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!

Massively shows some honesty

1468910

Comments

  • QSatuQSatu WarsawPosts: 1,733Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by xAPOCx
    Originally posted by QSatu
    Originally posted by SuprGamerX
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Massively, who just voted GW2 game of the year, is not rosey-eyed fanbois chees'n on the current hotness-

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/19/where-guild-wars-2-goes-wrong/

    Have some pretty interesting and intelligent arguments against the game that I tend to agree with.

    Pretty much highlights the issues I have with the game almost perfectly.

    To pique your interest - the highlights in bullet point form-

    -Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear

    -Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements

    -Area flow is problematic

    -Crafting is a freaking mess

    -The story is weak

     

    Really? They bash the game so hard , but hey, let's give it "Game of the Year" because quite frankly what else is there? Goes to show how pathetic 2012 was in the MMO world.   Seriously , if we compare 2012's releases to GW2 , then yeah GW2 is a pretty freaking amazing game. Compare GW2 to releases since 2008 , it barely makes the top 20.  All in all , one game has to win GOTY , so it's a toss up.

    gW2 would win with any mmo released since WoW easily, even with it flaws. there is no competition.

    Arent opinions great?

    Everyone writing on this forum is stating their opinions.  [mod edit]

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter BristolPosts: 2,801Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by SuprGamerX
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Massively, who just voted GW2 game of the year, is not rosey-eyed fanbois chees'n on the current hotness-

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/19/where-guild-wars-2-goes-wrong/

    Have some pretty interesting and intelligent arguments against the game that I tend to agree with.

    Pretty much highlights the issues I have with the game almost perfectly.

    To pique your interest - the highlights in bullet point form-

    -Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear

    -Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements

    -Area flow is problematic

    -Crafting is a freaking mess

    -The story is weak

     

    Really? They bash the game so hard , but hey, let's give it "Game of the Year" because quite frankly what else is there? Goes to show how pathetic 2012 was in the MMO world.   Seriously , if we compare 2012's releases to GW2 , then yeah GW2 is a pretty freaking amazing game. Compare GW2 to releases since 2008 , it barely makes the top 20.  All in all , one game has to win GOTY , so it's a toss up.

    1 guy bash the game so hard.

    That guy also posts incorrect information and many of its complaints are about the game not being more like games the guy prefer.

     

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • EudaimonEudaimon ExeterPosts: 116Member Uncommon

    Always good to see someone look at the positives as well as negatives.

    That said, I don't agree with some of the points -

    Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear  - this is kind of true, but then again, being a "jack of all trades" seems a lot more workable than in other games where one is doing (broadly) one thing e.g. tanking, healing or dpsing, so I don't see that fitting oneself into a role is as necessary as it would be in traditional "trinity" games.  I can quite see how someone who likes the "trinity" gameplay style would be confused and/or unimpressed, though.

    Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements - pretty much agree with this - I'd really like to see Anet do some work here

    Area flow is problematic - several areas where I disagree with their review -

    Firstly, Karma vendors are not the best sources of items when levelling unless one has karma to burn - it's easier to either buy off the TP, take a hand-me-down if an alt or even buy the white vendor gear (sure, it's not optimal, but gear is relatively unimportant in GW2 when compared with many games, especially when levelling).  I therefore can't see why it's a big deal re the karma vendors.  For my characters I've pretty much saved my karma for later, only buying recipes, crafting resources or the odd item with a nice skin or an amusing quote.

    Secondly, I don't understand why the reviewer feels that he ought to be forced to the next zone?  I personally find that wanting to explore the world and see what it's like is motivation enough

    Thirdly, there is motivation to explore other zones...if you're a crafter (and especially a chef), as it's only by going to new places that you'll obtain some of the resources either because some resources are account bound or others are too expensive on the TP to get all that one needs in a cost-effective manner.

    Crafting is a freaking mess - it doesn't seem any worse than many other MMOs' crafting systems, and I think the reviewer is going about it the wrong way.  He says that making a  craft 20 item only gives experience towards L21, and implies that there's an unnecessary amount of making useless items.  Agreed one has often outlevelled the items by the time that one can craft them but usually, I level my craft skills by discovery, which increases my craft skill by several points whenever I discover a new recipe, so doesn't feel terribly grindy to me, as although I'm making useless items, I'm not having to make very many of them.   Chef is a little different to the other professions too, IMO, and is a bit more fun, although it does eat up the bank space

    The story is weak - pretty much agreed - though there are some amusing bits of narrative (I like some of Tybalt's lines, for example) and the voice actors do well with what they're given, for the most part (though Adelbern's cut scenes make me cringe).  As for the narrative of the main story, it doesn't really hang together very well IMO

     

  • WraithoneWraithone Salt Lake City, UTPosts: 3,592Member Uncommon

    Thanks. That was certainly interesting to read.  One doesn't see much of that type of constructive criticism these days. One is either a fan kiddie, or a "hater"...<rolls eyes>

    I've noticed the same problems when I played the game. Its odd that they managed to get so many things right, but seriously messed up some others. Design by commitee perhaps?

  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by QSatu
    Originally posted by xAPOCx
    Originally posted by QSatu
    Originally posted by SuprGamerX
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Massively, who just voted GW2 game of the year, is not rosey-eyed fanbois chees'n on the current hotness-

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/19/where-guild-wars-2-goes-wrong/

    Have some pretty interesting and intelligent arguments against the game that I tend to agree with.

    Pretty much highlights the issues I have with the game almost perfectly.

    To pique your interest - the highlights in bullet point form-

    -Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear

    -Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements

    -Area flow is problematic

    -Crafting is a freaking mess

    -The story is weak

     

    Really? They bash the game so hard , but hey, let's give it "Game of the Year" because quite frankly what else is there? Goes to show how pathetic 2012 was in the MMO world.   Seriously , if we compare 2012's releases to GW2 , then yeah GW2 is a pretty freaking amazing game. Compare GW2 to releases since 2008 , it barely makes the top 20.  All in all , one game has to win GOTY , so it's a toss up.

    gW2 would win with any mmo released since WoW easily, even with it flaws. there is no competition.

    Arent opinions great?

    Everyone writing on this forum is stating their opinions. [mod edit]

    You assume to much

    image

  • Kingmob23Kingmob23 LondonPosts: 77Member
    I agree with most of the articles assessment with the promlems the game has on the pve side of things. I think the idea of de's are great but didn't quite like the implementation of them in the game for reasons that were stated in the article. I'm hopping the expansion address this issue as I think the game has great potential but it is in need of some tweaking.
  • ZalmonZalmon Bloomington, INPosts: 319Member
    Originally posted by QSatu
    Originally posted by xAPOCx
    Originally posted by QSatu
    Originally posted by SuprGamerX
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Massively, who just voted GW2 game of the year, is not rosey-eyed fanbois chees'n on the current hotness-

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/19/where-guild-wars-2-goes-wrong/

    Have some pretty interesting and intelligent arguments against the game that I tend to agree with.

    Pretty much highlights the issues I have with the game almost perfectly.

    To pique your interest - the highlights in bullet point form-

    -Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear

    -Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements

    -Area flow is problematic

    -Crafting is a freaking mess

    -The story is weak

     

    Really? They bash the game so hard , but hey, let's give it "Game of the Year" because quite frankly what else is there? Goes to show how pathetic 2012 was in the MMO world.   Seriously , if we compare 2012's releases to GW2 , then yeah GW2 is a pretty freaking amazing game. Compare GW2 to releases since 2008 , it barely makes the top 20.  All in all , one game has to win GOTY , so it's a toss up.

    gW2 would win with any mmo released since WoW easily, even with it flaws. there is no competition.

    Arent opinions great?

    Everyone writing on this forum is stating their opinions. [mod edit]

    Yeah everyone is giving their opinion but when opinions start becoming arrogant and absolute don't be surprised if people making it get called out.

    Even i had a hard time digesting your opinion regarding 'there is no compeition'.

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    -Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear

    -Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements

    -Area flow is problematic

    -Crafting is a freaking mess

    -The story is weak

     

     1. Unclear only to those that were not able to get their heads out of the tiny little box it was placed in by MMO companies unable to think differently. The holy trinity was one of the worst ideas in RPG history, thank you D&D.

    2. Yes, they do. Wish there were more of them but this is a damn fine start to the drab click on NPC, accept quest without reading because the story doesnt MATTER when all they are asking you to do is go get 10 of x from y which is the case almost ALL OF THE TIME in MMOs.

    3. Area flow was no different than any other themepark games flow. You start here, you go there and when your level increases you move forward some more.

    4. The only gripe with crafting is the heavy reliance on special items. Other than that this is the first crafting system in a very LONG TIME that actually allows you to get the materials for items to make things AT YOUR LEVEL...most games the crafting is 10 or so levels OFF and you dont get materials for level 20 items until you are around level 30! I do however wish they would expand it to include some vanity non-gear/buff realited items.

    5. The story is right on par with World of Warcrafts/EverQuests...but behind SWTORs in quality level.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • thanoskkkthanoskkk AthensPosts: 229Member Common
    disagree with crafting, i find it great

    He that lives upon Hope dies farting.

  • semantikronsemantikron Edwardsville, ILPosts: 258Member

    [mod edit]  Compaining that the DE system isn't an on-rails system from 1 to 80....  wtf?

    just to clarify.  The DE system is essentially the game saying "Hey, here's some fun stuff you might want to do" and the author is saying "Eff Off.  I don't want to have fun, I just want to get to 80, thanks."

    Charr: Outta my way.
    Human: What's your problem?
    Charr: Your thin skin.

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,117Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Volkon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by Volkon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by elocke
    Originally posted by Zalmon
    Originally posted by Volkon

    Meh... it's opinions, and opinions I disagree with. The fact that he's worrying about how clear roles are being defined shows he's still thinking in a more archaic "roles" mindset from too much trinity training in earlier games. 

     

    It's an interesting opinion piece, nothing more.

    Umm..thank you captain obvious. yes it is an opinion peice just like saying that GW2 is best MMO of 2012. Everything is an opinion and nothing more.

    Don't feel bad.  Volkon is an obvious GW2 fanboi.  Just look at his recent posts regarding such.  He can't be budged at all.  :D  At least he's civil about it though, I'll give him that.

    I don't consider him civil when he proclaims my preferred play style as archaic.  When classes are done right, it's a beautiful thing.  (EQ, EQ2, Vanguard, CoH, DAoC, WoW)  Just as the trinity is a valid play style and no better nor worse than twitch / action combat.  I suppose I could just turn around and proclaim him and those like him that they were brain washed in their earlier gaming days by consoles and are now bastardizing the PC MMO genre with their twitchy game mechanics and ruining things for an entire gaming population that originated this genre plays here specifically to get away from consoles and console type games.

    Archaic as in old-fashioned. Outdated in my opinion. If "archaic" is the worst I'm throwing at you I can't be all bad, no?

     

    Oh... never played console games, been strictly PC. Well... unless you count Pong and my old Atari... but that's dating me there. Ah, the old 8088 computer with it's 20 Meg hard drive and 5 1/4" floppy...

    Of course it's insulting and no better than turning around and saying one play style requires no skill over another.  It is not outdated, the problem is that gamers like you never liked it in the first place and prefer action combat over slower paced combat.  Which is fine, but don't put down another's play style just because you don't like it.  My issue with gamers like you is that you have been so incredibly vocal about it, that developers are completely shying away from slower paced combat, so much so that over the last year and over the next few years, there will not be a single slow paced MMO released and that is a big problem for me.

     

    Never liked it in the first place? After years of being a pally tank or very good hunter in WoW I certainly don't qualify as one who never liked it. 

     

    I simply out-grew it.

     

     

    OK, OK, sorry... that was meant to get a rise out of you and I apologize. (It's kind of funny though.) Seriously, I used to be fully entrenched in the trinity back in the day (pre-Cata). I could tank with the best of them (good old 9-6-9 rotation) while still being able to grab rogue adds, or I could burn out enough dps to make the best tanks sweat. I had fun, too, a lot of it. It... just did get old. Became too automated. There was nothing new to learn once you had the script down for any dungeon. You stood there, you did your rotation, don't stand in the fire, blame the hunters. I enjoyed it, but I don't miss it. I see that style of combat now as a relic of the past... an era in MMOs that we're moving out of these days into more active and situationally aware combat. In GW2, rotations are gone. Staring at other people health bars are gone. Watching what's actually happening in the fight, that's in now. Crippling or interrupting a foe that's about to whack an ally, that's in now. I dps, I buff allies and remove conditions from them. I dance amongst my clones like Baryshnikov on stage, using the right shatters as the situation demands.  So yes, that trinity style, to me, is archaic. A relic of the past best left there.

     

    But it looks good on you.

    Then you better hope your preferred play style remains viable throughout the years or you will find yourself being written off in this genre and something tells me you wouldn't go quietly either.

    image
  • grimalgrimal Stamford, CTPosts: 2,873Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    -Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear

    -Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements

    -Area flow is problematic

    -Crafting is a freaking mess

    -The story is weak

     

     1. Unclear only to those that were not able to get their heads out of the tiny little box it was placed in by MMO companies unable to think differently. The holy trinity was one of the worst ideas in RPG history, thank you D&D.

    2. Yes, they do. Wish there were more of them but this is a damn fine start to the drab click on NPC, accept quest without reading because the story doesnt MATTER when all they are asking you to do is go get 10 of x from y which is the case almost ALL OF THE TIME in MMOs.

    3. Area flow was no different than any other themepark games flow. You start here, you go there and when your level increases you move forward some more.

    4. The only gripe with crafting is the heavy reliance on special items. Other than that this is the first crafting system in a very LONG TIME that actually allows you to get the materials for items to make things AT YOUR LEVEL...most games the crafting is 10 or so levels OFF and you dont get materials for level 20 items until you are around level 30! I do however wish they would expand it to include some vanity non-gear/buff realited items.

    5. The story is right on par with World of Warcrafts/EverQuests...but behind SWTORs in quality level.

    What??? DnD?  The trinity was created by the modern MMO.  There was no trinity in DnD.

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by grimal

    What??? DnD?  The trinity was created by the modern MMO.  There was no trinity in DnD.

     Are you freaking serious....The first MMORPG with Graphics was NeverWinter Nights Online back in 1991, it had the holy trinity which Meridian 59 used in 1996 and EverQuest which is D&D with another name...wowzers.

    Original D&D Black Box had 3 classes. Cleric (Healer), Fighter (tank), Mage(DPS).

    It wasnt until Greyhawk was released that other classes started

    to appear, Greyhawk brought the Theif (another DPS) and the Paladin (tank/healer). it wasnt until the player handbook came out that the first non-trinity class was created...the BARD.

    Everything else all falls into the trinity catagory BECAUSE they are taken from D&D.

    /fighter/berserker/avenger/barbarian = dps

    paladin = tank/healer

    warrior/warlord/ardent = tank/dps

    Warden/batlemaid/swordmage = tank

    ranger/scout = dps

    theif/rogue = dps

    wizard/mage/elementalist/necro/warlock = dps

    cleric/priest = healer

    Druid/shaman/monk = healer/dps

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • grimalgrimal Stamford, CTPosts: 2,873Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by grimal

    What??? DnD?  The trinity was created by the modern MMO.  There was no trinity in DnD.

     Are you freaking serious....The first MMORPG with Graphics was NeverWinter Nights Online back in 1991, it had the holy trinity which Meridian 59 used in 1996 and EverQuest which is D&D with another name...wowzers.

    Original D&D Black Box had 3 classes. Cleric (Healer), Fighter (tank), Mage(DPS).

    It wasnt until Greyhawk was released that other classes started

    to appear, Greyhawk brought the Theif (another DPS) and the Paladin (tank/healer). it wasnt until the player handbook came out that the first non-trinity class was created...the BARD.

    Everything else all falls into the trinity catagory BECAUSE they are taken from D&D.

    /fighter/berserker/avenger/barbarian = dps

    paladin = tank/healer

    warrior/warlord/ardent = tank/dps

    Warden/batlemaid/swordmage = tank

    ranger/scout = dps

    theif/rogue = dps

    wizard/mage/elementalist/necro/warlock = dps

    cleric/priest = healer

    Druid/shaman/monk = healer/dps

    Wow.  Ok, first off, DPS stands for damage per second.  Combat in DnD was never based on real time.  There were turns or rounds, so how could it have been Damage Per Second?  It couldn't have been!

    The Trinity was developed back with the first gen of MMOs (EQ 1).  Made up of the Tank, Healer and DPS.  DnD never had such a term for this combat style because it didn't come into play until the MMO!!

    True each class was based off an archetype, healer, warrior, etc, but the actual term trinity as we use it now was coined by and for the MMO genre.

    Please, show me anywhere in any of the pre-MMO genre DnD books where it specifically states the trinity.  You'd be hard pressed.

    The only trinity you will possibly find mentioned is that of the three core books: Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide and the Monster Manual...but those referred to the three books, not the Tank/DPS/Healer trinity you are talking about.

    Second, EQ 1 may be a fantasy based online RPG but it is not Dungeons and Dragons. 

    I can't believe I am actually needing to post this. Did you even play Dungeons and Dragons PNP?

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,117Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by grimal
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by grimal

    What??? DnD?  The trinity was created by the modern MMO.  There was no trinity in DnD.

     Are you freaking serious....The first MMORPG with Graphics was NeverWinter Nights Online back in 1991, it had the holy trinity which Meridian 59 used in 1996 and EverQuest which is D&D with another name...wowzers.

    Original D&D Black Box had 3 classes. Cleric (Healer), Fighter (tank), Mage(DPS).

    It wasnt until Greyhawk was released that other classes started

    to appear, Greyhawk brought the Theif (another DPS) and the Paladin (tank/healer). it wasnt until the player handbook came out that the first non-trinity class was created...the BARD.

    Everything else all falls into the trinity catagory BECAUSE they are taken from D&D.

    /fighter/berserker/avenger/barbarian = dps

    paladin = tank/healer

    warrior/warlord/ardent = tank/dps

    Warden/batlemaid/swordmage = tank

    ranger/scout = dps

    theif/rogue = dps

    wizard/mage/elementalist/necro/warlock = dps

    cleric/priest = healer

    Druid/shaman/monk = healer/dps

    Wow.  Ok, first off, DPS stands for damage per second.  Combat in DnD was never based on real time.  There were turns or rounds, so how could it have been Damage Per Second?  It couldn't have been!

    The Trinity was developed back with the first gen of MMOs (EQ 1).  Made up of the Tank, Healer and DPS.  DnD never had such a term for this combat style because it didn't come into play until the MMO!!

    True each class was based off an archetype, healer, warrior, etc, but the actual term trinity as we use it now was coined by and for the MMO genre.

    Please, show me anywhere in any of the pre-MMO genre DnD books where it specifically states the trinity.  You'd be hard pressed.

    The only trinity you will possibly find mentioned is that of the three core books: Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide and the Monster Manual...but those referred to the three books, not the Tank/DPS/Healer trinity you are talking about.

    Second, EQ 1 may be a fantasy based online RPG but it is not Dungeons and Dragons. 

    I can't believe I am actually needing to post this. Did you even play Dungeons and Dragons PNP?

    No, tabletop definitely had the trinity.  Wizards / Sorcerors were the damage classes.  Fighters / Paladins / Rangers were the meat shields and protectors of the mages, always putting themselves between the opponent and the mage.  Clerics / Druids were the hybrids who both kicked ass and saved the group's bacon with well placed heals.  Thieves were the melee damage class and trap experts.  I never played a campaign that didn't have at least three of the above archetypes as campaigns couldn't be completed without them.

     

    They may not have been labeled as the trinity at the time, but that is exactly what they were.  Doesn't matter if combat is real time, turn based or some mix of the two, the point is that you had to have classes that healed, classes that tanked and protected and classes that dealt real damage in order to be successful in campaigns.

    image
  • Eir_SEir_S Argyle, NYPosts: 4,623Member
    Originally posted by SuprGamerX
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Massively, who just voted GW2 game of the year, is not rosey-eyed fanbois chees'n on the current hotness-

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/19/where-guild-wars-2-goes-wrong/

    Have some pretty interesting and intelligent arguments against the game that I tend to agree with.

    Pretty much highlights the issues I have with the game almost perfectly.

    To pique your interest - the highlights in bullet point form-

    -Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear

    -Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements

    -Area flow is problematic

    -Crafting is a freaking mess

    -The story is weak

     

    Really? They bash the game so hard , but hey, let's give it "Game of the Year" because quite frankly what else is there? Goes to show how pathetic 2012 was in the MMO world.   Seriously , if we compare 2012's releases to GW2 , then yeah GW2 is a pretty freaking amazing game. Compare GW2 to releases since 2008 , it barely makes the top 20.  All in all , one game has to win GOTY , so it's a toss up.

    This argument needs to put out of its misery, honestly.  There were more triple A games and expansions released in 2012 than in any recent year.  I'd love for you to name 20 games that released since 2008 that were better than GW2.

    Aion?  WAR?  AoC?  Vindictus?  FFXIV?  How about Runes of Magic?

    Good luck.

     

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by Eir_S
     

    This argument needs to put out of its misery, honestly.  There were more triple A games and expansions released in 2012 than in any recent year.  I'd love for you to name 20 games that released since 2008 that were better than GW2.

    Aion?  WAR?  AoC?  Vindictus?  FFXIV?  How about Runes of Magic?

    Good luck.

     

    We counting non-MMOs or just MMOs?

    Non-MMOs will include some really outstanding games like Skyrim, Portal2, Bioshock, Dead Space, The Walking Dead, Red Dead Redemption etc.

    Course all games are subjective so if you think that way, be my guess.

    I'd say it is not even in the top 50 from 2008 for myself.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • ZalmonZalmon Bloomington, INPosts: 319Member
    Originally posted by Eir_S
    Originally posted by SuprGamerX
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Massively, who just voted GW2 game of the year, is not rosey-eyed fanbois chees'n on the current hotness-

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/19/where-guild-wars-2-goes-wrong/

    Have some pretty interesting and intelligent arguments against the game that I tend to agree with.

    Pretty much highlights the issues I have with the game almost perfectly.

    To pique your interest - the highlights in bullet point form-

    -Roles are horribly underexplained and unclear

    -Dynamic events don't work in their role as quest replacements

    -Area flow is problematic

    -Crafting is a freaking mess

    -The story is weak

     

    Really? They bash the game so hard , but hey, let's give it "Game of the Year" because quite frankly what else is there? Goes to show how pathetic 2012 was in the MMO world.   Seriously , if we compare 2012's releases to GW2 , then yeah GW2 is a pretty freaking amazing game. Compare GW2 to releases since 2008 , it barely makes the top 20.  All in all , one game has to win GOTY , so it's a toss up.

    This argument needs to put out of its misery, honestly.  There were more triple A games and expansions released in 2012 than in any recent year.  I'd love for you to name 20 games that released since 2008 that were better than GW2.

    Aion?  WAR?  AoC?  Vindictus?  FFXIV?  How about Runes of Magic?

    Good luck.

     

    So you want to waste another page or two arguing about something as subjective as 'better'. Or you really need rewards from various websites as a stamp of approval to consider a game 'better'?

    SWTOR won lots of awards too. It really means nothing. Just how not every movie that wins 'best picture award' at Oscars is actually the 'best' movie.

  • winterwinter El Paso, TXPosts: 2,276Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Volkon

    Meh... it's opinions, and opinions I disagree with. The fact that he's worrying about how clear roles are being defined shows he's still thinking in a more archaic "roles" mindset from too much trinity training in earlier games. 

     

    It's an interesting opinion piece, nothing more.

     So you disagree with him that its a good game that he recomends that almost everyone should try?

    Seems that you are making broad sweeping coverall statements because you didn't read the entire article, or simly can't stant anything less then the games totall perfection review?

  • Bad.dogBad.dog Belleville, ONPosts: 1,108Member
    Originally posted by winter
    Originally posted by Volkon

    Meh... it's opinions, and opinions I disagree with. The fact that he's worrying about how clear roles are being defined shows he's still thinking in a more archaic "roles" mindset from too much trinity training in earlier games. 

     

    It's an interesting opinion piece, nothing more.

     So you disagree with him that its a good game that he recomends that almost everyone should try?

    Seems that you are making broad sweeping coverall statements because you didn't read the entire article, or simly can't stant anything less then the games totall perfection review?

    Seems to me you are grasping at best ..pretty hard to spin what Volkon said into a forum war ...unless you are just setting the bait ?

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter BristolPosts: 2,801Member Uncommon
    Exactly awards did SWTOR win? Gamespy MMO of the year? Did SWTOR win any non MMO award

    GW2 received more awards.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • grimalgrimal Stamford, CTPosts: 2,873Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by grimal
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by grimal

    What??? DnD?  The trinity was created by the modern MMO.  There was no trinity in DnD.

     Are you freaking serious....The first MMORPG with Graphics was NeverWinter Nights Online back in 1991, it had the holy trinity which Meridian 59 used in 1996 and EverQuest which is D&D with another name...wowzers.

    Original D&D Black Box had 3 classes. Cleric (Healer), Fighter (tank), Mage(DPS).

    It wasnt until Greyhawk was released that other classes started

    to appear, Greyhawk brought the Theif (another DPS) and the Paladin (tank/healer). it wasnt until the player handbook came out that the first non-trinity class was created...the BARD.

    Everything else all falls into the trinity catagory BECAUSE they are taken from D&D.

    /fighter/berserker/avenger/barbarian = dps

    paladin = tank/healer

    warrior/warlord/ardent = tank/dps

    Warden/batlemaid/swordmage = tank

    ranger/scout = dps

    theif/rogue = dps

    wizard/mage/elementalist/necro/warlock = dps

    cleric/priest = healer

    Druid/shaman/monk = healer/dps

    Wow.  Ok, first off, DPS stands for damage per second.  Combat in DnD was never based on real time.  There were turns or rounds, so how could it have been Damage Per Second?  It couldn't have been!

    The Trinity was developed back with the first gen of MMOs (EQ 1).  Made up of the Tank, Healer and DPS.  DnD never had such a term for this combat style because it didn't come into play until the MMO!!

    True each class was based off an archetype, healer, warrior, etc, but the actual term trinity as we use it now was coined by and for the MMO genre.

    Please, show me anywhere in any of the pre-MMO genre DnD books where it specifically states the trinity.  You'd be hard pressed.

    The only trinity you will possibly find mentioned is that of the three core books: Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide and the Monster Manual...but those referred to the three books, not the Tank/DPS/Healer trinity you are talking about.

    Second, EQ 1 may be a fantasy based online RPG but it is not Dungeons and Dragons. 

    I can't believe I am actually needing to post this. Did you even play Dungeons and Dragons PNP?

    No, tabletop definitely had the trinity.  Wizards / Sorcerors were the damage classes.  Fighters / Paladins / Rangers were the meat shields and protectors of the mages, always putting themselves between the opponent and the mage.  Clerics / Druids were the hybrids who both kicked ass and saved the group's bacon with well placed heals.  Thieves were the melee damage class and trap experts.  I never played a campaign that didn't have at least three of the above archetypes as campaigns couldn't be completed without them.

     

    They may not have been labeled as the trinity at the time, but that is exactly what they were.  Doesn't matter if combat is real time, turn based or some mix of the two, the point is that you had to have classes that healed, classes that tanked and protected and classes that dealt real damage in order to be successful in campaigns.

    I won't argue that you could play it like that now if you wanted but the trinity refers to the mechanic in MMOs.  Again, please show me where it is specifically referred to as "Tank/DPS/Healer" trinity in those books.  You can't because the label was created for MMOs.  There was no taunt mechanism, either.

    Edit: By saying the trinity existed with old pen n paper RPGs of the 70s-80s, you are projecting a 1999 mechanic onto something that predates the very definition of it.  If Everquest and the modern MMO never existed, there would be no "trinity" as we know it.  You can't go back and attribute it to something that was around 30 or more years before it.  You can argue there were elements or roles that beared resemblance to it, and perhaps lent itself to the creation of it some time after but thats about as far as you can go.

     

     

  • dopplemmodopplemmo toronto, ONPosts: 31Member
    There was no taunt mechanism, either.

     

     

    This.

    Trinity as people refer it nowadays is basically: Tank manages aggro, DPS deal damage, Healer keeps everyone alive.

    I have never seen characters systematically doing aggro management in the pen and paper games I played, because that notion was pretty much non existent.
  • bladedancerbladedancer BrightonPosts: 38Member

    Funny how "hating" on a game makes some people think they're the "cool kids". And for just having something positive to say about a game automatically makes them a fanboi...very weird...

    As for the topic at hand, it is interesting to see this kind of article on a major MMO, fresh even.

    I own Guild Wars 2 but don't really play it anymore, I think it's an alright game, not bad, but not great either, I;ll most likely play it from time to time when not investing much time in other games.

    Peter Griffin: you know those germans, if you dont join the party, they?ll come get ya

  • RaysheRayshe London, ONPosts: 1,284Member

    Lets face it, there are alot of GW2 Players (being respectful here) that cannot stand to have anything bad said about their game. Hell ive been attacked and i defend it as much as condemn it. GW2 is a good game if you want something from the genre that is Simplified to the highest degree possible. This is the main reason i dont play it, Its reletively boring to me. However i play TSW, a game which is become more complicated as it progresses. For this reason i am enjoying it more than ever.

     

    If you want Simplicity in a game then GW2 is great for you.

    Because i can.
    I'm Hopeful For Every Game, Until the Fan Boys Attack My Games. Then the Knives Come Out.
    Logic every gamers worst enemy.

Sign In or Register to comment.