Take the blinders off, there is a lot of structure to combat in GW2 - it's just a different structure than you are used to.
Competitive PvP in GW2 is pretty much 100% about player skill as all gear/levels/stats are set equal automatically.
That type of PvP is exactly like a FPS game in which all the guns have the same stats, with just a different skin. Which will accomplish what you say which it really is all player skill, but the side effect of that is killing any real combat strategy.
to me player skills means alot, but without deep strategy involved, its all easy mode superficial fluff. FOr me I need both aspects player skill and strategy.
If you think there is no strategy in GW2 PvP you need to do more research lol.
Or talk to Guild Wars 1 players.
Builds are equally important as player skill, there will be pro teams that spend countless hours testing/tweaking different builds to get just the right mix/feel.
Combat needs structure period. the rock paper scissor aproach is the ultimate rule. Pick a class and if you know how to play you will be good. The best example of this is FPS games. A sniper rifel has an advantage over a machine gun at long distance, the machine gun has the advatange ove a sniper rifle at close distances. WHen you try to make everything equal, all you accomplish is make a watered down mess, all the while taking all the player skills out.
GW2 is just going to be a watered down, no skill, button mashing hack and slash type combat.
The holy trinity has gotten a bad name due to all these pathetic themparks that abuse it. The old days of the MMO's had it perfect.
BF3 and the scoped HMGs beg to differ with you on that one. Furthermore, classes aren't locked into roles in that either. A recon can just as easily choose to equip an assault rifle, or a shotgun, and do well if he knows what he's doing. Same with support / Assault & Engineer.
Furthermore, structure does not mean trinity. Yes, there needs to be a structure, a set of rules and GW2 has that. The 'rock paper scissors' structure comes in, but in a very different way. Again, back to BF3, you have 4 classes in that game, each with their own 'unique' contribution to the fight. Recon is better for scouting (intelligence / mobility / target locking), the other 3 being very squad oriented.
Now, in GW2 you have a series of structures that are designed to play off each other. You have the 'support, damage, control' structure, and you have the meta conditions / boons structure, and then you also have the cross-profession combos which offer yet another way to tie both structures together. The reason it's not watered down, is because the structure isn't fully accessible to each class. Each class may get a piece of the pie, but they all have their different flavor, and are designed to work differently.
This has been thuroughly explained for months now, I really don't understand why we are still having this discussion.
Take the blinders off, there is a lot of structure to combat in GW2 - it's just a different structure than you are used to.
Competitive PvP in GW2 is pretty much 100% about player skill as all gear/levels/stats are set equal automatically.
That type of PvP is exactly like a FPS game in which all the guns have the same stats, with just a different skin. Which will accomplish what you say which it really is all player skill, but the side effect of that is killing any real combat strategy.
to me player skills means alot, but without deep strategy involved, its all easy mode superficial fluff. FOr me I need both aspects player skill and strategy.
If you think there is no strategy in GW2 PvP you need to do more research lol.
Or talk to Guild Wars 1 players.
Builds are equally important as player skill, there will be pro teams that spend countless hours testing/tweaking different builds to get just the right mix/feel.
If I talk to myself would that make me crazy? Ive played it, if you think thats deep stategy you need to expand your horizions past WoW, and all of its clones.
They have made an abomination out of the holy trinity. When its done right it takes vast player skills, player cordination, and exceptional strategy. In the good old days if you screwed up its a wipe.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
Combat needs structure period. the rock paper scissor aproach is the ultimate rule. Pick a class and if you know how to play you will be good. The best example of this is FPS games. A sniper rifel has an advantage over a machine gun at long distance, the machine gun has the advatange ove a sniper rifle at close distances. WHen you try to make everything equal, all you accomplish is make a watered down mess, all the while taking all the player skills out.
GW2 is just going to be a watered down, no skill, button mashing hack and slash type combat.
The holy trinity has gotten a bad name due to all these pathetic themparks that abuse it. The old days of the MMO's had it perfect.
Take the blinders off, there is a lot of structure to combat in GW2 - it's just a different structure than you are used to.
Competitive PvP in GW2 is pretty much 100% about player skill as all gear/levels/stats are set equal automatically.
That type of PvP is exactly like a FPS game in which all the guns have the same stats, with just a different skin. Which will accomplish what you say which it really is all player skill, but the side effect of that is killing any real combat strategy.
to me player skills means alot, but without deep strategy involved, its all easy mode superficial fluff. FOr me I need both aspects player skill and strategy.
What proof do you have that'll the input of player skill into the equation will lead to lack of player strategy? Hell, even in an FPS like TF2, when there are stalemates going on people start strategizing, and making moves.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed: And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill, And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!" ~Lord George Gordon Byron
If I talk to myself would that make me crazy? Ive played it, if you think thats deep stategy you need to expand your horizions past WoW, and all of its clones.
They have made an abomination out of the holy trinity. When its done right it takes vast player skills, player cordination, and exceptional strategy. In the good old days if you screwed up its a wipe.
Oh you are talking PvE?
Every single video/article seems to be saying that the PvE stuff that is supposed to be hard (dungeons and such) is really, really hard because the combat mechanics and group strategy is so incredibly different than WoW and all of its clones.
For PvP, when you remove gear/stats from PvP it is always, always, always 100% of the time some combination of strategy and player skill.
That type of PvP is exactly like a FPS game in which all the guns have the same stats, with just a different skin. Which will accomplish what you say which it really is all player skill, but the side effect of that is killing any real combat strategy.
to me player skills means alot, but without deep strategy involved, its all easy mode superficial fluff. FOr me I need both aspects player skill and strategy.
For one, in FPS (most of the ones I've played) the guns don't have the same stats. So I have no idea which game you are referring to on that one. Even a game as watered down as CoD has weapon variety.
- That said, NO, putting players on the same gear / lvl range isn't at all like having the same weapons. It's like ignoring lvls completely. The 'weapons' literally come into play as the 'weapons' you choose to bring into combat with you, as well as the utility skills & traits you choose to support those choices.
The skill, comes into play in how you choose to use those in combat & on the fly. Will you use your minions for damage (overwhelm the opponent), will you use them to stall the enemy while the rest of your team captures objectives, will you use them defensively (having them taking the hits / giving you mobility while your team focuses down your opponents)? Instead will you go staff & focus on laying down marks (mines) to slow / cripple / poison the enemy, distrcact them, or hinder their mobility? Will you go daggers for damage or axe / warhorn to act as a runner?
As you can see, there's a LOT of choice in this combat system. It does not mean that everyone is doing the exact same thing all the time, it means you have flexibility, and the option to change your playstyle mid-combat to fit a situation's needs. In most MMOs, you have your spec, and if you come across a person with a spec that counters yours, you're basically F*@Ked. Doesn't really matter what you do, because as long as the player isn't an idiot, his spec trumps yours. There's the difference right there, in GW2 if you're spec is wrong for the situation, you swap to your other spec (weapon) and use your skill to deal with it.
Take the blinders off, there is a lot of structure to combat in GW2 - it's just a different structure than you are used to.
Competitive PvP in GW2 is pretty much 100% about player skill as all gear/levels/stats are set equal automatically.
That type of PvP is exactly like a FPS game in which all the guns have the same stats, with just a different skin. Which will accomplish what you say which it really is all player skill, but the side effect of that is killing any real combat strategy.
to me player skills means alot, but without deep strategy involved, its all easy mode superficial fluff. FOr me I need both aspects player skill and strategy.
If you think there is no strategy in GW2 PvP you need to do more research lol.
Or talk to Guild Wars 1 players.
Builds are equally important as player skill, there will be pro teams that spend countless hours testing/tweaking different builds to get just the right mix/feel.
If I talk to myself would that make me crazy? Ive played it, if you think thats deep stategy you need to expand your horizions past WoW, and all of its clones.
They have made an abomination out of the holy trinity. When its done right it takes vast player skills, player cordination, and exceptional strategy. In the good old days if you screwed up its a wipe.
If you think GW1 strategizing is some sort of child's play, what is your idea of deep strategy?
How did they make an abomination out of it? It was essentially the same thing. In fact it was sometimes deeper, as you had to often change up your strategy from the ground with skills, all the way up to party composition and at times positioning.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed: And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill, And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!" ~Lord George Gordon Byron
I'm worried that I'm going to feel the same way about GW2 as it sounds very clicky and very movement centric.
its called skills-friend, skills.
now dont get me wrong heals n tanking has its place- but not running the game-ats all.
And when one finds they don't have the mad clicky skills on a 16 y/o they will become disappointed. likewise if the clicky skill are set so any 60 y/o can master then the 16 y/o will be disappointed. What you call skill seem to me to be more reaction time and getting that right for the majority of their players can be hard for the dev's in the end they will not be able to make everyone happy. Where players used to look for a class or skill set to make for a perfect run they will now have to find a "skilled" player. I can hear it now. "You Newb you didn't barrel roll out of that mobs 1 second power attack!" but we will see maybe GW2 will get this just right on their first try
And when one finds they don't have the mad clicky skills on a 16 y/o they will become disappointed. likewise if the clicky skill are set so any 60 y/o can master then the 16 y/o will be disappointed. What you call skill seem to me to be more reaction time and getting that right for the majority of their players can be hard for the dev's in the end they will not be able to make everyone happy. Where players used to look for a class or skill set to make for a perfect run they will now have to find a "skilled" player. I can hear it now. "You Newb you didn't barrel roll out of that mobs 1 second power attack!" but we will see maybe GW2 will get this just right on their first try
They aren't going to make everyone happy.
Even if we ignore all the people who are determined to dislike / hate this game, Anet will not please everyone looking forward to this game. The game's not perfect, all Anet is really focusing on, is giving player's choice in how they play the game, and making sure the design supports people playing together, rather than against each other.
However, as they say, the devil's in the details, and some people will just never get over some of the details.
So much so, that even if I like everything else about the game, I'll find myself playing in 30 minute sessions instead of my preferred 2 - 4 hour segments.
The nice thing about GW2 is, with the way dynamic events are designed, that is a completely valid way to play.
That actually sounds great. If a game can convince its customers to only play for 30 minutes instead of longer segments (without directly forcing them of course, because that would suck) then the game is going to last a lot longer and the developers do not have to focus so much on 'content' because the players aren't going to eat the content up as fast.
I don't want to go into a rant about how games are 'meant to be played' or how modern hardcore gaming has taken a turn for the worse, but the way some people play MMOs has gone beyond simple escapism because of the time they put into these games. The sad part is, the games are not necessarily even that enjoyable, but the players feel compelled because of reward mechanics.
When we were kids did we play 2-4 hour segments? I didn't. I was lucky for 30 min-1 hour. And those were some of the most enjoyable experiences I've ever had with games.
That type of PvP is exactly like a FPS game in which all the guns have the same stats, with just a different skin. Which will accomplish what you say which it really is all player skill, but the side effect of that is killing any real combat strategy.
to me player skills means alot, but without deep strategy involved, its all easy mode superficial fluff. FOr me I need both aspects player skill and strategy.
For one, in FPS (most of the ones I've played) the guns don't have the same stats. So I have no idea which game you are referring to on that one. Even a game as watered down as CoD has weapon variety.
that was my point. Things need to be different, things need to have strength and weaknesses, and you need to be locked into what you pick.
A FPS game that allows you to switch to anything you want on the fly is a shitty FPS game, there would still be stategy but it would be greatly deminished. I played a COD game (forgot which one) that had a one man army perk, and it absolutly ruined the game IMO. just like a FPS game that had every gun equal in stats would also be a shitty game, there would also still be a strategy involved but, but nothing like it would if the guns had strengths and weaknesses.
One thing MMO's and FPS games have in common, all the new ones try to make a good game but in the end they just out smart themselves and the game sucks.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
"I guess we'll see once we get our hands on the game, won't we?"
Well, first must deal with six months of very bad play, group arguments, and verbal posing.
"I R mad skillz U R scrubz lolz go back to WoW nubcakez."
But that's pretty standard in any new game. Worse in any game that tries to sell itself as 'skill based', though.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I'll leave this thread with a question - Whose information/opinion would you trust more?
Random internet web forum poster?
Or game developer / professional press writer?
The answer is simple: the truth is somewhere in the middle
Developers have been known to stretch the truth by great lengths. If you take what they say as the holy grail truth. your a fool. I learned this a long time ago, and there all the same. They are no different than a politician.
Professional writer: Years ago I would agree with this on, I use to only listen to those. But now thats changed. These guys also have an agenda now. Press writters that will tell you how it really is would never get a beta invite. These articles have become nothing but a brown noising cluster F$%@. Look no further back than SWTOR pre launch, the very author of this thread was one of the worst. I still remember the one" Innovations in swtor", I think i literally got sick reading it. The points were blantantly not innovations and even the author admitted it, over and over again. When I got done reading it I was surprised that she didnt think a character creator was innovative.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
Combat needs structure period. the rock paper scissor aproach is the ultimate rule. Pick a class and if you know how to play you will be good. The best example of this is FPS games. A sniper rifel has an advantage over a machine gun at long distance, the machine gun has the advatange ove a sniper rifle at close distances. WHen you try to make everything equal, all you accomplish is make a watered down mess, all the while taking all the player skills out.
GW2 is just going to be a watered down, no skill, button mashing hack and slash type combat.
The holy trinity has gotten a bad name due to all these pathetic themparks that abuse it. The old days of the MMO's had it perfect.
Specialization does not equal the Trinity. The Trinity is a VERY SPECIFIC implimentation of specialization. One that's rather hackneyed, over-simplified and done to death.... and quite frankly while servicible doesn't even really fit Fantasy RPG combat all that well.
Go play something like WWII Online (very similar to an FPS game like the Battlefield series).... Lots of specialization....no Trinity.
Specialization.... good.
P.S. Machine Guns are actualy very good at long range....take a look at the origions of the Barret 50 Cal sniper rifle for example...or how Carlos Hathcock used M2HB's in Vietnam. I think what you mean to say was SMG's.
I'll leave this thread with a question - Whose information/opinion would you trust more?
Random internet web forum poster?
Or game developer / professional press writer?
The answer is simple: the truth is somewhere in the middle
Developers have been known to stretch the truth by great lengths.
Appeal to Authority does't work well for 'winning' forum arguments anyway.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
This won't stop people from posting that you can stand in one spot and spam skills, at least not til after release. Some solo mobs can be fought that way in any game, but it's hardly the meat of the system. It'll get you killed.
Is Guild Wars 2 designed in such a fashion that if the person that youve dedicated to heal you dies your entire team wipes???
Nope, sorry it doesnt have to happen in Guild Wars 2, other people can be responsible for healing themselves so you dont have to have a dedicated healer and it doesnt have a massive benefit like in TRINITY BASED GAMES.
Sorry im not going to sugar coat this like other people, but your Wrong. I just proved it, now try and understand the logic behind it.
So 1/3rd of the elementalists skills , Engineers skills , and Guardians skills are complete garbage and will have no use what so ever.
Competitive teams will not be building a Healer / Support role or a Tanker role.
You are absolutely off your rocker if you think competitive teams won't have a Designated player for Healing and Support. I will also enjoy steam rolling any teams who do not understand the nessecity of this in PvP.
You are a prime example of the problem with the statement " Guild Wars 2 doesn't have a Trinity" , you are going to be incredibly disappointed when you hear a shout of " Looking for Healer loaded Engineer / Elementalist and Tanker Guardian".
* Edited for the : I just proved it .... I just proved the trinity does exsist, so take that. Also for completely ignoring the question .... about a healer and tanker role being benificial.
Dude if you think 1 player (healer) can keep one guy tanking in pvp or DEs alive in this game than you likely have not played it...
This is not wow where the tank stands in while the rogue stunlocks while the priest fears and heals at will, GW2 will require all players to actually move, dodge use their heals and skills for the good of all and run out of combat while others take on the tank role...
Players that want to stand in against any main mob boss with only their trusty dedicated non combat healer buddy behind them will die a lot...
Why, oh why , is there continual emphasis on the "we don't have a trinity" aspect of this game?
For those who are burying their heads in the sand.... THERE IS A TRINITY. You will still have healers, you will still have tanks, and you will still have Dps. They have changed the system to some extent but it is alive and well. What Guild Wars 2 trinity doesn't have : Whack-a-mole heals, Taunts. What it does have : Single Target Heals, Rescues, Group heals, AoE Heals, Regens- HoT's ( Which have always been stronger then flat heals in Guild Wars), Damage mitigation abilities, shields, reflects.
For the love of everything that is holy in Mmo's stop confusing the playerbase by stating Guild Wars 2 doesn't have a trinity. It absolutely does, its changed ... but its still present.
-- Yes I have pre-purchased , Yes I'm looking forward to the game. Yes I will running a pvp team as a Healer/support.
Sorry dude, no single target heals in GW2, just ground targetted AoE heals (including regen) which aren't as powerful as self heals so maybe YOU have got it wrong.
Comments
"Oh great & terrible mmorpg gods, accept our sacrifice of 'the holy trinity'...for the sword is mightier than the shield;
"Oh mighty and avenging, mmorpg immortals, accept our sacrifice of "static combat"... for the arrow is swifter than the sword;
"Oh inimitable and whimsical mmorpg divinities, accept our sacrifice of "alien-wizard classes"... for the ray-gun & fireball are about even...
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
If you think there is no strategy in GW2 PvP you need to do more research lol.
Or talk to Guild Wars 1 players.
Builds are equally important as player skill, there will be pro teams that spend countless hours testing/tweaking different builds to get just the right mix/feel.
BF3 and the scoped HMGs beg to differ with you on that one. Furthermore, classes aren't locked into roles in that either. A recon can just as easily choose to equip an assault rifle, or a shotgun, and do well if he knows what he's doing. Same with support / Assault & Engineer.
Furthermore, structure does not mean trinity. Yes, there needs to be a structure, a set of rules and GW2 has that. The 'rock paper scissors' structure comes in, but in a very different way. Again, back to BF3, you have 4 classes in that game, each with their own 'unique' contribution to the fight. Recon is better for scouting (intelligence / mobility / target locking), the other 3 being very squad oriented.
Now, in GW2 you have a series of structures that are designed to play off each other. You have the 'support, damage, control' structure, and you have the meta conditions / boons structure, and then you also have the cross-profession combos which offer yet another way to tie both structures together. The reason it's not watered down, is because the structure isn't fully accessible to each class. Each class may get a piece of the pie, but they all have their different flavor, and are designed to work differently.
This has been thuroughly explained for months now, I really don't understand why we are still having this discussion.
If I talk to myself would that make me crazy? Ive played it, if you think thats deep stategy you need to expand your horizions past WoW, and all of its clones.
They have made an abomination out of the holy trinity. When its done right it takes vast player skills, player cordination, and exceptional strategy. In the good old days if you screwed up its a wipe.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
What proof do you have that'll the input of player skill into the equation will lead to lack of player strategy? Hell, even in an FPS like TF2, when there are stalemates going on people start strategizing, and making moves.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed:
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!"
~Lord George Gordon Byron
Oh you are talking PvE?
Every single video/article seems to be saying that the PvE stuff that is supposed to be hard (dungeons and such) is really, really hard because the combat mechanics and group strategy is so incredibly different than WoW and all of its clones.
For PvP, when you remove gear/stats from PvP it is always, always, always 100% of the time some combination of strategy and player skill.
For one, in FPS (most of the ones I've played) the guns don't have the same stats. So I have no idea which game you are referring to on that one. Even a game as watered down as CoD has weapon variety.
- That said, NO, putting players on the same gear / lvl range isn't at all like having the same weapons. It's like ignoring lvls completely. The 'weapons' literally come into play as the 'weapons' you choose to bring into combat with you, as well as the utility skills & traits you choose to support those choices.
The skill, comes into play in how you choose to use those in combat & on the fly. Will you use your minions for damage (overwhelm the opponent), will you use them to stall the enemy while the rest of your team captures objectives, will you use them defensively (having them taking the hits / giving you mobility while your team focuses down your opponents)? Instead will you go staff & focus on laying down marks (mines) to slow / cripple / poison the enemy, distrcact them, or hinder their mobility? Will you go daggers for damage or axe / warhorn to act as a runner?
As you can see, there's a LOT of choice in this combat system. It does not mean that everyone is doing the exact same thing all the time, it means you have flexibility, and the option to change your playstyle mid-combat to fit a situation's needs. In most MMOs, you have your spec, and if you come across a person with a spec that counters yours, you're basically F*@Ked. Doesn't really matter what you do, because as long as the player isn't an idiot, his spec trumps yours. There's the difference right there, in GW2 if you're spec is wrong for the situation, you swap to your other spec (weapon) and use your skill to deal with it.
If you think GW1 strategizing is some sort of child's play, what is your idea of deep strategy?
How did they make an abomination out of it? It was essentially the same thing. In fact it was sometimes deeper, as you had to often change up your strategy from the ground with skills, all the way up to party composition and at times positioning.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guide_to_PvE
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed:
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!"
~Lord George Gordon Byron
There is a trinity in GW2. Blatantly obvious. To deny this is silly.
This argument has turned into what BadSpock believes is the definition of Trinity.
In his definition there has never been a Trinity. Examples you say?
WoW- Druids,Pallies, Warriors. There are alot more.. All depends on how u spec.
Daoc- Healers,Thanes,Warriors,Hunters,Shamans,... The list goes on and on.. All on how you spec.
That is all..
its called skills-friend, skills.
now dont get me wrong heals n tanking has its place- but not running the game-ats all.
And when one finds they don't have the mad clicky skills on a 16 y/o they will become disappointed. likewise if the clicky skill are set so any 60 y/o can master then the 16 y/o will be disappointed. What you call skill seem to me to be more reaction time and getting that right for the majority of their players can be hard for the dev's in the end they will not be able to make everyone happy. Where players used to look for a class or skill set to make for a perfect run they will now have to find a "skilled" player. I can hear it now. "You Newb you didn't barrel roll out of that mobs 1 second power attack!" but we will see maybe GW2 will get this just right on their first tryYou are going to have to elaborate on that.
*sigh*
This is what I get....
I hate to do it, but this has become extremely pointless and stupid.
"I guess we'll see once we get our hands on the game, won't we?"
I'll leave this thread with a question - Whose information/opinion would you trust more?
Random internet web forum poster?
Or game developer / professional press writer?
How about personal experience?
Whoever isn't on the payroll
They aren't going to make everyone happy.
Even if we ignore all the people who are determined to dislike / hate this game, Anet will not please everyone looking forward to this game. The game's not perfect, all Anet is really focusing on, is giving player's choice in how they play the game, and making sure the design supports people playing together, rather than against each other.
However, as they say, the devil's in the details, and some people will just never get over some of the details.
That actually sounds great. If a game can convince its customers to only play for 30 minutes instead of longer segments (without directly forcing them of course, because that would suck) then the game is going to last a lot longer and the developers do not have to focus so much on 'content' because the players aren't going to eat the content up as fast.
I don't want to go into a rant about how games are 'meant to be played' or how modern hardcore gaming has taken a turn for the worse, but the way some people play MMOs has gone beyond simple escapism because of the time they put into these games. The sad part is, the games are not necessarily even that enjoyable, but the players feel compelled because of reward mechanics.
When we were kids did we play 2-4 hour segments? I didn't. I was lucky for 30 min-1 hour. And those were some of the most enjoyable experiences I've ever had with games.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
that was my point. Things need to be different, things need to have strength and weaknesses, and you need to be locked into what you pick.
A FPS game that allows you to switch to anything you want on the fly is a shitty FPS game, there would still be stategy but it would be greatly deminished. I played a COD game (forgot which one) that had a one man army perk, and it absolutly ruined the game IMO. just like a FPS game that had every gun equal in stats would also be a shitty game, there would also still be a strategy involved but, but nothing like it would if the guns had strengths and weaknesses.
One thing MMO's and FPS games have in common, all the new ones try to make a good game but in the end they just out smart themselves and the game sucks.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
Well, first must deal with six months of very bad play, group arguments, and verbal posing.
"I R mad skillz U R scrubz lolz go back to WoW nubcakez."
But that's pretty standard in any new game. Worse in any game that tries to sell itself as 'skill based', though.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
The answer is simple: the truth is somewhere in the middle
Developers have been known to stretch the truth by great lengths. If you take what they say as the holy grail truth. your a fool. I learned this a long time ago, and there all the same. They are no different than a politician.
Professional writer: Years ago I would agree with this on, I use to only listen to those. But now thats changed. These guys also have an agenda now. Press writters that will tell you how it really is would never get a beta invite. These articles have become nothing but a brown noising cluster F$%@. Look no further back than SWTOR pre launch, the very author of this thread was one of the worst. I still remember the one" Innovations in swtor", I think i literally got sick reading it. The points were blantantly not innovations and even the author admitted it, over and over again. When I got done reading it I was surprised that she didnt think a character creator was innovative.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
Specialization does not equal the Trinity. The Trinity is a VERY SPECIFIC implimentation of specialization. One that's rather hackneyed, over-simplified and done to death.... and quite frankly while servicible doesn't even really fit Fantasy RPG combat all that well.
Go play something like WWII Online (very similar to an FPS game like the Battlefield series).... Lots of specialization....no Trinity.
Specialization.... good.
P.S. Machine Guns are actualy very good at long range....take a look at the origions of the Barret 50 Cal sniper rifle for example...or how Carlos Hathcock used M2HB's in Vietnam. I think what you mean to say was SMG's.
Trinity ...... not so much.
Appeal to Authority does't work well for 'winning' forum arguments anyway.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
"Skill Based"
LOL
This won't stop people from posting that you can stand in one spot and spam skills, at least not til after release. Some solo mobs can be fought that way in any game, but it's hardly the meat of the system. It'll get you killed.
Playing GW2..
Sorry dude, no single target heals in GW2, just ground targetted AoE heals (including regen) which aren't as powerful as self heals so maybe YOU have got it wrong.
This is not a game.