does GW2 use sandbox specific elements?? Now Arche Age, THAT I can understand that people describe it as a themepark/sandbox hybrid, with sandbox features like building your own houses, towns, keeps and ships and such. But GW2, nope, not really: best description imo would be themepark 2.0 or next-gen themepark. But still very solidly in the themepark or dev content driven branch of things.

    From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

    Exploration + content.

     

    Your description describes most mmorpg's I've played the only difference would be in ones perception of "fun".  One might not think it fun to ignore the "tunnels" in games like WOW,TOR,STO,LOTRO and the like but it's possible to do and to be honest I've often thought of alot of the supposed sandboxes that way, no they don't give you things like quests and the like as a reason to go out and explore and I've never found that to make the game fun at all.

  • elockeelocke Manassas, VAPosts: 4,205Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Originally posted by elocke

    I've been saying all along that HYBRIDs(sandparks) are the kick in the pants this genre needs to thrive and survive.  So glad to FINALLY get games that are doing it.

    I think GW2 is more of a Themebox than a Sandpark.

     

    True, but it has sandbox elements, as the article pointed out.  Even a little makes it hands above the latest games we've seen of late.

    image
  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo LondonPosts: 3,221Member

    More a case a new breed of quality MMORPG + value for money MMORPG.


    1. Combat : This is where players in themepark mmos spend their time/focus on - has to be v good. Actiony/versatile


    /dynamic/visual/teambased. GW2 should stand out here with lots of activity on the screen from players, mobs and effects and balance and combinations et al.


     


    2. Flat Level Curve + B2P: Removing the grind-level-up + b2p: Lowering the entitlement threshold of players is v v important! As well as making them feel like FANS of a good game (we want more!) instead of CUSTOMERS of a grindy "gym" subscription.


     


    3. Innovating PvE Quests: 1. Chains of stages to these that scale and allow 2. social multiplayer and are 3. changeable/feel different. Linked with lore/story/more like GTA sandbox than a mmo themepark... BUT still unsure how successful these will be?


     


    4. Separating PvP from PvE and having instant access at any time and any "level" with any server. 3 Factions ffs!! image Why has it been so long? Having several types - team and faction.


     


    5. Big fan of Personal Story addition for more RPG and adding voices, cut-scenes, drama and story-branching illusion of a changing world.


     


    6. Polish: still room to spare for Lore, World-Building, music and more polish than you'd get in 2 mmorpgs let alone 1 b2p.


     


    7. They've communicated development in very clear way with their blogs: Very exact what they are offering/Confident that they are selling something that's trying for more/new/better than other thempark mmorpgs currently available and clear what it is not: FFA-pvp has to go, Raids have to go, Loot effect on PvP has to go.... etc.


     

    I don't think those are revolutionary or actually sandboxy that much, just very good design ideas that cooperate with each other packaged in THE 2nd to none presentation for mmorpgs.

  • DiovidiusDiovidius GoudaPosts: 1,025Member

    I mostly agree with you except it's a shame you did not mention GW2's potential for e-sports like instanced pvp, with it's emphasis on equality, skill, action and watching the screen instead of the UI.

  • smh_alotsmh_alot Area 51Posts: 976Member
    Originally posted by BadSpock


    Originally posted by smh_alot

    Ok, I get the excitement of the article writer, but I don't get the sandbox comparison. In what way does GW2 use sandbox specific elements?? Now Arche Age, THAT I can understand that people describe it as a themepark/sandbox hybrid, with sandbox features like building your own houses, towns, keeps and ships and such. But GW2, nope, not really: best description imo would be themepark 2.0 or next-gen themepark. But still very solidly in the themepark or dev content driven branch of things.

    From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

    Exploration + content.

     

     

    ? The definition of what makes an MMO a sandbox sure has changed, if that's what's considered a sandbox nowadays. There have been quite a number of non-sandbox MMO's starting from EQ where this was very much possible, picking a direction and wandering out to do fun stuff.

    Afaik the difference between sandbox and themepark MMO's, or game driven and virtual world focused design as the debate went on before WoW, was that with sandbox MMO's the emphasis is on providing players the tools and flexible mechanics to make their stamp on the ingame world and create an emerging interactive community. Less focus on dev created content, and more on player/community interaction via tools provided, which if you look at UO, SWG and EVE Online is what was noticeable in player created houses and cities, persistent world territory control and a deep, multi layered and complex economy system.

    I don't see that in GW2 at all, not like Arche Age has which I consider a true themepark/sandbox hybrid. What I do see is typical themepark style features, but then taken to the next level, which is a good thing too.
  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Originally posted by raistlinm

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

    Exploration + content.

    Your description describes most mmorpg's I've played the only difference would be in ones perception of "fun".  One might not think it fun to ignore the "tunnels" in games like WOW,TOR,STO,LOTRO and the like but it's possible to do and to be honest I've often thought of alot of the supposed sandboxes that way, no they don't give you things like quests and the like as a reason to go out and explore and I've never found that to make the game fun at all.

    You are right, in the sense that you don't really get quests that tell you to go places in GW2 (except for a few of the ones that the Scouts will tell you about) so in reality it is more like all the quests are out in the world and don't require you to run back to town afterwards.

    So is it sandbox? Really depends on how you define sandbox. It's much more themepark then say EvE, but it's far more sandbox then say TOR.

    I like to call it a Themebox.

    Heavier on the themepark side, but with a more sandbox feel to it.

  • BigdaddyxBigdaddyx California, WAPosts: 1,985Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Originally posted by Bigdaddyx


    Originally posted by BadSpock



    I would disagree.

    There are a lot of bad design decisions made that make no sense and are not good for a game.

    And those bad designs suddenly make sense with GW2? sorry but it is not that simple.

    All systems in a MMORPG are related. You can't just pluck feature X from game Y and put it into game Z.

    All systems and features must work well in concert with each other to be "designed well."

    You are still being very vague and offered no real explanation. Why is bad for other themepark MMOS to be released for consoles but it is ok for GW2, why is it bad for other themepark MMOS to have loading screens but it is ok for GW2.

    I personally do not care for these issues but it does makes you pause and think for a while to see such double standards.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Originally posted by smh_alot



    ? The definition of what makes an MMO a sandbox sure has changed, if that's what's considered a sandbox nowadays. There have been quite a number of non-sandbox MMO's starting from EQ where this was very much possible, picking a direction and wandering out to do fun stuff

    Afaik the difference between sandbox and themepark MMO's, or game driven and virtual world focused design as the debate went on before WoW, was that with sandbox MMO's the emphasis is on providing players the tools and flexible mechanics to make their stamp on the ingame world and create an emerging interactive community. Less focus on dev created content, and more on player/community interaction via tools provided, which if you look at UO, SWG and EVE Online is what was noticeable in player created houses and cities, persistent world territory control and a deep, multi layered and complex economy system.

    I don't see that in GW2 at all, not like Arche Age has which I consider a true themepark/sandbox hybrid. What I do see is typical themepark style features, but then taken to the next level, which is a good thing too.

    Not trying to ever say it's a pure sandbox. I think I made it very clear it's missing one of my favorite features - good housing.

    But I do think it's as much of a sandbox as someting like Skyrim, which is obviously not a MMORPG though.

    So maybe GW2 is a themepark with some sandbox feeling features?

    I like Themebox for that reason. Not quite a hybrid and thus a sandpark, but not just a themepark either.

  • Mors.MagneMors.Magne LondonPosts: 1,420Member

    Originally posted by fiontar

    Great aritcle. Glad to see that people are starting to get what this game is going to do to the MMORPG genre.

    We don't know what percentage of MMO fans will adapt to and embrace the new design paradigm and what percent will cling to the pre-GW2 status quo of WoW-like MMORPG game design, but even if it were to split the community down the middle, it wouldn't make the game any less revolutionary. (It would probably just give developers an excuse to keep making WoW-clones).

    In any event, the game design and the quality of game that get's paired with the Buy to Play business model will definitely shake up the genre.

    I'm hoping that in addition to the inevitable attempts to clone GW2, GW2 will also inspire some talented and creative development teams to do their own innovative redesigns of the MMORPG formula and that publishers will fund more innovative projects, rather than just attempting to clone WoW, or any other game.

     

    I've read a few of your posts and I've got a big critisism - you write a load of hot air. There is no detail to your posts at all.

     

    Your posts are so bad that you could copy and paste all your posts to any forum - all you need to do is substitute the name of one game for another.

     

    The reason some people like your posts is because they are like "fortune telling" - you write using 'truisms' without fastening them to details.

     

    You use 'hanging comparisons'. For example, "This game is better." Well, compared to what? Banging your head against a brick wall?

  • EvilGeekEvilGeek londonPosts: 1,226Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Originally posted by raistlinm

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.
    Exploration + content.
    Your description describes most mmorpg's I've played the only difference would be in ones perception of "fun".  One might not think it fun to ignore the "tunnels" in games like WOW,TOR,STO,LOTRO and the like but it's possible to do and to be honest I've often thought of alot of the supposed sandboxes that way, no they don't give you things like quests and the like as a reason to go out and explore and I've never found that to make the game fun at all.


    You are right, in the sense that you don't really get quests that tell you to go places in GW2 (except for a few of the ones that the Scouts will tell you about) so in reality it is more like all the quests are out in the world and don't require you to run back to town afterwards.
    So is it sandbox? Really depends on how you define sandbox. It's much more themepark then say EvE, but it's far more sandbox then say TOR.
    I like to call it a Themebox.
    Heavier on the themepark side, but with a more sandbox feel to it.

    Sandbox elements are hard to find in GW2 but it certainly gives back that notion of freedom in a theme park setting, it's a theme park without rails is my take on it, it's a massive difference unto itself from what we've had from releases over the past four or five years. Those rails seem to have got tighter as the genre moved on (on not forward). As an explorer I'm really hyped by this new freedom, I won't have to go from quest giver to quest giver, from hub to hub, instead the world is my oyster, far closer to a virtual world feel than we've seen for a long time.

    What really struck me from playing the demo was the fluidity of play or how organic it felt, sentiments echoed by a lot of the reviews we've had since the press beta. Tyria feels like a living breathing world because of this, the game became less and the world became more (if you get what I mean) and I was believing the world, my place in it and having crap loads of fun. Fun and accessible being the other words that hit strongly for me.


    image
  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Originally posted by Bigdaddyx

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    All systems in a MMORPG are related. You can't just pluck feature X from game Y and put it into game Z.

    All systems and features must work well in concert with each other to be "designed well."

    You are still being very vague and offered no real explanation. Why is bad for other themepark MMOS to be released for consoles but it is ok for GW2, why is it bad for other themepark MMOS to have loading screens but it is ok for GW2.

    I personally do not care for these issues but it does makes you pause and think for a while to see such double standards.

    I don't think there is anything bad with console gaming, and in truth I love the idea (far from confirmed) of a console version of GW2. I don't share that whole "elitist PC gamer" attitude.

    As for loading screens, they are often a neccessary evil. Would I prefer to not have them? Of course. But I also like to have nice graphics and smooth game play.

    If the engine can't give me all 3, I'll gladly sacrifice loading screens for better graphics with more players and smoother game play.

    As with all things, it's a matter of degree - TOR goes too far in feeling like a very small closed off world, as GW1.

    Is it possible to have smooth game play with great graphics and a lot of players and no loading screens between zones?

    I don't know - supposedly Tera does pretty good at that.

    Archeage looks to be looking good in that department too, but Tera looks to have basic quest-hub game play (despite action combat system) and Archeage also looks to have dated tab-target hot key combat and quest-hub level grinding - in addition to all the sandbox elements.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Originally posted by EvilGeek



    Sandbox elements are hard to find in GW2 but it certainly gives back that notion of freedom in a theme park setting, it's a theme park without rails is my take on it, it's a massive difference unto itself from what we've had from releases over the past four or five years. Those rails seem to have got tighter as the genre moved on (on not forward). As an explorer I'm really hyped by this new freedom, I won't have to go from quest giver to quest giver, from hub to hub, instead the world is my oyster, far closer to a virtual world feel than we've seen for a long time.

    What really struck me from playing the demo was the fluidity of play or how organic it felt, sentiments echoed by a lot of the reviews we've had since the press beta. Tyria feels like a living breathing world because of this, the game became less and the world became more (if you get what I mean) and I was believing the world, my place in it and having crap loads of fun. Fun and accessible being the other words that hit strongly for me.

    I like it.

    Especially this line - "certainly gives back that notion of freedom in a theme park setting, it's a theme park without rails is my take on it"

  • PhelcherPhelcher Boston, MAPosts: 1,053Member

    Originally posted by smh_alot

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Originally posted by smh_alot

    Ok, I get the excitement of the article writer, but I don't get the sandbox comparison. In what way does GW2 use sandbox specific elements?? Now Arche Age, THAT I can understand that people describe it as a themepark/sandbox hybrid, with sandbox features like building your own houses, towns, keeps and ships and such. But GW2, nope, not really: best description imo would be themepark 2.0 or next-gen themepark. But still very solidly in the themepark or dev content driven branch of things.

    From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

    Exploration + content.

     

     

    ? The definition of what makes an MMO a sandbox sure has changed, if that's what's considered a sandbox nowadays. There have been quite a number of non-sandbox MMO's starting from EQ where this was very much possible, picking a direction and wandering out to do fun stuff.

     

    Afaik the difference between sandbox and themepark MMO's, or game driven and virtual world focused design as the debate went on before WoW, was that with sandbox MMO's the emphasis is on providing players the tools and flexible mechanics to make their stamp on the ingame world and create an emerging interactive community. Less focus on dev created content, and more on player/community interaction via tools provided, which if you look at UO, SWG and EVE Online is what was noticeable in player created houses and cities, persistent world territory control and a deep, multi layered and complex economy system.

     

    I don't see that in GW2 at all, not like Arche Age has which I consider a true themepark/sandbox hybrid. What I do see is typical themepark style features, but then taken to the next level, which is a good thing too.

     

    It is upsetting when somone is using the word "Sandbox" and doesn't even know the definition (within contex), or even understand the term (within actual use, in game).

    The definition of "Sandbox" has not changed, only the technology allowing it's use, has changed. It is now alot easier to build Sandbox games, BECAUSE building an Open World is much, much, easier now given the technology of the day.

     

    Sandbox games are predicated on the fact they have 360 degree content.

    Everquest back in March 16th 1999 was/is considered a Sandbox game. There was no funneling of content, mulitple ways to leave a city and multi paths & direction to head out in...  given the technology @ the time. Zone walls were used, but the zones were all outward content.

    When a game is predicated on inferior server technology...  and the business decision to funnel content and "theme" using zones/instances due to server cost... THEN, that game becomes themepark, becausde now the developers (limited by their choice/cost of server structure) have to develop eye catching rifts/public quests, etc..  so that you as a inhabitant of their world MUST spend time looking at what the Developers specifically deveoped for you, instead of heading off in THAT direction & exploring.

    Just because a Sandbox has side shows, that some people like, or enjoy doesn't make it a "themepark". Anything can have "themepark" like qualities..  only sandboxes have sandbox qualities about them.

    "No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


    -Nariusseldon

  • ChrisxenonChrisxenon fochabersPosts: 6Member

    ALL ABOARD!

    THE HYPE TRAIN!

  • AnubisanAnubisan Boulder, COPosts: 1,801Member

    I think a lot of things about this game sound really cool and I am looking forward to playing it. That being said, I don't think GW2 will be the 'messiah' of MMOs and I will be very surprised if the same people aren't on the forums whining about the game after release. I honestly don't think any game will meet the unrealistic expectations of this community.

    Also... the more you all hype it, the more you set yourselves up for disappointment. This always happens!

  • Master10KMaster10K LondonPosts: 3,065Member



    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Originally posted by EvilGeek

    Sandbox elements are hard to find in GW2 but it certainly gives back that notion of freedom in a theme park setting, it's a theme park without rails is my take on it, it's a massive difference unto itself from what we've had from releases over the past four or five years. Those rails seem to have got tighter as the genre moved on (on not forward). As an explorer I'm really hyped by this new freedom, I won't have to go from quest giver to quest giver, from hub to hub, instead the world is my oyster, far closer to a virtual world feel than we've seen for a long time.

    What really struck me from playing the demo was the fluidity of play or how organic it felt, sentiments echoed by a lot of the reviews we've had since the press beta. Tyria feels like a living breathing world because of this, the game became less and the world became more (if you get what I mean) and I was believing the world, my place in it and having crap loads of fun. Fun and accessible being the other words that hit strongly for me.

    I like it. Especially this line - "certainly gives back that notion of freedom in a theme park setting, it's a theme park without rails is my take on it"

    That's my take on it aswell. No other Themepark MMORPG gives players as much freedom as Guild Wars 2. From all the the press beta footage I've seen, they all seem to do something different right after the tutorial...

     - Some go straight for the personal story.

     - Some just roam around doing tasks & events.

     - Some explore the gorgeous vistas and stumble of across hidden areas.

     - Some head straight for the Competitive PvP.

     - And some level their character a bit, before heading to WvW.


    No other Themepark MMORPG will allow you to do that many things, right out the gate and that's what makes the game so amazing IMO.

    image

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Everquest is a themepark not a sandbox

    my take, gw2 isn't this sandpark thing.

    Archeage looks more like that.

    gw2 (and other upcoming games like tsw) are more themeparks that aren't Y.A.W.Cs, with some sand box elements, getting rid of the corridor and taking elements from pre wow themeparks like daoc, Ao, ac etc..
Sign In or Register to comment.