It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Website: http://www.emrendil.comTwitchTV: http://www.twitch.tv/emrendilTwitter: https://twitter.com/Emrendil
Yes to your first question. No to your second.
Besides the Trinity wasn't completely done away with. It was reconfigured so that anyone can fill a role at any time, and then switch roles in the middle of combat. I think it works just fine in GW2.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
Be afraid.....The dragons are HERE!
Originally posted by Emrendil It's been a while since Guild Wars 2 launch, and I still don't know what to think about this new system. Do you think it was necessary to break the "trinity" system? Would dungeons be more fun wit it?
No and I don't know. I applaud them for breaking it, though. It allows us to play a game without any predefined roles.
As for any further thoughts, I just don't know yet. I haven't really formed too strong an opinion and what would help the game.
Edit: On second thought....for me, the problem isn't with the lack of trinity so much as a lack of attachment to my character. I feel that he/she only really levels/advances once the weapon skills open up. Everything after that is just gravy....little stuff that doesn't matter.
Basically, I feel my character grows from the customization screen until about level 5 or so. At level 5 I am basically top level. The rest is just....I dunno...pointless? for lack of a better term. Maybe that's too harsh...it just feels like it doesn't matter. The game, for me, at least, drastically switches from an MMO to a slightly more immersive version of a dungeon crawler.
Title question: no.
First question in original post: yes.
Second question in original post: no.
There are a ton of games that cater to those few people who like trinity-based combat. If you're one of them, then you've got lots of choices that suit your preferred style of combat. To insist that no one else should have any options at all is silly.
Besides, Trinity is an AMD processor and Guild Wars 2 heavily favors Intel processors.
My theme song.
before gw2 i liked trinity.
i liked the idea to be removed and one of the reasons i was waiting gw2 was that.
after gw2 i can say i LIKE trinity even more! i hate the gw2 system and the dungeons it has.
it was a dissapointment for me because i wanted to be good. i wanted something new, but in the end it wasnt what i expected.
I loved the fact that they were being creative enough to do something different. Good for them. Having said that, I do find myself missing the trinity on dungeon runs and big open world events. I don't know, I think it may have taken something like this to convince me that the trinity system really is a great way of doing things. This new way just feels zergy (yes that's a word now)
Think about this. If most all games for the past 15 or so years used this same system, and then a new game came out that used the trinity system as the primary group combat mechanic, wouldn't we all be praising it as the best thing ever made? I think I would.
This is a bit OT here, however, I want to say that I'm still enjoying GW2 for what it is. The fact that I paid my 60 bucks and don't have to pay another dime is great. I would really struggle with the decision of quitting GW2 to go back to another trinity game with more endgame. Now I don't have to. I think I'm going to fire Rift back up for the x-pac coming out and still play GW2. Win, win.
Originally posted by Xzen There is nothing wrong with the trinity. Not every mmorpg needs to have it. I'm glad they did something different.
This is how I feel. Trinity is still fun, but mixing it up is as well.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
Originally posted by KoLdBieR I've been thinking the same thing lately.. Generally, I play a support/healing role in most MMO's. I enjoy being able to fill many roles at once in this game, but I do miss the feeling of being the healer that 'saves the day' in a scenario or dungeon.
I think a lot of players miss that
Well, in games with trinity system, I felt like I'm party of the team when doing dungeons. Everybody knows their role and know what to do. But in GW2, it was chaotic. I felt like I was on my own.
Originally posted by Emrendil It's been a while since Guild Wars 2 launch, and I still don't know what to think about this new system. Do you think it was necessary to break the "trinity" system? Would the game be better off with the "trinity"?
It would be an interesting experiment to see how well the trinity works in GW2. I'm willing to test it if they can make it happen. lol
No, I don't.
They tried to be "new" and "creative", so props to them. However, they left a LOT of what makes the "Trinity" work so well for itself in GW2, and changed it from "Tank", "Dps", "Heals" to "Dps", "Control", "Support". Needless to say it isn't working out well at all, and most dungeons are nothing but chaos unless you've been running it a CRAP ton with friends and know every single step of the way in the dungeon. Oh, and that's called a "Static" dungeon....not really sure why people are confusing "Dynamic" with "Static" .
However, I'll rephrase your question that fits better to the real answer:
"Do you believe changing the Trinity to something else while leaving in elements that work best with classic-Trinity worked well for GW?"
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
I prefer to play Trinity style combat system, that is what seems to be the most fun for me so far. That being said I have no problems with GW2 doing what they did. I do have alot of things that I think ANET has done poorly with this game getting rid of the Trinity setup is not one of them. It did bug me for a little while but I'm over it.
edit: also like has been said in this thread already when you say GW2 does not have a Trinity setup it really should be that GW2 does not have a set Trinity roll system that is setup before the fight. The Trinity system is still there you can't argue that. There is tanking, healing, and dps in the game still you just can pick what you do and change mid fight more then other MMOs.
Originally posted by stratasaurus I prefer to play Trinity style combat system, that is what seems to be the most fun for me so far. That being said I have no problems with GW2 doing what they did. I do have alot of things that I think ANET has done poorly with this game getting rid of the Trinity setup is not one of them. It did bug me for a little while but I'm over it.
I'd prefer SWG style combat that isn't a trinity based system and allows multi-roles to be performed at any given time. However, that seems to be a touchy subject around themeparks .
Originally posted by Quizzical Title question: no. First question in original post: yes. Second question in original post: no. There are a ton of games that cater to those few people who like trinity-based combat. If you're one of them, then you've got lots of choices that suit your preferred style of combat. To insist that no one else should have any options at all is silly. Besides, Trinity is an AMD processor and Guild Wars 2 heavily favors Intel processors.
^ I like this reply so much that I shall just copy and paste it, and pretend that I said it
Originally posted by grimal Originally posted by Emrendil It's been a while since Guild Wars 2 launch, and I still don't know what to think about this new system. Do you think it was necessary to break the "trinity" system? Would dungeons be more fun wit it?
I don't really get that about the pointlessness you feel about your character. I find I'm getting more attached to my necro as I go (currently level 49). To me, unlocking the weapon skills is almost pointless, but then that's where the fun comes in, I think. Once I can start unlocking and using utility skills, elite skills, and traits combined with different armor/jewelry sigil configurations and weapon upgrades, then it starts to get really immersive for me. I can then really start to play around with my character and learn new ways to use him (I learned a bunch last night in AC).
That's the way I look at it, anyway.
Nothing wrong with the trinity and it will be around for years to come . Anet tried something different and should be applauded for that ...
Is it perfect ? No
Does it suit what they were aiming for with GW2 ? I would say yes it does
Originally posted by Requiem1066 Nothing wrong with the trinity and it will be around for years to come . Anet tried something different and should be applauded for that ... Is it perfect ? No Does it suit what they were aiming for with GW2 ? I would say yes it does
Agreed. Part of what made GW1 unique is that guilds had to plan their skills based on what work best work together and what they predict would counter what their enemy was bringing to the match. The current system supports that basic concept.
In general PvE gameplay, the current system combined with the world content as they have designed it eliminates the need for specific group builds to fight content, allows for more freeform cooperative play and offers something different for MMO gamers to choose from.
The trinity simply wouldn't work in GW2.
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
No to the title. Besides, it would require a major redesign of combat and all PVE encounters. Which probably will never happen, so it is kind of moot to talk about.
And I know the problem here. Dungeons. You can tell players that they play it wrong if all they do is zerg and respawn. I wonder how many of those ppl who want trinity back, actually even watch other player's skills? Do they make use of combo's? Do they talk about what utility skills to bring to create a more cohesive team set up?
No, they probably don't. They probably approach a dungeon in the same way as a zerg event. Just spam your AOE , don't switch to a more usefull weapon and ignore those annoying combo fields because they are in the way of your awesome skills.You can easily pick them out of the crowds in zergs. Players that just spam and don't pay attention and then they are dead. And go 'res pls res pls res pls' while they are being teabagged by a boss. And when on their own, everything seems to be too difficult. This is one scenario where you can actually say that they are playing wrong
At some point in the more difficult PVE content in GW2, groups and combo's actually start to matter. You can rip these elite mobs to shreds if played right. I wish that Arenanet showed some examples in a next blog.
Originally posted by Emrendil Originally posted by KoLdBieR I've been thinking the same thing lately.. Generally, I play a support/healing role in most MMO's. I enjoy being able to fill many roles at once in this game, but I do miss the feeling of being the healer that 'saves the day' in a scenario or dungeon.
Well if you look at the way GW2 is setup from top to bottom really they went with a setup that is singleplayer inside of a Multiplayer. Not in the respect that you are alone but in the respect that it lots of stuff does not require teamwork or evening being in a group like DEs. From what I have heard this is really only not true in Explorer mode dungeons which are very hard and require a plan.
When I picture GW2 group play I see a picture of like a dragon coming down on a random village and all the villager grabbing pickforks and going after it. It takes all of them together to take down the dragon but really they did not work as a team or come up with a plan to do it. While in Trinity style games with group content it is more like a regular army of troops that go in knowing what the plan is and what their roll is within that plan for it to succeed.
Lastly people around here like to pick apart analogies saying that is not the same thing as...for you people I have a definition of an analogy...a similarity between like features of two things, on which acomparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump. By definition a analogy are two different things that share a similiar component. Noone would say that a heart and a pump are the same thing so you just sound stupid when you say your analogy is false because x is not the same situation as y.
another definition of an analogy because I'm sure people will come back with the heart is a kind of pump(which it is) is this "an analogy is a comparison between two different things in order to highlight some point of similarity." Notice that the things are different but share some point of similarity, that means the setup or what is going on in the situation does not have to be the same for it to be a good analogy.
i like the system they have. Outside of dungeons and in pvp it works very well. Im not sold in the dungeons though. I wonder if all these super players are really all skill or is it a thin veil of full exotics and a vent server.
this might sound crazy but i think the key to GW2 dungeon combat is to not use range and use melee weapons whenever you can.There is so much aoe i think your probabally better off up close.
Looking at: The RepopulationPreordering: NonePlaying: Random Games
I play the game - and I do like it!
However, I think by eliminating the "trinity" what they did was create a dps / support overload. I play that game- and one of my favorite toons to play is my toughness/ vitality guardian. She can tank! But really she cant because no one can heal- so in the end she is a dps / support class cause I have to heal myself whle everyone else dps from range and I hold aggro- which only lasts till I have to dodge then aggro goes everywhere and its a circle-jerk-kite-athon. =/
So really you just sorta tank / kite / run around in circles and stuff cause no one can really tank and no one can really heal but everyone can dps...