Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Guild Wars 2 Review (long)
Yamota
Member UncommonPosts: 6,593
Wrote a review on my blog. It can be found here: http://taleofshahin.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/guild-wars-2-review-good-but-not-great.html
An excerpt:
"Some people are saying that you should just look at the fun factor of a game but I only partly agree with that. Ofcourse, at the end of the day, the game needs to be fun but MMORPGs have the potential to be more than that as they are also persistant, virtual worlds and albeit GW 2 is a solid and fun game, due to the lacklustre and highly controlled PvP and the fact that it did not push the envelope when it comes to Dynamic Events, it is not that much of a persistant virtual world where you feel you can have any real impact.
So altough the game is classified as a ThemePark one might not blame it for that but for me a subgenre classification does not take away the fact that the game is an MMORPG and as such has the potential to be more than "just a game". Therefore I cannot say that this game is more than "just" good. It is an excellent ThemePark but lacks in the persistant, virtual world area. So after the end of the day it is "yet another" triple A MMORPG altough excellently executed and with some novel features. However don't expect to have much fun things to do at level cap..."
Comments
Tell me, how can you have any Real Impact in any other Themepark MMO. GW2 is the only one I've played that feels alive. It's not a static world like Every other Themepark out there. How do you make in Impact when everything is static.
Well one way of have a true impact is if the Dynamic Events actually had some real consequences. Like in the extreme case they would eventually lead to the invasion and shutting down of a capital city and only a coordinated effect of groups of players would kick them out.
There are lots of ways of a ThemePark to have a real impact on what you do. Problem is that most ThemePark devs plays it safe and does not want to introduce elements which can scare of the ultra casual player who just wants to play an hour here and there but still want to be able to do everything during his limited time.
My gaming blog
That's not individual impact though.
Today I was finishing up in Caledon Forest and I initiated an event on my own. No one else around. Half way through another player joined and towards the end a few more. It chained into more and bigger events and finally culminating in the Boss fight for that area. Had I not initiated the first event that would not have happened. To me that is having an impact. I affected the situation in that region. Had I not done that it might not have happened for hours.
Furthermore. In the higher level zones in Orr you no longer have hearts. If you want gear from Karma vendors. You need to make sure the places are either safe or conquer them, which is exactly done with a large group of people.
So again how do you personally make an impact in other Themepark MMOs
I was not referring to making a impact by yourself, MMORPGs should not be solo games, but rather the impact players can do, individually or in groups. For example if you were really powerful you could have twarted that capital invasion single handedly, obviously that kind of power does not exist in GW 2 but you get the idea.
Your example of impact is no impact. You kill or dont kill the boss, it wont matter, except you getting more loot/karma whatever. If that boss mob would actually roam around and threaten not only this zone but also eventually other zones, then taking him down would have an impact. Sadly in ThemeParks, casual play seems to be the focus and you can't have epic mobs "disturbing" other people's experience.
My gaming blog
A giant boss roaming around destroying villages, or player housing ,or conflicts and invasions where players can place various structures and turrets on the ground in the open world (not instanced maps or designated pvp zones), or the ability to not only initiate an event, but also determine when and where and what type out of dozens to choose from and how many people it needs to complete.
Do you think stuff like this is a way to have permanence and impact on the game world you're in? I tend to think so.
The developers will never do something like this. Not because they don't want to but because a city that gets overrun ruins the fun for people who aren't interested in dynamic events, and who need the services of the city to play their game.
If Anet implemented your suggestion and Divinity's Reach went offline until enough people decided to "Fix it" then the number of complaints from people who are unable to get to their bank, train, do their personal story in the home area, etc.., the number of those people complaining would outnumber the people with your view by 10 to 1. The developers have to make the game fun for as many people as possible, not just you.
I hate to sound like a Hallmark card, but MMOs are kind of like any other public place. The more people that show up, the greater the diversity of personal views and the greater the likelihood that your idea of fun won't be the same as someone else's. In short you need to compromise and accept what is offered, or move onto something else.
Why dont we try to stop expecting themeparks to be like sandboxes? To you all of that might sound amazing and you might ask yourself why no one is doing it. I on the other hand would HATE any of that in a themepark game.
Theres a reason why we have subgenres and this game was never advertised as a sandbox.
Well considering the failures of the latest crop of ThemePark, namely SW:TOR, Secret World and Rift, to capture a greater audience then perhaps even ThemeParks need to evolve?
My gaming blog
Why? because sandboxers cant find their mmo that fits their style? What you are seeing are game hoppers. You could make the best sandbox game and they would still leave its what they do.
Long gone are the days when the majority of the mmo population sticks to one game. Get on with the times. WoW is the only exeption
Themeparks dont need to evolve, they do what they need to do just fine, they only needed to change their revenue model which thankfully GW2 did.
Again please dont try to change your niches into the norm, while it may sound weird, the majority of people enjoy hopping from one game to another and thats because they come from single player games. Mainstream audience isnt searching for a MMO that is home or a long term plan, just for quick bursts of fun. The only ones doing that are sandboxers and vets.
Well considering the failures of the latest crop of ThemePark, namely SW:TOR, Secret World and Rift, to capture a greater audience then perhaps even ThemeParks need to evolve?
Why? because sandboxers cant find their mmo that fits their style? What you are seeing are game hoppers. You could make the best sandbox game and they would still leave its what they do.
Long gone are the days when the majority of the mmo population sticks to one game. Get on with the times. WoW is the only exeption
Themeparks dont need to evolve, they do what they need to do just fine, they only needed to change their revenue model which thankfully GW2 did.
Again please dont try to change your niches into the norm, while it may sound weird, the majority of people enjoy hopping from one game to another and thats because they come from single player games. Mainstream audience isnt searching for a MMO that is home or a long term plan, just for quick bursts of fun. The only ones doing that are sandboxers and vets.
You know what the funny thing is? All those features I listed are actually in Rift right now or are coming in the expansion in November.
Yes a themepark can expand the niches it includes apart from its mainstream. There is housing too in that update. Contrary to a lot of what people believe 90% of people dont give two rats about them.
If guild wars 2 feels it should expand its repertoire it most likely will. Right now though it has exactly what the themepark crowd wants. Everything else, like rift kind of updates that could come are just a bonus and asked and needed only by a niche.
So what you are saying is that some gamers, you claim the majority, are playing MMORPGs as single player games and that is just fine? Well, for me, that is not fine because MMORPGs are, or were, the next step in the evolution of gaming. One which has been stopped in it's track because single player gamers want to play MMORPGs as single player games.
Sorry I am not buying that. For sure there is a need for single player MMORPGs but I believe there is room for true MMORPGs as well and since no big budget one has been developed, since Eve (and that was even not big budget), there is definetely room for some to take that spot and I believe ArcheAge will be the one.
My gaming blog
Bosses who are not hunted down will roam that zone and kill everything from mobs to npc in villages, I've seen it happend.
Crossing to another zone no it won't happend but after I read what you have wrote I suggest you build your own game with all these cool features you keep writing about and see how well it will work with thousands of other players who are bent on destruction and grefing other fellow gamers.
Good luck with that project.
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
Are you saying that Guild Wars 2 should have released with more content than an already released game + expansions?
Im not saying there isnt a market for what you want. But dont try to push your niche into a MAINSTREAM game.
Evaluate a game for what it is, not for what you want out of it.
One of the main things about this game that won me over was that it felt distinctly more like a world than a game.
After MMOs started drifting away from 'virtual world' and more towards 'prepackaged game experience' in the early 2000s I had to take what I could get, and over the years became conditioned to stop poking around, stop being curious, stop investigating and talking to NPCs because it just no longer paid off.
With GW2, it simply does pay off. I can fully step away from primary combat progression (dynamic events/hearts) and continually find things that are engaging as well as rewarding in both a progression sense as well as horizontal development sense, and I'm loving that. In typical linear themeparks, I just don't get that. I don't get meaty content that can draw me in and keep me entertained to the point that I have to step back and say 'wow, I've been exploring this ____ or investigating ____ or climbing ____ for an hour now - and I was originally just intending to run over there to sell.'
The world is packed with details, secrets, stories and mechanics that often tie them together in a way that I find incredibly satisfying (I love uncovering actual content that the 5 people ahead of me just ran past because they weren't curious about the oddly named 'Wounded Moa' by the mountain wall, or the guy by the tree in the swamp that after a conversation chain leads me to another NPC which leads to kicking off a full scale event). Maybe it's the EverQuest in me, but I find any form of content that I uncover through curiosity more satisfying than the obvious types thrust in my face...
Anyway, to each their own, I would absolutely classify this game as 'World' rather than simply 'Game', and with the future proofing they've done and seeds already in the world, I'm excited to see what this will grow in to over the years.
I don't want to game hop. I want to find a mmorpg and play it for 5 years like I did WoW. It just seems that games are being developed not to last for than 3 months. From Swtor to TSW, to GW2 these games were launched far too early like 2 years too early.
The next gen graphics are here. The new games will look good for another 5 - 8 years. If your concept is forward looking like TSW or GW2 (to a lesser extent)why not let it simmer for another couple years in order to fill the game out so it would last a year. I know money is an issue, but do paid closed betas like PS2 or something.
[quote]Originally posted by Badaboom
Originally posted by Foomerang Originally posted by austriacus Originally posted by Yamota Originally posted by austriacus Originally posted by Foomerang A giant boss roaming around destroying villages, or player housing ,or conflicts and invasions where players can place various structures and turrets on the ground in the open world (not instanced maps or designated pvp zones), or the ability to not only initiate an event, but also determine when and where and what type out of dozens to choose from and how many people it needs to complete. Do you think stuff like this is a way to have permanence and impact on the game world you're in? I tend to think so. Why dont we try to stop expecting themeparks to be like sandboxes? To you all of that might sound amazing and you might ask yourself why no one is doing it. I on the other hand would HATE any of that in a themepark game. Theres a reason why we have subgenres and this game was never advertised as a sandbox. Well considering the failures of the latest crop of ThemePark, namely SW:TOR, Secret World and Rift, to capture a greater audience then perhaps even ThemeParks need to evolve? Why? because sandboxers cant find their mmo that fits their style? What you are seeing are game hoppers. You could make the best sandbox game and they would still leave its what they do. Long gone are the days when the majority of the mmo population sticks to one game. Get on with the times. WoW is the only exeption Themeparks dont need to evolve, they do what they need to do just fine, they only needed to change their revenue model which thankfully GW2 did. Again please dont try to change your niches into the norm, while it may sound weird, the majority of people enjoy hopping from one game to another and thats because they come from single player games. Mainstream audience isnt searching for a MMO that is home or a long term plan, just for quick bursts of fun. The only ones doing that are sandboxers and vets. You know what the funny thing is? All those features I listed are actually in Rift right now or are coming in the expansion in November.Are you saying that Guild Wars 2 should have released with more content than an already released game + expansions?[/quot
Nope. Was talking about mmos bringing in virtual world features
AAA MMO's are already taking 5+ years to develop mainly because players are demanding rich content and not just mobs to grind on so adding two more years of evelopment is a big no no. This type of content takes years to make and they can only make a finite amount which is consumed by players in the first 6 months of the games life and because they cannot add new content quickly players get bored and move on. This has happened with Champions Online, Rift, SW:TOR, TSW and will happen with GW2 unless you are the type of player who rolls alts or likes grinding for unique gear or raiding.
Now I'm not a lover of Sandbox games but I understand the argument of adding Sandbox elements in MMO's to add depth and longevity though whether the masses will take to them is in my mind long odds I do understand the argument. Personally I think players that want more virtual world should just try and support the smaller dev's that are attempting to build those types of games and just forget about any AAA MMO on the horizon.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
I agree with this post ^^^^^^.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Have you ever seen what happens when the players lose key positions in orr?
There is no merchants or pact defenses or anything but risen everywhere and the forts become open spaces loaded with undead..
So yeah there is severe consenquences for failure but luckily we dont fail that much and i would say maybe anet should intenify the risen attacks on key pact positions but we would likely lose everything overnight when the player population gets smaller...
Besides that you cant complete an entire cycle of DEs without everything you earn diminishing to nothing..
Anet has a great concept but then they turned around and ruined it by limiting the fun to 20-30 minutes of playtime and then it takes around an hour for your experience/karma to return to normal levels if you stop playing..
What a crock..
Playing GW2..
I agree as well it was something they had to compromise.. Iv'e said it before in a couple threads but say a giant stormed a town and completely obliterated it, it then took several days or more to gather people and rebuild it. What you would get would be a buttload of angry people that they missed the epic giant smashing the town. They had to make a design decision on how far the effects could reach and change the zones and still allow the maximum amount of people enjoy the content. May not be perfect but to me it's miles better than standard static quest hub layout and for me improves replayability 10 fold.
This is the first themepark MMO I have actually had very differn't experiences playing through the exact same zones.
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
People keep saying it's a great themepark, and even the best themepark.
Here's an important question: Do these people actually like themeparks? Or are they sandbox fans and just go "oh, well, good enough for a themepark" in a knock on the themepark design in general? Like they used to say: "Bon pour l'orient!" (Meaning, "good for the East" - this was obviously said by the "West")
I actually like themeparks. (I also like sandboxes. Happens, there are more of us out there. :P)
When I play themeparks, I'm OK with being made to go through rides, I'm OK with being limited, I'm even OK with not having impact on the world.
So a themepark must be judged on its own terms. On the quality of its content - not how freeform it is.
So, are people saying GW2 is a good themepark game because it's less "limited?" Or because it actually has better directed content, like story content, dungeon content, etc.? To me, it doesn't surpass other games in this regard. TSW and SWTOR easily has better story and character, while many other games have better dungeons, in my opinion.
So no, I wouldn't say GW2 is the best themepark or even "great for a themepark". After all, freeform gameplay is not why I play themeparks. I play EVE for that!
How dare you claim dynamic events aren't amazing on this game! They are the defining point that makes this good that no other game...
Oh wait... they exist on other games too? Oh... um....
Joking aside, I pretty much agree with the excerp. I'd read the full review but to me its silly to read a review for something you already have your own opinion formed on. Personally I have to disagree with some of the describers used in how 'well designed' it is, but even then I still can't call it a bad game either. Its good, but when I say good, I'm meaning it in the most plain and simple way possible.
I wasn't blown away from it and as much as I hate to note graphics, I felt that graphically the game was lack luster in many areas, going for a bit cartoony look but cutting short by trying to do realism as well to create a rather odd setting, particularly with the environment that just felt so lack luster. I can't make any claims that any of the zones really stuck out from one another, and considering the art style its a real issue to be. Combat... clunky. Events... buggy and not properly tuned before hand (failsafes do wonders ANET at preventing issues from happening. No one is perfect, so the best solution is to make sure stuff fixes itself incase.)
Overall I tried playing the game earlier for the daily achievement (aka fancy daily quest... which feels MORE like a grind somehow then regular dailies) and I just honestly couldn't do it. With Torchlight 2 or Boarderlands 2 or Minecraft or FTL to play... its the way back seat. Even Rift I have absolutely nothing to do on (maxed PA waiting for expansion
) I take a priority in playing over GW2 right now. I think its good like you though personally I'm viewing it in a more negative light.