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!

What if...

PaRoXiTiCPaRoXiTiC Denison, TXPosts: 576Member Uncommon

they took out all portals making this giant game one big seemless world, added mounts, took out waypoints, and made places like Orr (once you cross into it) to be an open PvP area?

Would the game be better or worse?

Comments

  • CorehavenCorehaven Colorado Springs, COPosts: 1,538Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    [mod edit]

     

    Yea, that's perfect.  You comment in tons of GW2 threads and all you ever say is the game sucks.  Yea we got.  That's not even having to do with the thread.  Go play something you enjoy already.  Otherwise I say you got a good buy out of GW2.  Its obviously given you something entertaining to do.  Bashing it in threads. 

     

     

    Now then, on to the OP, the game is structured around waypoints.  That would be a hard sell not only to Anet but also to many of the players.  I wouldn't mind seeing less waypoints though, and added mounts.  There really doesn't need to be anymore than 3 waypoints to a zone, if even that.  Yea I think the world would seem larger if people actually had to travel through it more than just once. 

     

    I wouldn't mind some open PVP area's too.  But Orr is hardcore enough already, so I might think of putting them elsewhere.  Personally, I wouldn't mind PVP servers that you could guest on, and the entire world is PVP.  They are adding guesting anyways, so why not just stick a few open world PVP servers to the list?  People would love that.  You can guest in, and then leave and go back to your own world if you just want to adventure around the world PVP free. 

  • ZairuZairu Portland, ORPosts: 469Member
      Personally, I wouldn't mind PVP servers that you could guest on, and the entire world is PVP.  They are adding guesting anyways, so why not just stick a few open world PVP servers to the list?  People would love that.  You can guest in, and then leave and go back to your own world if you just want to adventure around the world PVP free. 

    i can dig that. it would add a nice element to the game. PVP can be scary (the fun kind) if all you want to do is level and RP. makes you really plan your course and watch your back.

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,066Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    [mod edit]

    While I don't think GW2 is bad it does have some replaybility issues but I disagree with some of the points the OP made.  Here is what I would like to see done to make GW2 become the game it could be.

    • Increase the total number of armor and weapon skins by at least 4-6 times.  Having only like 10 unique skins at endgame is very underwhelming.  I would like to see at least 50 unique skins
    • Do away with the weapon skills being static.  Add in another 15-20 skills per weapon and allow the player the choice to equip what he wants.  Theres a variable plethora of skill points a character recieves and for the msot part once you hit level 30, your skills no longer matter.  When I quit I had 326 skills on my Warrior.  What would of been awesome is to be able to buy 30, 40 and 50 point weapon skills.  Stuff you wont aquire till after level cap.
    • Also do away with the boring animations of Dual wielding, its really immersive breaking to have only your main hand swing on the basic attack (unless its tied into a torch or focus)  Also make the weapons actually believable and immersive.  No more Greatsword acting as the ranged weapon slot for Mesmers or Axe acting as the medium range weapon for the Necro.  It just isnt believable.
    • Remove the Trading post as its done, instead make it more like WoW and tie it to the server.  Increase the number of drops, remove the Magic Find stat, make it easier to find exotic and rares while hunting.  Also remove the restriction of zones not dropping level equivalent rewards.  Increase gold drop per mob.
    • I like the removing the zone walls and making it seemless as well as removing the way point feature (instead allow the players to port to Lion's Arch for free every 15 mins)  Adding mounts would be cool too.
    • Add in Realm Ranks for WvW.
    • Add CtF and LMS type scenarios to sPvP.
    • Add a Darkness Falls dungeon to the Eternal Battle Grounds  Who ever controls the middle keep owns the right to enter this new DF dungeon.
    • Remove the ability to level via gold/crafting.
     
    Some other stuff but I can't think of anything else at the moment.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • ezpz77ezpz77 Beale, CAPosts: 227Member
    Originally posted by Zairu
      Personally, I wouldn't mind PVP servers that you could guest on, and the entire world is PVP.  They are adding guesting anyways, so why not just stick a few open world PVP servers to the list?  People would love that.  You can guest in, and then leave and go back to your own world if you just want to adventure around the world PVP free. 

    i can dig that. it would add a nice element to the game. PVP can be scary (the fun kind) if all you want to do is level and RP. makes you really plan your course and watch your back.

     

    Not to derail the thread, but why should I care about my course or watch my back when the biggest consequence to getting ganked in most MMO's is having to rez at a nearby waypoint?

  • rafalex007rafalex007 dubaiPosts: 244Member
    [mod edit]

    back on topic its great idea but i prefer if they do some changes to the current game before doning such a big movment(but great idea i hope to see more) :)

  • ZairuZairu Portland, ORPosts: 469Member
    Originally posted by ezpz77
    Originally posted by Zairu
      Personally, I wouldn't mind PVP servers that you could guest on, and the entire world is PVP.  They are adding guesting anyways, so why not just stick a few open world PVP servers to the list?  People would love that.  You can guest in, and then leave and go back to your own world if you just want to adventure around the world PVP free. 

    i can dig that. it would add a nice element to the game. PVP can be scary (the fun kind) if all you want to do is level and RP. makes you really plan your course and watch your back.

     

    Not to derail the thread, but why should I care about my course or watch my back when the biggest consequence to getting ganked in most MMO's is having to rez at a nearby waypoint?

     

    i don't like to die, tbh. i think that would all derive from the rp atmosphere that the gamer creates, if that is their thing.

    besides, this is a hypothetical thread, so why impose hypothetical boundries and limitations?

    basically, incentive could be added to the pvp server to not die, and maybe even to kill.

  • L0C0ManL0C0Man Puerto OrdazPosts: 1,065Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by PaRoXiTiC

    they took out all portals making this giant game one big seemless world, added mounts, took out waypoints, and made places like Orr (once you cross into it) to be an open PvP area?

    Would the game be better or worse?

    Ideally, if they could take out portals and keep the world as it is, would be much better... however, considering that bandwith and computer resources aren't limitless, if taking out the portals would mean making the zone smaller, less detailed, or with repetition of the same models for rocks, trees and the like, then I'd rather them keep the portals.

    Mounts I wouldn't mind, though not sure whether it would fit the lore considering that AFAIK there have never been any mounted chars in either GW. I'd agree with taking out waypoints as long as there's an alternate form of fast travel (like the gryphons in WoW, for example), but I like the waypoints system as it is.

    And as for areas becoming open PvP areas... unless a faction system is introduced (kinda like the whole kurzik/luxons thing in GW1) and stuff like territory control, I don't really see them working, since the game in orr is mostly based on dynamic events, that wouldn't work as they are with open PvP. If anything I'd agree with new open PvP areas added with new mechanics to support it, not just changing existing areas to open PvP just like that.

     

    What can men do against such reckless hate?

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,277Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by PaRoXiTiC

    they took out all portals making this giant game one big seemless world, added mounts, took out waypoints, and made places like Orr (once you cross into it) to be an open PvP area?

    Would the game be better or worse?

    That would be a start. The entire world needs to PvP though. If either TSW or GW2 had Wpvp, I might still be playing.

  • kabitoshinkabitoshin Posts: 758Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully

    That would be a start. The entire world needs to PvP though. If either TSW or GW2 had Wpvp, I might still be playing.

    World PvP makes no sense in this game since all factions are allied now.

  • L0C0ManL0C0Man Puerto OrdazPosts: 1,065Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by kabitoshin
    Originally posted by bcbully

    That would be a start. The entire world needs to PvP though. If either TSW or GW2 had Wpvp, I might still be playing.

    World PvP makes no sense in this game since all factions are allied now.

    Not to mention that the events that are practically the backbone of PvE in this game wouldn't work at all with open PvP.

    What can men do against such reckless hate?

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,453Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by PaRoXiTiC

     

    Would the game be better or worse?

    It would be different, that's it.

    Remember, the devs created GW1 with the idea of "cutting out" all the things they thought kept players from "the fun".

    Now, one's mileage may vary when it comes to "fun" so their game is aimed at a particular audience; one that wants these features.

  • FelixMajorFelixMajor London, ONPosts: 576Member
    Originally posted by PaRoXiTiC

    they took out all portals making this giant game one big seemless world, added mounts, took out waypoints, and made places like Orr (once you cross into it) to be an open PvP area?

    Would the game be better or worse?

    I really do wish they would take the way points out.  The world would feel so much larger and immersive if it wasn't broken up by the waypoints.  I can understand having waypoints that transfer you to larger cities, like Rata sum to Lions Arch, or Hoelbrak or something.

     

    Mounts would be great as well, I would take mounts over waypoints.

    Originally posted by Arskaaa
    "when players learned tacticks in dungeon/raids, its bread".

  • nikolaitnikolait HissaryaPosts: 5Member
    i'll use some cliche for this thread - Sad but true, haters gonna hate...
  • bookworm438bookworm438 Detroit, MIPosts: 647Member

    I don't think it would make the game better necessarily. Just different from what it currently is. The term "better" is subjective, and for the general GW playerbase, it may not be better.

    Now, to that end, do I think they could lower the amount of waypoints? Sure. Do I think they could change the waypoint system a bit? Possibly. For example, having only 1-2 waypoints per map and those being major outposts/cities and not being these random floating asura rock thingies. 

    To be honest, I think they could look back at GW1 and take a look at what they did right and incorporate that into GW2. But this is just me being a GW1 player wishing GW2 was a little more like an open-world GW1. 

     

    As for seamlessness. I don't have much knowledge or experience in the concept of zoning. I do know that they are in place to handle lag, and most games handle them differently. Pretty much every game implements zoning in some way, but it may/may not be hidden. For example, WoW has zones as well. However, the walls between each zone is hidden thus it's "seamless". I'd prefer them to just go with whatever method is best for handling lag in their game. 

     

    On the issue of mounts. After playing the game, I can say yes, I see a case for mounts. Not only as something to do, but as a way to get between waypoints. I can even make a case for flying mounts. I understand Anet wants people to see the world they created, but after I've seen it on the ground, sometime's I want to see what it all looks like from above. However, the problem is with the way they handle zones. And I don't know if they would have to redesign their zones in order to implement seamless zone transitions. 

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Player names in pvp
    Mounts
    Alternative to doing the boring stories
    WvW less of a gold sink
    Pick up new weapons on higher level characters and skill them up.
    Add gvg
  • PaRoXiTiCPaRoXiTiC Denison, TXPosts: 576Member Uncommon
    Yes names in PvP.... thast one of the biggest things form me. I hate that we don't see names. I wanna be scared of someone when I see them cause they just spanked me earlier or vice versa. Makes it so much more intense.
  • jpnolejpnole Tampa, FLPosts: 1,656Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by PaRoXiTiC

    they took out all portals making this giant game one big seemless world, added mounts, took out waypoints, and made places like Orr (once you cross into it) to be an open PvP area?

    Would the game be better or worse?

    Worse. No one wants to spend hours trotting along on their mounts. Portal system is the best thing that's happened to mmos, GW 2 included.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,779Member Uncommon

    The game would be much worse because they would introduce a lot of bugs in the course of making such radical changes to the game.

    You can make major game engine changes early on when you don't have a ton of data to convert.  But once you have all of the zones and events and textures and everything already built around the assumption that things are going to be done a certain way, trying to change that will make an enormous mess.

    You can maybe live with an enormous mess and the time that it takes to clean it up if you're a long way from even starting alpha testing.  But after release?  No.  Very bad idea.

  • dimnikardimnikar ZanistanvillePosts: 271Member

    What the OP proposes would DEFINITELY make for a better game.

     

    The idea about guesting on PVP servers (and PVP servers in general) is very good too.

     

    I would actually consider playing GW2 if it did these things.

  • BladestromBladestrom edinburghPosts: 4,943Member Uncommon
    Yup these things would make GW2 better with the exception of open world pvp , that opens the door to abuse of people not interested in pvp. In any case there is already open world pvp in wvwvw.

    rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar

    Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D

  • Lovely_LalyLovely_Laly genevaPosts: 734Member

    I think they need to decide if WvW PvE or PvP, I'm very confused.

    More of all and anything can make it better or worse, hard to tell now.

    I still hate travel costs, confusing patched map, need to explore WvW as to me it's pure PvP, and confusing.
    I still miss group finder and dislike too long runs inside dungeons (beside they are hard for no reason), missing hard mod too.

    Missing a lot original GW games content and mechanic, that why GW2 looks to me as mean less fail game.

    Finishing my expiration and crafting now before use it as run/farm game when nothing better to play....

    try before buy, even if it's a game to avoid bad surprises.
    Worst surprises for me: Aion, GW2

Sign In or Register to comment.