I'm not saying there aren't differences, but I'm saying the entire underlying event system is, in essence, a PQ. By me simplifying the scope of what happens in an "event" its easier to see exactly what is going on, without "oversimplifying" the entirety of the system, which would be something along the lines of monsters show up, you kill them or get killed by them, then you move on to the next area of monsters.
I really hate to arrive late to a conversation, but I've read everything you have said. I believe phrases like this are the ones being singled out. I realize this block of text, out of context is not your point... but, perhaps if you would phrase it better.
I've played PQs in two games to date, WH:O and CO. In both of these games, your point is... absolutely correct.
However in the context of GW2, it is incorrect. I would define what has been described to us thus far as heavily scripted events. In my mind, a PQ is and always will be a quest you can walk up to and compete/game in actively without accepting a quest.
GW2s system is more like a cinematic in a movie you have yet to see. Instead of attending a PQ and completing 3+ stages of objectives - you can pass or fail... but it really isn't as simple as that. Before you go on, shouting about how I am outlining your "oversimplification" example, I am not. Because in a PQ - that is the only outcome. Pass, you move on. Fail, the enemies despawn. In guild wars 2, what happens is absolutely not as black and white as the definition of what a PQ is.
The Dynamic Event system is something more along the lines of watching a movie. Lets take an example.
1. In a normal MMORPG, you get a quest where it says "Go kill 10 orcs". You do so, return and claim reward. In a PQ MMORPG - you go to the PQ area, kill 10 orcs - then fight their master - then fight his enraged lover. After which, you are given a stat screen and usually a reward from a chest. In GW2, the 10 orcs will be attacking a village and the player can decide to, or not to help. If you pass it on by, the threat might have grown immensely by the time you return - that doesn't sound like a PQ to me. If you kill the orcs, 10 minutes later (real time) you might hear villagers screaming "Orc Raid!". You find out, or deduce that the 10 orcs were merely a scouting party for an occupation crew. Since you killed their scouts, they retaliate by sending out riders and hulking armor covered beasts.
The difference? If the orcs only have to kill the 6 - 7 villagers in a small town, they might simply occupy it - if you attack them - they actually counter attack the village since the scouts were killed and didn't return. Lets continue by saying... you actually fail in beating the orc counter attack. They would then move on to their next target, which could be dictated dynamically (Something as simple as a roll of the dice). You would then have to try tracking the orc party, only to find that other players had intercepted them half way, and are fighting a losing battle. Lets say you and your friends back attack them and together with the new partners, defeat them.
At this point, you have a scripted event. I don't care what anyone says, that is not a PQ to me - that is an event.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
I like the fact that gw2 will be soloable, bacause I'm tired of running or perma builds in gw1 in order to do something alone. Beacuse henchmens mostly suck, and finding a human party to do something is getting harder these days.
Self heal for all classes will be awesome, I'm glad that we won't have to have a healer in party in order to survive any battle.
even though gw2 will be soloable that doesn't mean that community won't be important to you anymore. With this dynamic events everyone will have something to do together, and this time It won't just be healing each other. It's going to be something much more fun!
What I dislike in gw2 so far are human models (like many of you), they should improve the skin, and It's going to be hard to adjust with new technology in game - guns and machinery.
One could also compare modern tanks to WW1 tanks, or U1 bombs to cruise missiles. Same kinda thing, but vastly more advanced implementation. So much so that over-emphasizing their similarities with more primitive tech might well give the wrong impression of how they work and how sophisticated they are. At least, from what I've read about GW2's system.
In other words, I don't think saying "they are like Public Quests" is a very precise statement. I'm not saying it isn't true (see above military technology analogies), but it doesn't convey the differences very well. It's not hard to come up with something a lot less crude...."GW'2 system is like PQs on steroids" for instance.
ok i know in order to have the personal story quests, it's easier to have Instance, but that's just about the thing i feel that it's a pity GW2 still include instancing, i would hope someday a game as good as GW2 but without any instance at all
ok i know in order to have the personal story quests, it's easier to have Instance, but that's just about the thing i feel that it's a pity GW2 still include instancing, i would hope someday a game as good as GW2 but without any instance at all
even for raids, Open World ftw!
Have you seen a REAL story with non-instancing? I'm not talking about games where an NPC tells you that the world is going to end, so you must go and kill 20 lizards...
Without instancing, there won't be a story, just a regular progression line.
If a story were to tell of how your brother was kidnapped, it would b nearly impossible to tell it without breaking immersion in a persistent world. You would see your brother get kidnapped in the middle of a city, and then ten seconds later, someone else on the same story would have his brother kidnapped at the same location. Everytime you go to that city, someone on that same quest line would be getting their brother kidnapped.
Or maybe youy about to defeat one of the main bosses who kidnapped your brother. He has a hide-out in the woods somehwere, but as you approach, you realize 15 other people are running that same mission. So instead of a one on one fight to save your brother, (and there are actually 15 kids in there whom all look like your brother,) all the players just gang up on him and the fight is over as soon as it starts.
What a bout cut scenes? We know GW2 will feature cut scenes as they did in GW1, but how do you do that in a persistent world when showing how a Ascalon was destroyed (like in GW1.) That means, everytime something big happened, like a suicide bomber or some sort of explosion takes place in your story, EVERYONE else can see it. Now imagine that with a million people running that similar mission. Millions of explosions going off non-stop.
So what you ask for is to basically get rid of good story telling elements so the world can be persistent. No thanks, I'd much rather have 10-20% of the world be instanced if it held a good story.
ok i know in order to have the personal story quests, it's easier to have Instance, but that's just about the thing i feel that it's a pity GW2 still include instancing, i would hope someday a game as good as GW2 but without any instance at all
even for raids, Open World ftw!
Have you seen a REAL story with non-instancing? I'm not talking about games where an NPC tells you that the world is going to end, so you must go and kill 20 lizards...
Without instancing, there won't be a story, just a regular progression line.
If a story were to tell of how your brother was kidnapped, it would b nearly impossible to tell it without breaking immersion in a persistent world. You would see your brother get kidnapped in the middle of a city, and then ten seconds later, someone else on the same story would have his brother kidnapped at the same location. Everytime you go to that city, someone on that same quest line would be getting their brother kidnapped.
Or maybe youy about to defeat one of the main bosses who kidnapped your brother. He has a hide-out in the woods somehwere, but as you approach, you realize 15 other people are running that same mission. So instead of a one on one fight to save your brother, (and there are actually 15 kids in there whom all look like your brother,) all the players just gang up on him and the fight is over as soon as it starts.
What a bout cut scenes? We know GW2 will feature cut scenes as they did in GW1, but how do you do that in a persistent world when showing how a Ascalon was destroyed (like in GW1.) That means, everytime something big happened, like a suicide bomber or some sort of explosion takes place in your story, EVERYONE else can see it. Now imagine that with a million people running that similar mission. Millions of explosions going off non-stop.
So what you ask for is to basically get rid of good story telling elements so the world can be persistent. No thanks, I'd much rather have 10-20% of the world be instanced if it held a good story.
This is exactly the reason I dont like "personal" stories implemented in a MMO. So you have instanced quests but then again you must assume that everyone has a brother and then everyone's brother is kidnapped in the same way and by the same boss... wow this really adds to immersion.
The idea in GW2 of having randomly attacked villages and other similar kind of events that are not totally predictable and exactly the same is more than welcome. Now if your actions like battles could make a difference in a world by expanding or contracting your kingdom borders, thus constantly changing battlefields, you would be on a good track of making a seamless and persistant world and a good MMO. In such world you could have a lot of mini quests/missions (like a farmer that needs help against local bandits) which are available for every player but instead of being repeatble, once you successfuly help that farmer he recognizes you in the future and offers you food for a cheaper price, as an example.
These are a good story telling elements for a MMO. The story elements you are reffering to are good for a single player game which unfortunately are most often seen in MMOs.
ok i know in order to have the personal story quests, it's easier to have Instance, but that's just about the thing i feel that it's a pity GW2 still include instancing, i would hope someday a game as good as GW2 but without any instance at all
even for raids, Open World ftw!
Hmm, from what I can see so far, the main dev philosophy for GW2 is "something for everyone". Rather than taking one concept and building the whole game on it (thus reducing their potential audience and geting in danger of turning into a shallow, one-gimmick game) they are attempting to diversify the gameplay so every class of players has something to look forward to. In that respect I envision GW2 as true "themepark" where there is a ride or two for everyone, even the sandbox crowd, and you are not required to take all the rides in order to play the game "properly".
A good example of how this clashes with preconceptions is a recent thread on this forum dealing with the newly announced non-combat social activities. There actually were some commenters saying that basically since they don't like this kind of content it shouldn't be in the game, the assumption being that if it is in the game you have to do it in order to progress or at least get full value for your money. Ofc they got quickly shouted down by the "if you don't like this type of content, you don't have to play it" argument.
Imo this "personal story" gameplay mode caters to the single RPG and CORPG crowds. I'm not a fan of this type of game, tho I did enjoy it a while back. I see it as a fun diversion and one that I'll happily do with my friends and maybe alone when I want a bit of a change. Most of my game time I'll be spending doing other stuff (WvW most probably) but on the other hand I find it really cool that a single game offers so much variety and that I won't have to buy and get into some other title just becase I want some occasional diversion.
In fact IMO the very idea that MMO players are heterogenous and can be categorized into clear cut groups "PvP player" "PvE player" "RP-er" etc etc is fallacious because it presupposes that a single person plays only one type of game and won't ever tolerate or feel the urge to play something else. I, for one, enjoy both massive PvP, arena-style PvP, open worlds, mini-games and tightly directed dungeon runs. I have my preferences and I tend to spend most of my time in just a few of those but I'm definitely not averse to occasionally doing something else for a change. In fact I find that this enhances my enjoyment of my chosen main activity when I get back to it.
When mine and my guildies heads start spinning from endless hours of good old WvW slaughter I'll be able to tell them "Guys lets take a break - how about a snowball fight or help me out with my personal quest line for some diversion?" And we'll be able to go and do it from within the game, using our own characters which will even continue progressing duing that time rather than switching out completely and doing D&D for example. I welcome this most heartily.
There will be 5 races which will seem to take the role of a second class. Those racial skills and abilities seem pretty powerful to me, norn being able to change form, asuras riding golems... This might provide quite a bit of variety beyond the 8 classes.
- No monks
We don't know that yet.
- No deep wound (implies no spike)
- No body block
It was said no body block due to mob problems, especially pathing, in open world.. This still leaves the possibility of there being body blocking in PvP. In fact, some skills (shield stance for example) make almost no sense in PvP without body blocking. We need more info on this one.
- PVP 5X5 and not 8X8
That isn't necesarrily a bad thing.. And besides there was a brief mention of other competetive PvP modes besides arena style.. Large groups and dynamic group-based goals were mentioned. There might be battleground/scenario - styled instances yet. We'll see when more info on PvP becomes available.
- Bleedding stacking, I assume poinson as well
Plus side so far:
- jump ?
Am I the only one getting worried about PVP depth ?
Don't forget the Mists. 3-faction open world PvP with keeps, siege weaponry, resources and RTS elements. That sounds pretty deep to me.
Am I the only one getting worried about PVP depth ?
No monks doesn't affect pvp at all. The only useful skill set was protting and that's has been confirmed to be in. Healing skills was barely used in high rank pvp matches anyway.
Secondaries although gave a lot of freedom within the creation of builds were an absolute nightmare to balance. They had a high propensity to produce gimmick builds which stifled competitive pvp when combined with the introduction of the new classes. Sure that could have been fixed but with the combination of the new skill mechanics old imbalances would be fixed but new ones would created.
Basically they've gone for adaptability (through weapon swaps and attunements) and visibile skill mechanics over the build freedom of secondaries but TBH the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle is a worthy sacrifice for the loss secondaries. It provides greater tactical depth during the actual matches than the strategic depth of secondaries and quite frankly the tactical depth provides for far more interesting pvp matches than the gimmick prone secondary system if done right.
Spiking is a bad gimmick and i'm not even sure why you think it's a bad thing that it's gone. It led to very one dimensional play and didn't really bring anything positive to the game apart from a gimmick that was heavily used to win matches.
5X5 is a great idea for structured pvp and i'm not really sure why your against it. You do remember how hard it was to organise 8 people to be able to do GvG? This way you can spend more time actually playing matches rather than organising your team since you don't have to wait for 8 guild members to be free at the same time and because of the smaller team sizes they'll be more teams and more people likely to do the matches since it doesn't take so long to gather 5 people.
You can't count bleeding stacking as a negative when you know nothing about the game, there could only be two skills that induce bleeding for all you know.
No body block is pretty much the only thing you've said which I would consider a real concern hopefully they'll keep body block for structured pvp only at least. Hopefully if enough concerns are raised during the player testing of pvp it will be added if it hasn't been added already.
The PVP depth is still there it's just a completely different type to that found in gw1 but if done right it could produce more interesting pvp matches than those found in gw1 with less balancing issues.
Am I the only one getting worried about PVP depth ?
No monks doesn't affect pvp at all. The only useful skill set was protting and that's has been confirmed to be in. Healing skills was barely used in high rank pvp matches anyway.
infuse, woh and ps beg to differ
Secondaries although gave a lot of freedom within the creation of builds were an absolute nightmare to balance. They had a high propensity to produce gimmick builds which stifled competitive pvp when combined with the introduction of the new classes. Sure that could have been fixed but with the combination of the new skill mechanics old imbalances would be fixed but new ones would created.
i agree
Basically they've gone for adaptability (through weapon swaps and attunements) and visibile skill mechanics over the build freedom of secondaries but TBH the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle is a worthy sacrifice for the loss secondaries. It provides greater tactical depth during the actual matches than the strategic depth of secondaries and quite frankly the tactical depth provides for far more interesting pvp matches than the gimmick prone secondary system if done right.
this is what gets me excited for gw2 pvp, no more (or less) buildwars
Spiking is a bad gimmick and i'm not even sure why you think it's a bad thing that it's gone. It led to very one dimensional play and didn't really bring anything positive to the game apart from a gimmick that was heavily used to win matches.
5X5 is a great idea for structured pvp and i'm not really sure why your against it. You do remember how hard it was to organise 8 people to be able to do GvG? This way you can spend more time actually playing matches rather than organising your team since you don't have to wait for 8 guild members to be free at the same time and because of the smaller team sizes they'll be more teams and more people likely to do the matches since it doesn't take so long to gather 5 people.
just want to add, that if you count the healers (dualbackline and ritu or pnh/runner) they make up exactly the 3 slots you loose
You can't count bleeding stacking as a negative when you know nothing about the game, there could only be two skills that induce bleeding for all you know.
No body block is pretty much the only thing you've said which I would consider a real concern hopefully they'll keep body block for structured pvp only at least. Hopefully if enough concerns are raised during the player testing of pvp it will be added if it hasn't been added already.
IIRC they said "no bodyblocking in persistent world" which still allows for it to be part of organised pvp
The PVP depth is still there it's just a completely different type to that found in gw1 but if done right it could produce more interesting pvp matches than those found in gw1 with less balancing issues.
I guess we'll have to see how gw2 pvp turns out, but i think it's to early to say that it sucks now.
For nearly two centuries the Trolloc Wars had ravaged the length and breadth of the world, and wherever battles raged, the Red Eagle banner of Manetheren was in the forefront. The men of Manetheren were a thorn to the Dark One's foot and a bramble to his hand. Sing of Mantheren, that would never bend knee to the Shadow. Sing of Manetheren, the sword that could not be broken.
Am I the only one getting worried about PVP depth ?
No monks doesn't affect pvp at all. The only useful skill set was protting and that's has been confirmed to be in. Healing skills was barely used in high rank pvp matches anyway.
infuse, woh and ps beg to differ
I said barely, besides it's not like those skills added any depth to the game anyway and could be removed completely with little to few alterations
Secondaries although gave a lot of freedom within the creation of builds were an absolute nightmare to balance. They had a high propensity to produce gimmick builds which stifled competitive pvp when combined with the introduction of the new classes. Sure that could have been fixed but with the combination of the new skill mechanics old imbalances would be fixed but new ones would created.
i agree
Basically they've gone for adaptability (through weapon swaps and attunements) and visibile skill mechanics over the build freedom of secondaries but TBH the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle is a worthy sacrifice for the loss secondaries. It provides greater tactical depth during the actual matches than the strategic depth of secondaries and quite frankly the tactical depth provides for far more interesting pvp matches than the gimmick prone secondary system if done right.
this is what gets me excited for gw2 pvp, no more (or less) buildwars
Spiking is a bad gimmick and i'm not even sure why you think it's a bad thing that it's gone. It led to very one dimensional play and didn't really bring anything positive to the game apart from a gimmick that was heavily used to win matches.
5X5 is a great idea for structured pvp and i'm not really sure why your against it. You do remember how hard it was to organise 8 people to be able to do GvG? This way you can spend more time actually playing matches rather than organising your team since you don't have to wait for 8 guild members to be free at the same time and because of the smaller team sizes they'll be more teams and more people likely to do the matches since it doesn't take so long to gather 5 people.
just want to add, that if you count the healers (dualbackline and ritu or pnh/runner) they make up exactly the 3 slots you loose
You can't count bleeding stacking as a negative when you know nothing about the game, there could only be two skills that induce bleeding for all you know.
No body block is pretty much the only thing you've said which I would consider a real concern hopefully they'll keep body block for structured pvp only at least. Hopefully if enough concerns are raised during the player testing of pvp it will be added if it hasn't been added already.
IIRC they said "no bodyblocking in persistent world" which still allows for it to be part of organised pvp
Maybe but i'm not certain about it being in structured pvp since the PR replies I saw in response to the worries said over at gw2g didn't exactly confirm it would be in structured pvp either but maybe I just missed the reply saying it was.
The PVP depth is still there it's just a completely different type to that found in gw1 but if done right it could produce more interesting pvp matches than those found in gw1 with less balancing issues.
I guess we'll have to see how gw2 pvp turns out, but i think it's to early to say that it sucks now.
Pretty much, far too early to make any assumptions about it, but it should be obvious this isn't purely a pvp game like it was during prophecies with pve tacked on so it's pvp may not be pushed quite as hard by A-net as they did during the prophecies days.
Nothing I have heard/ seen thus far that would be a game breaker for me as of yet. One thing that is an annoyance to me however, is the non human playable races.. just really hate the appearance of the Asura, and Char as playable races. I just enjoyed only having the Human races in Guild wars1, but to each their own. I think it appeals more to people who want to play cuddly creatures, like furcadia, and club penguin - something I tend to avoid.
Nothing I have heard/ seen thus far that would be a game breaker for me as of yet. One thing that is an annoyance to me however, is the non human playable races.. just really hate the appearance of the Asura, and Char as playable races. I just enjoyed only having the Human races in Guild wars1, but to each their own. I think it appeals more to people who want to play cuddly creatures, like furcadia, and club penguin - something I tend to avoid.
Nothing I have heard/ seen thus far that would be a game breaker for me as of yet. One thing that is an annoyance to me however, is the non human playable races.. just really hate the appearance of the Asura, and Char as playable races. I just enjoyed only having the Human races in Guild wars1, but to each their own. I think it appeals more to people who want to play cuddly creatures, like furcadia, and club penguin - something I tend to avoid.
ohh... you're gonna get it now...
Why? Because I have no desire to hear furries talk? Even worse- have them following me around with cheezy pick up lines?
The horror! I am going to have nightmares now. Like Squirrels following me around saying " you must be tired.." and " Did it hurt?"
Don't get me wrong- I think Arena Net is doing an awesome job with this game, though players as furbies just isn;t something I enjoy. LOL
Nothing I have heard/ seen thus far that would be a game breaker for me as of yet. One thing that is an annoyance to me however, is the non human playable races.. just really hate the appearance of the Asura, and Char as playable races. I just enjoyed only having the Human races in Guild wars1, but to each their own. I think it appeals more to people who want to play cuddly creatures, like furcadia, and club penguin - something I tend to avoid.
ohh... you're gonna get it now...
Why? Because I have no desire to hear furries talk? Even worse- have them following me around with cheezy pick up lines?
The horror! I am going to have nightmares now. Like Squirrels following me around saying " you must be tired.." and " Did it hurt?"
Don't get me wrong- I think Arena Net is doing an awesome job with this game, though players as furbies just isn;t something I enjoy. LOL
So invite them down the pub brawl and knock their teeth out... Who wouldn't love to punch an Asura in the face. I am soooo collecting my guildies teeth!
So many scores to settle... It may become the new GvG lol!!! Winners get their teeth back
The only thing that peeves me at the moment is that walking, as of now, is not in the game. I know it's a very little thing to most people but why not include it??
Am I the only one getting worried about PVP depth ?
No monks doesn't affect pvp at all. The only useful skill set was protting and that's has been confirmed to be in. Healing skills was barely used in high rank pvp matches anyway.
infuse, woh and ps beg to differ
Secondaries although gave a lot of freedom within the creation of builds were an absolute nightmare to balance. They had a high propensity to produce gimmick builds which stifled competitive pvp when combined with the introduction of the new classes. Sure that could have been fixed but with the combination of the new skill mechanics old imbalances would be fixed but new ones would created.
i agree
Basically they've gone for adaptability (through weapon swaps and attunements) and visibile skill mechanics over the build freedom of secondaries but TBH the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle is a worthy sacrifice for the loss secondaries. It provides greater tactical depth during the actual matches than the strategic depth of secondaries and quite frankly the tactical depth provides for far more interesting pvp matches than the gimmick prone secondary system if done right.
this is what gets me excited for gw2 pvp, no more (or less) buildwars
Spiking is a bad gimmick and i'm not even sure why you think it's a bad thing that it's gone. It led to very one dimensional play and didn't really bring anything positive to the game apart from a gimmick that was heavily used to win matches.
5X5 is a great idea for structured pvp and i'm not really sure why your against it. You do remember how hard it was to organise 8 people to be able to do GvG? This way you can spend more time actually playing matches rather than organising your team since you don't have to wait for 8 guild members to be free at the same time and because of the smaller team sizes they'll be more teams and more people likely to do the matches since it doesn't take so long to gather 5 people.
just want to add, that if you count the healers (dualbackline and ritu or pnh/runner) they make up exactly the 3 slots you loose
You can't count bleeding stacking as a negative when you know nothing about the game, there could only be two skills that induce bleeding for all you know.
No body block is pretty much the only thing you've said which I would consider a real concern hopefully they'll keep body block for structured pvp only at least. Hopefully if enough concerns are raised during the player testing of pvp it will be added if it hasn't been added already.
IIRC they said "no bodyblocking in persistent world" which still allows for it to be part of organised pvp
The PVP depth is still there it's just a completely different type to that found in gw1 but if done right it could produce more interesting pvp matches than those found in gw1 with less balancing issues.
I guess we'll have to see how gw2 pvp turns out, but i think it's to early to say that it sucks now.
the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle
umm no you cant they even said you have to be out of combat in order to change your build.
Am I the only one getting worried about PVP depth ?
No monks doesn't affect pvp at all. The only useful skill set was protting and that's has been confirmed to be in. Healing skills was barely used in high rank pvp matches anyway.
infuse, woh and ps beg to differ
Secondaries although gave a lot of freedom within the creation of builds were an absolute nightmare to balance. They had a high propensity to produce gimmick builds which stifled competitive pvp when combined with the introduction of the new classes. Sure that could have been fixed but with the combination of the new skill mechanics old imbalances would be fixed but new ones would created.
i agree
Basically they've gone for adaptability (through weapon swaps and attunements) and visibile skill mechanics over the build freedom of secondaries but TBH the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle is a worthy sacrifice for the loss secondaries. It provides greater tactical depth during the actual matches than the strategic depth of secondaries and quite frankly the tactical depth provides for far more interesting pvp matches than the gimmick prone secondary system if done right.
this is what gets me excited for gw2 pvp, no more (or less) buildwars
Spiking is a bad gimmick and i'm not even sure why you think it's a bad thing that it's gone. It led to very one dimensional play and didn't really bring anything positive to the game apart from a gimmick that was heavily used to win matches.
5X5 is a great idea for structured pvp and i'm not really sure why your against it. You do remember how hard it was to organise 8 people to be able to do GvG? This way you can spend more time actually playing matches rather than organising your team since you don't have to wait for 8 guild members to be free at the same time and because of the smaller team sizes they'll be more teams and more people likely to do the matches since it doesn't take so long to gather 5 people.
just want to add, that if you count the healers (dualbackline and ritu or pnh/runner) they make up exactly the 3 slots you loose
You can't count bleeding stacking as a negative when you know nothing about the game, there could only be two skills that induce bleeding for all you know.
No body block is pretty much the only thing you've said which I would consider a real concern hopefully they'll keep body block for structured pvp only at least. Hopefully if enough concerns are raised during the player testing of pvp it will be added if it hasn't been added already.
IIRC they said "no bodyblocking in persistent world" which still allows for it to be part of organised pvp
The PVP depth is still there it's just a completely different type to that found in gw1 but if done right it could produce more interesting pvp matches than those found in gw1 with less balancing issues.
I guess we'll have to see how gw2 pvp turns out, but i think it's to early to say that it sucks now.
the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle
umm no you cant they even said you have to be out of combat in order to change your build.
so no mid pvp build swaping
Out of combat = no one currently attacking you, you not attacking someone.
You can also switch weapons/attunements mid battle to switch half you build, making big tactics. So technically, there is mid pvp half-build swapping.
I absolutely despise the fact that it is not out by now!! Damn! They really gonna have to fix that if they expect me to play it with such a major fault. There is no excuse for a game developer to screw up such a great game like that...No excuse..DAMN!
Comments
I really hate to arrive late to a conversation, but I've read everything you have said. I believe phrases like this are the ones being singled out. I realize this block of text, out of context is not your point... but, perhaps if you would phrase it better.
I've played PQs in two games to date, WH:O and CO. In both of these games, your point is... absolutely correct.
However in the context of GW2, it is incorrect. I would define what has been described to us thus far as heavily scripted events. In my mind, a PQ is and always will be a quest you can walk up to and compete/game in actively without accepting a quest.
GW2s system is more like a cinematic in a movie you have yet to see. Instead of attending a PQ and completing 3+ stages of objectives - you can pass or fail... but it really isn't as simple as that. Before you go on, shouting about how I am outlining your "oversimplification" example, I am not. Because in a PQ - that is the only outcome. Pass, you move on. Fail, the enemies despawn. In guild wars 2, what happens is absolutely not as black and white as the definition of what a PQ is.
The Dynamic Event system is something more along the lines of watching a movie. Lets take an example.
1. In a normal MMORPG, you get a quest where it says "Go kill 10 orcs". You do so, return and claim reward. In a PQ MMORPG - you go to the PQ area, kill 10 orcs - then fight their master - then fight his enraged lover. After which, you are given a stat screen and usually a reward from a chest. In GW2, the 10 orcs will be attacking a village and the player can decide to, or not to help. If you pass it on by, the threat might have grown immensely by the time you return - that doesn't sound like a PQ to me. If you kill the orcs, 10 minutes later (real time) you might hear villagers screaming "Orc Raid!". You find out, or deduce that the 10 orcs were merely a scouting party for an occupation crew. Since you killed their scouts, they retaliate by sending out riders and hulking armor covered beasts.
The difference? If the orcs only have to kill the 6 - 7 villagers in a small town, they might simply occupy it - if you attack them - they actually counter attack the village since the scouts were killed and didn't return. Lets continue by saying... you actually fail in beating the orc counter attack. They would then move on to their next target, which could be dictated dynamically (Something as simple as a roll of the dice). You would then have to try tracking the orc party, only to find that other players had intercepted them half way, and are fighting a losing battle. Lets say you and your friends back attack them and together with the new partners, defeat them.
At this point, you have a scripted event. I don't care what anyone says, that is not a PQ to me - that is an event.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
I like the fact that gw2 will be soloable, bacause I'm tired of running or perma builds in gw1 in order to do something alone. Beacuse henchmens mostly suck, and finding a human party to do something is getting harder these days.
Self heal for all classes will be awesome, I'm glad that we won't have to have a healer in party in order to survive any battle.
even though gw2 will be soloable that doesn't mean that community won't be important to you anymore. With this dynamic events everyone will have something to do together, and this time It won't just be healing each other. It's going to be something much more fun!
What I dislike in gw2 so far are human models (like many of you), they should improve the skin, and It's going to be hard to adjust with new technology in game - guns and machinery.
Guild Wars 2 Youtube Croatian Maniacs
My Guild Wars titles
Dynamic Events are a PQ system.
One could also compare modern tanks to WW1 tanks, or U1 bombs to cruise missiles. Same kinda thing, but vastly more advanced implementation. So much so that over-emphasizing their similarities with more primitive tech might well give the wrong impression of how they work and how sophisticated they are. At least, from what I've read about GW2's system.
In other words, I don't think saying "they are like Public Quests" is a very precise statement. I'm not saying it isn't true (see above military technology analogies), but it doesn't convey the differences very well. It's not hard to come up with something a lot less crude...."GW'2 system is like PQs on steroids" for instance.
"instancing"
ok i know in order to have the personal story quests, it's easier to have Instance, but that's just about the thing i feel that it's a pity GW2 still include instancing, i would hope someday a game as good as GW2 but without any instance at all
even for raids, Open World ftw!
So What Now?
The huge amount of hype people at this site are feeding into it.
Have you seen a REAL story with non-instancing? I'm not talking about games where an NPC tells you that the world is going to end, so you must go and kill 20 lizards...
Without instancing, there won't be a story, just a regular progression line.
If a story were to tell of how your brother was kidnapped, it would b nearly impossible to tell it without breaking immersion in a persistent world. You would see your brother get kidnapped in the middle of a city, and then ten seconds later, someone else on the same story would have his brother kidnapped at the same location. Everytime you go to that city, someone on that same quest line would be getting their brother kidnapped.
Or maybe youy about to defeat one of the main bosses who kidnapped your brother. He has a hide-out in the woods somehwere, but as you approach, you realize 15 other people are running that same mission. So instead of a one on one fight to save your brother, (and there are actually 15 kids in there whom all look like your brother,) all the players just gang up on him and the fight is over as soon as it starts.
What a bout cut scenes? We know GW2 will feature cut scenes as they did in GW1, but how do you do that in a persistent world when showing how a Ascalon was destroyed (like in GW1.) That means, everytime something big happened, like a suicide bomber or some sort of explosion takes place in your story, EVERYONE else can see it. Now imagine that with a million people running that similar mission. Millions of explosions going off non-stop.
So what you ask for is to basically get rid of good story telling elements so the world can be persistent. No thanks, I'd much rather have 10-20% of the world be instanced if it held a good story.
Warriors with bows. Rangers are left with what? Trapping and tree hugging?
This is exactly the reason I dont like "personal" stories implemented in a MMO. So you have instanced quests but then again you must assume that everyone has a brother and then everyone's brother is kidnapped in the same way and by the same boss... wow this really adds to immersion.
The idea in GW2 of having randomly attacked villages and other similar kind of events that are not totally predictable and exactly the same is more than welcome. Now if your actions like battles could make a difference in a world by expanding or contracting your kingdom borders, thus constantly changing battlefields, you would be on a good track of making a seamless and persistant world and a good MMO. In such world you could have a lot of mini quests/missions (like a farmer that needs help against local bandits) which are available for every player but instead of being repeatble, once you successfuly help that farmer he recognizes you in the future and offers you food for a cheaper price, as an example.
These are a good story telling elements for a MMO. The story elements you are reffering to are good for a single player game which unfortunately are most often seen in MMOs.
Hmm, from what I can see so far, the main dev philosophy for GW2 is "something for everyone". Rather than taking one concept and building the whole game on it (thus reducing their potential audience and geting in danger of turning into a shallow, one-gimmick game) they are attempting to diversify the gameplay so every class of players has something to look forward to. In that respect I envision GW2 as true "themepark" where there is a ride or two for everyone, even the sandbox crowd, and you are not required to take all the rides in order to play the game "properly".
A good example of how this clashes with preconceptions is a recent thread on this forum dealing with the newly announced non-combat social activities. There actually were some commenters saying that basically since they don't like this kind of content it shouldn't be in the game, the assumption being that if it is in the game you have to do it in order to progress or at least get full value for your money. Ofc they got quickly shouted down by the "if you don't like this type of content, you don't have to play it" argument.
Imo this "personal story" gameplay mode caters to the single RPG and CORPG crowds. I'm not a fan of this type of game, tho I did enjoy it a while back. I see it as a fun diversion and one that I'll happily do with my friends and maybe alone when I want a bit of a change. Most of my game time I'll be spending doing other stuff (WvW most probably) but on the other hand I find it really cool that a single game offers so much variety and that I won't have to buy and get into some other title just becase I want some occasional diversion.
In fact IMO the very idea that MMO players are heterogenous and can be categorized into clear cut groups "PvP player" "PvE player" "RP-er" etc etc is fallacious because it presupposes that a single person plays only one type of game and won't ever tolerate or feel the urge to play something else. I, for one, enjoy both massive PvP, arena-style PvP, open worlds, mini-games and tightly directed dungeon runs. I have my preferences and I tend to spend most of my time in just a few of those but I'm definitely not averse to occasionally doing something else for a change. In fact I find that this enhances my enjoyment of my chosen main activity when I get back to it.
When mine and my guildies heads start spinning from endless hours of good old WvW slaughter I'll be able to tell them "Guys lets take a break - how about a snowball fight or help me out with my personal quest line for some diversion?" And we'll be able to go and do it from within the game, using our own characters which will even continue progressing duing that time rather than switching out completely and doing D&D for example. I welcome this most heartily.
Minus side so far:
- No second class
- No monks
- No deep wound (implies no spike)
- No body block
- PVP 5X5 and not 8X8
- Bleedding stacking, I assume poinson as well
Plus side so far:
- jump ?
Am I the only one getting worried about PVP depth ?
10char and all that.
No monks doesn't affect pvp at all. The only useful skill set was protting and that's has been confirmed to be in. Healing skills was barely used in high rank pvp matches anyway.
Secondaries although gave a lot of freedom within the creation of builds were an absolute nightmare to balance. They had a high propensity to produce gimmick builds which stifled competitive pvp when combined with the introduction of the new classes. Sure that could have been fixed but with the combination of the new skill mechanics old imbalances would be fixed but new ones would created.
Basically they've gone for adaptability (through weapon swaps and attunements) and visibile skill mechanics over the build freedom of secondaries but TBH the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle is a worthy sacrifice for the loss secondaries. It provides greater tactical depth during the actual matches than the strategic depth of secondaries and quite frankly the tactical depth provides for far more interesting pvp matches than the gimmick prone secondary system if done right.
Spiking is a bad gimmick and i'm not even sure why you think it's a bad thing that it's gone. It led to very one dimensional play and didn't really bring anything positive to the game apart from a gimmick that was heavily used to win matches.
5X5 is a great idea for structured pvp and i'm not really sure why your against it. You do remember how hard it was to organise 8 people to be able to do GvG? This way you can spend more time actually playing matches rather than organising your team since you don't have to wait for 8 guild members to be free at the same time and because of the smaller team sizes they'll be more teams and more people likely to do the matches since it doesn't take so long to gather 5 people.
You can't count bleeding stacking as a negative when you know nothing about the game, there could only be two skills that induce bleeding for all you know.
No body block is pretty much the only thing you've said which I would consider a real concern hopefully they'll keep body block for structured pvp only at least. Hopefully if enough concerns are raised during the player testing of pvp it will be added if it hasn't been added already.
The PVP depth is still there it's just a completely different type to that found in gw1 but if done right it could produce more interesting pvp matches than those found in gw1 with less balancing issues.
I guess we'll have to see how gw2 pvp turns out, but i think it's to early to say that it sucks now.
For nearly two centuries the Trolloc Wars had ravaged the length and breadth of the world, and wherever battles raged, the Red Eagle banner of Manetheren was in the forefront. The men of Manetheren were a thorn to the Dark One's foot and a bramble to his hand. Sing of Mantheren, that would never bend knee to the Shadow. Sing of Manetheren, the sword that could not be broken.
Pretty much, far too early to make any assumptions about it, but it should be obvious this isn't purely a pvp game like it was during prophecies with pve tacked on so it's pvp may not be pushed quite as hard by A-net as they did during the prophecies days.
Second c lass system was broken and too hard to balance anyway.
Monks...who needs em?
As for the rest of the list I'm not sure if any of that has been neither confired nor denied.
Nothing I have heard/ seen thus far that would be a game breaker for me as of yet. One thing that is an annoyance to me however, is the non human playable races.. just really hate the appearance of the Asura, and Char as playable races. I just enjoyed only having the Human races in Guild wars1, but to each their own. I think it appeals more to people who want to play cuddly creatures, like furcadia, and club penguin - something I tend to avoid.
ohh... you're gonna get it now...
I don't like that you can't jump! Nah...just kidding
Why? Because I have no desire to hear furries talk? Even worse- have them following me around with cheezy pick up lines?
The horror!
I am going to have nightmares now. Like Squirrels following me around saying " you must be tired.." and " Did it hurt?" 
Don't get me wrong- I think Arena Net is doing an awesome job with this game, though players as furbies just isn;t something I enjoy. LOL
You should listen to this then ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjwDrF2RSak
So invite them down the pub brawl and knock their teeth out... Who wouldn't love to punch an Asura in the face. I am soooo collecting my guildies teeth!
So many scores to settle... It may become the new GvG lol!!! Winners get their teeth back
The only thing that peeves me at the moment is that walking, as of now, is not in the game. I know it's a very little thing to most people but why not include it??
Hopefully it will be in it for release.
the ability to change your tactics and entire team build mid battle
umm no you cant they even said you have to be out of combat in order to change your build.
so no mid pvp build swaping
Out of combat = no one currently attacking you, you not attacking someone.
You can also switch weapons/attunements mid battle to switch half you build, making big tactics. So technically, there is mid pvp half-build swapping.
I absolutely despise the fact that it is not out by now!! Damn! They really gonna have to fix that if they expect me to play it with such a major fault. There is no excuse for a game developer to screw up such a great game like that...No excuse..DAMN!