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!

Does No Quests mean Less Atmosphere?

24

Comments

  • Arathir86Arathir86 CanberraPosts: 442Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    Finally, Arenanet is OWNED by NCsoft, therefore the game is developed by NCsoft.   Just like we say Madden is developed by EA instead of EA Tiburon or Red Dead Redemption was made by Rockstar instead of Rockstar Studios San Diego, I will continue to say GW2 is made by NCsoft, because it is.  The name of a studio doesn't make a difference as to who is funding the game, paying for the studio, and directly employing the staff. 

    Sorry, but that's not how it works. Anet is their own studio, but yes, a large chunk of their profit goes to NCSoft. NCSoft is the publisher. They are 2 very different things.

    Developer = makes the creative decisions, physically makes the game, and to a large extent decides what goes in the game.

    Publisher = makes sure the game has proper funding (gets paid), and in many cases helps market the game / destribute it to the market.

    In this particular case, NCSoft has been extremely hands-off w/ GW2, which many people have even commented on. It's not common to see this happen in the gaming industry, but so far it appears to be the case. NCsoft has more or less given Anet free-reign over GW2, and doesn't seem to be putting up much if any roadblocks / strict deadlines on the game.

    To compare this arrangement to anything EA does is not only misleading, but it's also fairly insulting. EA has been voted the worste company in america, and it's not just because of ME3. EA is easily the worst example of a publisher by a landslide. Comparing them in any fashion to the arrangement between Anet & NCSoft is like comparing night to day. It's like comparing how george lucas makes films to how christopher nolan does. Just stop.

     

    You missed his point though: if the developer is owned by the publisher, we usually refer to the publisher name. Like his example with Red Dead Redemption, which was developed by "Rockstar San Diego" and published by "Rockstar Games"; see http://ps3.ign.com/articles/109/1090380p1.html.

    As for how much different specific publishers affect their developers: that's hard to know and one would have to read interviews with those involved. Links to such where they discuss the matter, would be appriciated.

    Blizzard developed Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, and people call them Blizzard games, not Activision or Activision Blizzard games.

    Maybe its because I am a Game Developer myself, but I find it highly offensive when people dont give credits where credit is due.

    Publisher =/= Developer, and Vice Versa.

    "The problem with quotes from the Internet is that it's almost impossible to validate their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln

  • SybnalSybnal nunavit, NWPosts: 261Member

    I have to admit, I ran around Divinity's Reach for a loooong time, and I didn't once think about the lack of quest givers.  The atmosphere of the city was amazing just the way it was I thought.   One of my favorite parts of the game.

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by Connmacart
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    Finally, Arenanet is OWNED by NCsoft, therefore the game is developed by NCsoft.   Just like we say Madden is developed by EA instead of EA Tiburon or Red Dead Redemption was made by Rockstar instead of Rockstar Studios San Diego, I will continue to say GW2 is made by NCsoft, because it is.  The name of a studio doesn't make a difference as to who is funding the game, paying for the studio, and directly employing the staff. 

    Sorry, but that's not how it works. Anet is their own studio, but yes, a large chunk of their profit goes to NCSoft. NCSoft is the publisher. They are 2 very different things.

    Developer = makes the creative decisions, physically makes the game, and to a large extent decides what goes in the game.

    Publisher = makes sure the game has proper funding (gets paid), and in many cases helps market the game / destribute it to the market.

    In this particular case, NCSoft has been extremely hands-off w/ GW2, which many people have even commented on. It's not common to see this happen in the gaming industry, but so far it appears to be the case. NCsoft has more or less given Anet free-reign over GW2, and doesn't seem to be putting up much if any roadblocks / strict deadlines on the game.

    To compare this arrangement to anything EA does is not only misleading, but it's also fairly insulting. EA has been voted the worste company in america, and it's not just because of ME3. EA is easily the worst example of a publisher by a landslide. Comparing them in any fashion to the arrangement between Anet & NCSoft is like comparing night to day. It's like comparing how george lucas makes films to how christopher nolan does. Just stop.

     

    You missed his point though: if the developer is owned by the publisher, we usually refer to the publisher name. Like his example with Red Dead Redemption, which was developed by "Rockstar San Diego" and published by "Rockstar Games"; see http://ps3.ign.com/articles/109/1090380p1.html.

    As for how much different specific publishers affect their developers: that's hard to know and one would have to read interviews with those involved. Links to such where they discuss the matter, would be appriciated.

    It's still wrong, Rockstar San Diego still has the Rockstar Brand name and thus the overal name applies.

    Anet is more like a daughter company. Those always carry its own name.

    So we say Anet when talking about GW2 and not NCSoft. If the company was name NCSoft Arenanet the point would be relevant.

     

    Since you are being nitpicky about "Rockstar" being in both names, I'll give you another example "Pokemon Sapphire", which is developed by Game Freak and published by Nintendo (Game Freak is owned by Nintendo).; see http://gameboy.ign.com/articles/389/389663p1.html.  Yet we refer to Nintendo when we talk about who developed them. 

     

  • someforumguysomeforumguy HomePosts: 3,540Member Uncommon

    I see what the OP means about the city. Yes it is huge and it has a lot of npcs trotting about and random chatter. Which does makes the city come alive. But I think Anet needs to add more minigames to it and other interaction (couldn't find any last time) before it actually starts to have a purpose. Atm I only used it for storage, crafting and getting dye recipes. For this it doesn't have to be this large. Without more interaction I feel as if I'm an outsider.

    Outside the city though, it totally trumps any MMO that I played (and I played loads) in how alive the worlds feels. Like others I really like that I can go in any direction and find action I can participate in (absolutely love the scaling down of lvl! ).

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by Kreedz
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    Finally, Arenanet is OWNED by NCsoft, therefore the game is developed by NCsoft.   Just like we say Madden is developed by EA instead of EA Tiburon or Red Dead Redemption was made by Rockstar instead of Rockstar Studios San Diego, I will continue to say GW2 is made by NCsoft, because it is.  The name of a studio doesn't make a difference as to who is funding the game, paying for the studio, and directly employing the staff. 

    Sorry, but that's not how it works. Anet is their own studio, but yes, a large chunk of their profit goes to NCSoft. NCSoft is the publisher. They are 2 very different things.

    Developer = makes the creative decisions, physically makes the game, and to a large extent decides what goes in the game.

    Publisher = makes sure the game has proper funding (gets paid), and in many cases helps market the game / destribute it to the market.

    In this particular case, NCSoft has been extremely hands-off w/ GW2, which many people have even commented on. It's not common to see this happen in the gaming industry, but so far it appears to be the case. NCsoft has more or less given Anet free-reign over GW2, and doesn't seem to be putting up much if any roadblocks / strict deadlines on the game.

    To compare this arrangement to anything EA does is not only misleading, but it's also fairly insulting. EA has been voted the worste company in america, and it's not just because of ME3. EA is easily the worst example of a publisher by a landslide. Comparing them in any fashion to the arrangement between Anet & NCSoft is like comparing night to day. It's like comparing how george lucas makes films to how christopher nolan does. Just stop.

     

    You missed his point though: if the developer is owned by the publisher, we usually refer to the publisher name. Like his example with Red Dead Redemption, which was developed by "Rockstar San Diego" and published by "Rockstar Games"; see http://ps3.ign.com/articles/109/1090380p1.html.

    As for how much different specific publishers affect their developers: that's hard to know and one would have to read interviews with those involved. Links to such where they discuss the matter, would be appriciated.

    Blizzard developed Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, and people call them Blizzard games, not Activision or Activision Blizzard games.

    Maybe its because I am a Game Developer myself, but I find it highly offensive when people dont give credits where credit is due.

    Publisher =/= Developer, and Vice Versa.

     

    For Starcraft 2, IGN names "Blizzard Entertainment" as both publisher and developer. See http://pc.ign.com/articles/110/1108642p1.html

     

    Edit: Same for Diablo 3: see http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/14/diablo-iii-review-in-progress.

    Furthermore, it is about naming convention. There is a distinction between developer and publisher, yes, but how do we refer to things when the publisher owns the developer? That's interesting to watch.

  • ValkaernValkaern OxfordPosts: 512Member
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    I absolutely love the way ncsoft designed the cities and towns of GW2, with all their side characters and background conversations -  it's really great.  However, an issue that I find with the game is that none of them give me quests.  maybe I could help them find their frieds, family or deal with their problems (not just hoping to stumble upon some related event in a different zone).    The best part about games like Mass Effect or Dragon Age was just stumbling upon stories and quests. 

    I just find myself not wanting to explore anymore because I know I probably wont find any cool characters, stories or quests.  Much like if the game had a huge, well designed city that had no vendors, minigames, events or quests in it, there's nothing to look forward to (apart from the view itself, which while nice isn't everything in a game).

    Overall I think that by excising quests completely NC may have jumped the gun and gone overboard, because while in the open world, DEs make sense, in cities, there could be so many more stories to tell.

     

    All of the things you mentioned do take place in game, that's the entire point of their design, they're just indicated by actual in game actions (conversations, text, and most commonly visual cues & actions) rather than quest icons. I could see how you would miss it if you were trying to play it as a traditional quest hub grinder and ignored what the NPCs actually said and did.

    Stop looking for quest indicators and start watching the NPCs, follow them, interact with them, watch them, listen to them - this game is absolutely packed with exactly what you mentioned, you're missing out if you glance around, fail to see quest indicators and just assume there's no content. I'm not sure how you missed. We discovered tons of little events and cool stories to take part in by exploring out of the way places.

    Try paying attention to what NPCs say and do, follow them, you're really missing out and shooting yourself if you assume there's no content in a game that's absolutely crammed with content and colorful NPCs that have agendas, stories and actions.

    It's all there and then some, they've just changed the delivery system, don't let that throw you off  :)

  • someforumguysomeforumguy HomePosts: 3,540Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Kreedz
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

     

    For Starcraft 2, IGN names "Blizzard Entertainment" as both publisher and developer. See http://pc.ign.com/articles/110/1108642p1.html

     

    Edit: Same for Diablo 3: see http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/14/diablo-iii-review-in-progress.

    Furthermore, it is about naming convention. There is a distinction between developer and publisher, yes, but how do we refer to things when the publisher owns the developer? That's interesting to watch.

    So the OP wrote and I quote : "I absolutely love the way ncsoft designed the cities and towns of GW2". This is factually wrong and has nothing to do with that NCSoft owns Arenanet. There are no two ways about it, in all the articles you will read they will write that Arenanet developed the game (unless misinformed of course). Even NCSoft themselves wouldn't claim that they designed the cities in GW2.

     

  • austriacusaustriacus limaPosts: 624Member
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Kreedz
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    Finally, Arenanet is OWNED by NCsoft, therefore the game is developed by NCsoft.   Just like we say Madden is developed by EA instead of EA Tiburon or Red Dead Redemption was made by Rockstar instead of Rockstar Studios San Diego, I will continue to say GW2 is made by NCsoft, because it is.  The name of a studio doesn't make a difference as to who is funding the game, paying for the studio, and directly employing the staff. 

    Sorry, but that's not how it works. Anet is their own studio, but yes, a large chunk of their profit goes to NCSoft. NCSoft is the publisher. They are 2 very different things.

    Developer = makes the creative decisions, physically makes the game, and to a large extent decides what goes in the game.

    Publisher = makes sure the game has proper funding (gets paid), and in many cases helps market the game / destribute it to the market.

    In this particular case, NCSoft has been extremely hands-off w/ GW2, which many people have even commented on. It's not common to see this happen in the gaming industry, but so far it appears to be the case. NCsoft has more or less given Anet free-reign over GW2, and doesn't seem to be putting up much if any roadblocks / strict deadlines on the game.

    To compare this arrangement to anything EA does is not only misleading, but it's also fairly insulting. EA has been voted the worste company in america, and it's not just because of ME3. EA is easily the worst example of a publisher by a landslide. Comparing them in any fashion to the arrangement between Anet & NCSoft is like comparing night to day. It's like comparing how george lucas makes films to how christopher nolan does. Just stop.

     

    You missed his point though: if the developer is owned by the publisher, we usually refer to the publisher name. Like his example with Red Dead Redemption, which was developed by "Rockstar San Diego" and published by "Rockstar Games"; see http://ps3.ign.com/articles/109/1090380p1.html.

    As for how much different specific publishers affect their developers: that's hard to know and one would have to read interviews with those involved. Links to such where they discuss the matter, would be appriciated.

    Blizzard developed Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, and people call them Blizzard games, not Activision or Activision Blizzard games.

    Maybe its because I am a Game Developer myself, but I find it highly offensive when people dont give credits where credit is due.

    Publisher =/= Developer, and Vice Versa.

     

    For Starcraft 2, IGN names "Blizzard Entertainment" as both publisher and developer. See http://pc.ign.com/articles/110/1108642p1.html

     

    Edit: Same for Diablo 3: see http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/14/diablo-iii-review-in-progress.

    Furthermore, it is about naming convention. There is a distinction between developer and publisher, yes, but how do we refer to things when the publisher owns the developer? That's interesting to watch.

    Ppl that say that publishers are the ones that develop the games too fail too see why we make the distinction in the first place.

    A publisher has a lot of development teams and some are better than others giving them pedigree to the games that specific team does.

    The reason we say Arenanet is the developer is to separate GW2  from the other games ncsoft publishes since the other teams that ncsoft owns have no relation or influence in the development of GW2

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kreedz
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

    You missed his point though: if the developer is owned by the publisher, we usually refer to the publisher name. Like his example with Red Dead Redemption, which was developed by "Rockstar San Diego" and published by "Rockstar Games"; see http://ps3.ign.com/articles/109/1090380p1.html.

    As for how much different specific publishers affect their developers: that's hard to know and one would have to read interviews with those involved. Links to such where they discuss the matter, would be appriciated.

    Blizzard developed Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, and people call them Blizzard games, not Activision or Activision Blizzard games.

    Maybe its because I am a Game Developer myself, but I find it highly offensive when people dont give credits where credit is due.

    Publisher =/= Developer, and Vice Versa.

    This ^

    I also get annoyed when people start fudging w/ industry standards and passing them off as 'facts', especially when it takes credit away from the people who deserve it. As if the artists didn't have enough crap to deal w/ already.

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,119Member Uncommon

    I found the lack of a /general channel or at least a regional chat channel made the game feel very quiet and rather dull.  Chatter is a huge part of an MMOs appeal to me and with it missing, it makes the game feel dead.

    image
  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by someforumguy
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Kreedz
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

     

    For Starcraft 2, IGN names "Blizzard Entertainment" as both publisher and developer. See http://pc.ign.com/articles/110/1108642p1.html

     

    Edit: Same for Diablo 3: see http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/14/diablo-iii-review-in-progress.

    Furthermore, it is about naming convention. There is a distinction between developer and publisher, yes, but how do we refer to things when the publisher owns the developer? That's interesting to watch.

    So the OP wrote and I quote : "I absolutely love the way ncsoft designed the cities and towns of GW2". This is factually wrong and has nothing to do with that NCSoft owns Arenanet. There are no two ways about it, in all the articles you will read they will write that Arenanet developed the game (unless misinformed of course). Even NCSoft themselves wouldn't claim that they designed the cities in GW2.

    You're absolutely correct someforumguy. He's just trying to use semantics to rationalize how NCSoft is the developer for this game. Which absolutely isn't true.

  • someforumguysomeforumguy HomePosts: 3,540Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    I absolutely love the wayArenanet designed the cities and towns of GW2, with all their side characters and background conversations -  it's really great.  However, an issue that I find with the game is that none of them give me quests.  maybe I could help them find their frieds, family or deal with their problems (not just hoping to stumble upon some related event in a different zone).    The best part about games like Mass Effect or Dragon Age was just stumbling upon stories and quests. 

    I just find myself not wanting to explore anymore because I know I probably wont find any cool characters, stories or quests.  Much like if the game had a huge, well designed city that had no vendors, minigames, events or quests in it, there's nothing to look forward to (apart from the view itself, which while nice isn't everything in a game).

    Overall I think that by excising quests completely NC may have jumped the gun and gone overboard, because while in the open world, DEs make sense, in cities, there could be so many more stories to tell.

    Ok, let's get back on track, lets discuss the OP's topic :p I think he makes a fair point, because while the city is huge and feeling alive due to many npcs wandering about and chat, it also makes me feel like an outsider. Because as far as I could tell, it lacks interaction beyond the standard services (craft, merchant and storage). I couldn't find any of the minigames yet that Arenanet talks about.

     

     

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    I found the lack of a /general channel or at least a regional chat channel made the game feel very quiet and rather dull.  Chatter is a huge part of an MMOs appeal to me and with it missing, it makes the game feel dead.

    Uhm... did u not see the /local chat, or /team chat? Cause the channels were constantly being flooded all weekend.

  • The_KorriganThe_Korrigan EastPosts: 2,630Member

    Ok, so the publisher of a video game is not the same than the developer of the same video game, just like the publisher of a book is obviously not the author of the book. I think everybody with a little bit common sense can only agree.

    But does no quests mean less atmosphere? ;-)

    If you wonder why I don't answer your posts, it's most likely because you are on my block list - so don't waste your time.

    image

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,119Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    I found the lack of a /general channel or at least a regional chat channel made the game feel very quiet and rather dull.  Chatter is a huge part of an MMOs appeal to me and with it missing, it makes the game feel dead.

    Uhm... did u not see the /local chat, or /team chat? Cause the channels were constantly being flooded all weekend.

    I find that amusing as it seemed people were too busy circle strafing and dodging to get in two words while out in the fields doing DE's and hearts.  Rarely did people even respond to me in /local which has a range of what, 50 feet.  Getting people to actually form a team was also a major chore and the two I was in, barely two words were spoken.

    image
  • austriacusaustriacus limaPosts: 624Member
    Originally posted by someforumguy
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    I absolutely love the wayArenanet designed the cities and towns of GW2, with all their side characters and background conversations -  it's really great.  However, an issue that I find with the game is that none of them give me quests.  maybe I could help them find their frieds, family or deal with their problems (not just hoping to stumble upon some related event in a different zone).    The best part about games like Mass Effect or Dragon Age was just stumbling upon stories and quests. 

    I just find myself not wanting to explore anymore because I know I probably wont find any cool characters, stories or quests.  Much like if the game had a huge, well designed city that had no vendors, minigames, events or quests in it, there's nothing to look forward to (apart from the view itself, which while nice isn't everything in a game).

    Overall I think that by excising quests completely NC may have jumped the gun and gone overboard, because while in the open world, DEs make sense, in cities, there could be so many more stories to tell.

    Ok, let's get back on track, lets discuss the OP's topic :p I think he makes a fair point, because while the city is huge and feeling alive due to many npcs wandering about and chat, it also makes me feel like an outsider. Because as far as I could tell, it lacks interaction beyond the standard services (craft, merchant and storage). I couldn't find any of the minigames yet that Arenanet talks about.

     

     

    They said that for that BWE they didnt put any mini games in, thats why you didnt saw them.

    Dont worry though they are there, hopefully the coming beta weekend they add some.

  • LeodiousLeodious Abingdon, VAPosts: 773Member
    Originally posted by Elifia

     


    Originally posted by The_Korrigan

    Originally posted by Elifia  

    Originally posted by The_Korrigan "Hearts" are actually repeatable, Elifia. For the rest of your post, I agree :)
    If you mean by creating a new character, that doesn't count, that way you could say everything in the game is repeatable. If that's not what you meant, please elaborate? Because as far as I know, hearts have a completion bar, which is completely persistent, and disappears once filled. You can keep killing enemies and doing DEs in the area, but that doesn't reset your heart.
    The heart remains "done" but I think the content itself resets after a while. For instance, you can do the raven shrine heart, then come back later and do it again (if you wish to, of course).

     

    Maybe I'm confusing two different things too, but I know I went back to a couple of heart spots and was able to do them again.


     

    Honestly, I think you were confusing DEs with Hearts. What exactly were you doing at the Raven Shrine? Did you get an empty Heart bar that filled up by collecting eggs and killings skelks, or did you get to talk to the statues to answer riddles? Because the riddles thing was a DE.

    Also note that the 'content' for a Heart cannot reset, because the 'content' of a heart is small tasks like killing the generic mobs in the area, and those mobs won't disappear once the heart is completed. You can still kill mobs, feed cows, water crops, etc, but you won't get anything from it.

    Heart "quest" content does reset. The heart won't empty, but you can redo the content after a few hours or a day or something and get stuff for it. I don't remember specifics of this happening to me in the game, but I do recall this being discussed by Anet at some point. And as I've read and watched dozens if not hundreds of interviews and videos and such, I'm not going to try and find the specific line.  But they said this was to give people more avenues to do content and be rewarded without having to go searching for stuff. I personally also think it makes sense, as that lady is going to need someone to pick her apples the next day after you do it for it. The world doesn't stop just because you finish, which you have noted yourself. When you complete a quest in another game, you can't do it again and be rewarded. Anet has said time and again they want to avoid that. They want you to be able to do what you want to do and still get rewards for doing it.

    "There are two great powers, and they've been fighting since time began. Every advance in human life, every scrap of knowledge and wisdom and decency we have has been torn by one side from the teeth of the other. Every little increase in human freedom has been fought over ferociously between those who want us to know more and be wiser and stronger, and those who want us to obey and be humble and submit."

    — John Parry, to his son Will; "The Subtle Knife," by Phillip Pullman

  • powerplaypowerplay canton, MIPosts: 24Member
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    Finally, Arenanet is OWNED by NCsoft, therefore the game is developed by NCsoft.   Just like we say Madden is developed by EA instead of EA Tiburon or Red Dead Redemption was made by Rockstar instead of Rockstar Studios San Diego, I will continue to say GW2 is made by NCsoft, because it is.  The name of a studio doesn't make a difference as to who is funding the game, paying for the studio, and directly employing the staff. 

    Sorry, but that's not how it works. Anet is their own studio, but yes, a large chunk of their profit goes to NCSoft. NCSoft is the publisher. They are 2 very different things.

    Developer = makes the creative decisions, physically makes the game, and to a large extent decides what goes in the game.

    Publisher = makes sure the game has proper funding (gets paid), and in many cases helps market the game / destribute it to the market.

    In this particular case, NCSoft has been extremely hands-off w/ GW2, which many people have even commented on. It's not common to see this happen in the gaming industry, but so far it appears to be the case. NCsoft has more or less given Anet free-reign over GW2, and doesn't seem to be putting up much if any roadblocks / strict deadlines on the game.

    To compare this arrangement to anything EA does is not only misleading, but it's also fairly insulting. EA has been voted the worste company in america, and it's not just because of ME3. EA is easily the worst example of a publisher by a landslide. Comparing them in any fashion to the arrangement between Anet & NCSoft is like comparing night to day. It's like comparing how george lucas makes films to how christopher nolan does. Just stop.

    GW2 may be great and all, but it is owned by NCsoft. Anet canot take the game and leave. NCsoft is to Anet as EA is to Bioware as Activision is to Blizzard. They do not have a CO-publishing deal like Funcom has for instance. Funcom can take their game and leave EA if they want and switch to NCsoft for publishing if they like.

    OP has a a pretty good idea that would make the game even more full imo. You adventure wouldn't stop. More is always better :)

     

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by someforumguy
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by Kreedz
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

     

    For Starcraft 2, IGN names "Blizzard Entertainment" as both publisher and developer. See http://pc.ign.com/articles/110/1108642p1.html

     

    Edit: Same for Diablo 3: see http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/14/diablo-iii-review-in-progress.

    Furthermore, it is about naming convention. There is a distinction between developer and publisher, yes, but how do we refer to things when the publisher owns the developer? That's interesting to watch.

    So the OP wrote and I quote : "I absolutely love the way ncsoft designed the cities and towns of GW2". This is factually wrong and has nothing to do with that NCSoft owns Arenanet. There are no two ways about it, in all the articles you will read they will write that Arenanet developed the game (unless misinformed of course). Even NCSoft themselves wouldn't claim that they designed the cities in GW2.

    You're absolutely correct someforumguy. He's just trying to use semantics to rationalize how NCSoft is the developer for this game. Which absolutely isn't true.

     

    What I am trying to do is to defend the previous post who pointed out that there are cases when we normally refer to the publisher rather than the developer. It is a seperate discussion about why things are said like they were. Arenanet is indeed the developer, just like Gamefreak is the developer for Pokemon and Rockstar San Diego is for Red Dead Redemption. Yet in the other 2 cases, we refer to the owners directly when we talk about who developed them, rather the specific developer studios they own.

     

    Why is it that we refer in such way in some cases, but not in others?  Is it because we imagine the owners having less influence in some cases than in others? But, how can we really know that? We would need inside information from the company employees themselves, right?

     

    This is not an attempt to discredit Arenanet for their work. It is an attempt to try to understand why the custom is in one way in some cases, but not in others. There has to be a rational explanation that makes sense.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,668Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Intrinsic

    I don't see how it can mean less atmosphere, if anything it's more atmosphere as you are actually immersed in what you are doing and doing with others, not just reading a quest log.

    Agreed.

    I think a good percentage of today's MMO gamers have never played or even heard of MMOs that aren't quest-based, let alone without quests, so I can kind of understnad the perception that without quests there's no atmosphere - it's an alien concept.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • AmjocoAmjoco Layton, UTPosts: 4,779Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    I found the lack of a /general channel or at least a regional chat channel made the game feel very quiet and rather dull.  Chatter is a huge part of an MMOs appeal to me and with it missing, it makes the game feel dead.

    I agree and yet at the same time one of my main dislikes and the reason I didn't resubscribe to Tera was the chat, it was horrible (disgusting and childish). There needs to be a happy medium and hopefully that is what Anet is going with. Perhaps them starting with a minimal chat system and tweaking it up until they feel it is right is what they are going for (I hope). I would also like to see chat bubbles, it's hard to remember to look at the window when playing. 

    Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.

  • GenghasGenghas knoxville, TNPosts: 13Member

    heaven forbid you sould have to do something without a quest oh noooo plenty of content to keep you busy in gw2

  • korent1991korent1991 CakovecPosts: 1,390Member
    Originally posted by BigAndShiny

    I absolutely love the way ncsoft designed the cities and towns of GW2, with all their side characters and background conversations -  it's really great.  However, an issue that I find with the game is that none of them give me quests.  maybe I could help them find their frieds, family or deal with their problems (not just hoping to stumble upon some related event in a different zone).    The best part about games like Mass Effect or Dragon Age was just stumbling upon stories and quests. 

    I just find myself not wanting to explore anymore because I know I probably wont find any cool characters, stories or quests.  Much like if the game had a huge, well designed city that had no vendors, minigames, events or quests in it, there's nothing to look forward to (apart from the view itself, which while nice isn't everything in a game).

    Overall I think that by excising quests completely NC may have jumped the gun and gone overboard, because while in the open world, DEs make sense, in cities, there could be so many more stories to tell.

    "Guild Wars 2 is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game in development by ArenaNet.  --wikipedia

    source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild_Wars_2

    "Guild Wars is an episodic series of online 3D fantasy role-playing games developed by ArenaNet and published by NCsoft." -wikipedia

    source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild_Wars

    Currently, ArenaNet is busy developing Guild Wars 2 while continuing to support Guild Wars with additional content such as holiday events, community contests, monthly championships, and merchandise. The entire team is excited about Guild Wars 2and thinks players will be, too- -arenanet blog (about us section)

    source: http://www.arena.net/aboutus/

    That's what GW2 is all about, not giving you any quests which you have to do, you just go around and do whatever you like and do events which you like from those which are happening across the world. The efforts of your story are shown in the city, you have your own "instanced" part of the city where everyone resides from people you helped to the people you saved and they all recognize you.  Story itself is told trough the "personal story events" which guide you trough your own personalized and unique story. It's a huge step forward from the walls of texts which no one actually reads anymore after few levels. 

     

    "Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life."
    -------------------------------

    image
  • LytheRageLytheRage Roebuck, SCPosts: 12Member

    During BWE #1 I played a Charr Guardian and was walking around inside the city (or perhaps it was just outside but I swear I was inside because I was near my personal story quest). 

    Anyway, an event DID occur where a bar brawl was about to break out between the different Charr factions (Blood, Iron, Shadow?).  The NPCs were arguing (with voice and chat bubbles) and I could speak to them individually.  I then had to choose a response based on what they said.  If I chose correctly, they backed down.  If not, I had to fight (brawl) with them to make them capitulate. 

    Other players arrived and we talked down (or beat down) enough of them to complete the event.  Had we not, who knows what would have happened?

    Also, in Divinty's Reach if you explore the city you find NPCs that give you speed boosts to move through the city faster AND I did find a minigame but the NPC said it was closed for now.  It was a shooting gallery like you see at a fair with moving targets and everything.

    So yeah that stuff IS in the game, at least from my short experience.

  • just1opinionjust1opinion Kansas City, MOPosts: 4,844Member
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    I found the lack of a /general channel or at least a regional chat channel made the game feel very quiet and rather dull.  Chatter is a huge part of an MMOs appeal to me and with it missing, it makes the game feel dead.

    Uhm... did u not see the /local chat, or /team chat? Cause the channels were constantly being flooded all weekend.

     

    Our server, Sea of Sorrows, had tons of talking going on.  Most of the time I just wasn't really interested in stopping to read it, but when I was at vendors I would watch chat to see what people were saying.  There was so much going on in the game world....I didn't really miss participating in the chat though.  I used to sit and gab in trade chat in WoW and general chat in EQ2 for hours sometimes, but it wasn't because it made the game so interesting, it was because I was bored.

     

    Anyway....not missing participating in chat, but glad to see there IS some.  I mean who knows when the urge might strike? lol

     

    On topic:

    IMO no quests means MORE atmosphere.  It's very freeing and alive.  I've loathed quest logs for a long time now, and I'm soooo ready to be without them.  I'm a huge explorer too, so the game is really made for someone like me that likes to explore and find things.  And the atmosphere is so beautiful.

    President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club

Sign In or Register to comment.