lol Exposed you came to this sub forum and posted this? Good luck man. More power to you. Everything is flat out theory crafting right now and when ArenaNET basically says Guild Wars sucked to the point they had to completely re do it with GW2 that should be your hint.
Let them remove the healr roll in MMORPG and see how it goes. If it pays off we are better for it. If it back fires we are stuck with the trinity easily for another 10 years before anyon tries anything different.
GW2 fans REFUSE to falt out admit that only other dynamic game on the market is Rift. Sorry guys, but ArenaNET is not looking at WoW to figure out how to do this dynamic world stuff because they have ZERO. They are looking at Rift and War PQ's to figure out how to make it work.
If I were an ArenaNET dev I would be playing Rift 8 hours a day/7 days a week trying to figure out what works and what pisses people off. This genre has been dominated by ONE game and Rift is about it for another game that was not down to 4 servers after 4 months. Somethings work and some things do not.
SWToR will be the next MMO to study, but I can not even tell you if their world will be completely dead and no reason to leave the cities. Rift is is a perfect place to draw from and expand on. I tell you right now. They try and make consequences permamnent and I do not think this mmo generation can handle it.
Let's see how the genre unfolds a few years from now, after GW 2 is out for a while. I'm guessing we'll see a big shift away from the wow-type MMO. After all, even a relatively polished version of that game, like Rift, isn't doing nearly as well as most people thought it would.
First part,
We didn't see very many (If at all) GAMES (much less MMOs) take up GW1 style of combat/game mechanics, so saying we will be seeing a string of GW2 Clones is stretching it a bit as the first one didn't have much of an impact of the MMO world.
Second Part,
I take it you're new to this site, RIFT had its ass RIFTed apart before it came out on this site taking about how it was giong to tank like every other "WoW Clone".
Its sitting at about 500k subs right now out of the 600k pre-orders. I wouldn't call that a failure at all.
No game market can take infinite saturation rate. Between WoW and Rift, you have enough people playing "games like that'" for any other game to really be sucessful using that formula. There won't be many more, and I doubt there'll be many more than are as sucessful. As the success rate of these games keeps sllidiing, the new games will HAVE TO try something differerent.
That's all I meant. I don't suspect anyone will emulate GW 2 because it's too hard to program something like that. You need to be creative to start with. Not all companies will enter the fray with the same level of creativity.
Games like Halo and COD havn't changed their basic formula in 10 years yet they are still selling like hot cakes.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot people don't give two shits for innovation? (The kind you're talking about at least) So long as a game is fun. The problem with WAR, AION, and RIFT wern't that they used 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and the Holy Trinity. The problem was that they were emulating WoW and not doing anything else, You make it sound as if people are tired of the things that EQ1 and WoW did yet you ignore that people have been playing the same FPS game for the last 10 years, Hell Dragon Age: Origin sold great and it was using a play set designed (what was it?) 30 years ago, still a great game, same with Never Winter Knights and a lot of other games that use the D&D rulesets.
As far as it being hard to program GW2 I would have to say it isn't when you look at game mechanics. You don't have to enter in any coding for spell aggro or have any advance aggro table and I am sure that takes time to set up. But IDK if someone wants to correct me feel free.
Let's see how the genre unfolds a few years from now, after GW 2 is out for a while. I'm guessing we'll see a big shift away from the wow-type MMO. After all, even a relatively polished version of that game, like Rift, isn't doing nearly as well as most people thought it would.
First part,
We didn't see very many (If at all) GAMES (much less MMOs) take up GW1 style of combat/game mechanics, so saying we will be seeing a string of GW2 Clones is stretching it a bit as the first one didn't have much of an impact of the MMO world.
Second Part,
I take it you're new to this site, RIFT had its ass RIFTed apart before it came out on this site taking about how it was giong to tank like every other "WoW Clone".
Its sitting at about 500k subs right now out of the 600k pre-orders. I wouldn't call that a failure at all.
No game market can take infinite saturation rate. Between WoW and Rift, you have enough people playing "games like that'" for any other game to really be sucessful using that formula. There won't be many more, and I doubt there'll be many more than are as sucessful. As the success rate of these games keeps sllidiing, the new games will HAVE TO try something differerent.
That's all I meant. I don't suspect anyone will emulate GW 2 because it's too hard to program something like that. You need to be creative to start with. Not all companies will enter the fray with the same level of creativity.
Games like Halo and COD havn't changed their basic formula in 10 years yet they are still selling like hot cakes.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot people don't give two shits for innovation? (The kind you're talking about at least) So long as a game is fun. The problem with WAR, AION, and RIFT wern't that they used 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and the Holy Trinity. The problem was that they were emulating WoW and not doing anything else, You make it sound as if people are tired of the things that EQ1 and WoW did yet you ignore that people have been playing the same FPS game for the last 10 years, Hell Dragon Age: Origin sold great and it was using a play set designed (what was it?) 30 years ago, still a great game, same with Never Winter Knights and a lot of other games that use the D&D rulesets.
As far as it being hard to program GW2 I would have to say it isn't when you look at game mechanics. You don't have to enter in any coding for spell aggro or have any advance aggro table and I am sure that takes time to set up. But IDK if someone wants to correct me feel free.
Wait till you say, and play the events. It's not the programming that's hard. It's coming up with stuff. Most game suffer from very unimaginative quests. One thing I know about Anet, from even playing GW 1...questing is not like in most games.
If I were interested in gear grind, I'd have become a watchmaker
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot people don't give two shits for innovation? (The kind you're talking about at least) So long as a game is fun.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot of people DO, and that for them, the conventional standard of MMOs is NOT fun? I am thrilled for you that the combat in SWTOR will make you happy. Go play it when it comes out and have a blast! WoW-like combat, for me, is not satisfying any longer, now that I know that there are no technical limitations requiring that games operate that way.
Your concern is noted; your concern that those of us looking forward to GW2 will be utterly disappointed when we find out the gameplay is exactly the same as every other tab-targetting MMO that preceded it (exactly the same, of course, except for the ways in which it is different). Thanks for the warning. Some of us have played the demo too, however, and have as much an idea of what we are getting into as you do.
I agree completely with most of the responders on here. The thread starter needs to calm down and stop hating on everyone else (Arenanet / Nintendo / Warhammer).
Warhammer - although it may not have been successful, it still tried something new and inovative. It didn't fully work in their game, but it still helped to plant the seeds which have been further developed in games like Rift and now completely function DEs in GW2. It at least deserves credit for laying the groundwork for those that followed.
Nintendo - Some would think that after the Gamecube that they would have started to go the way of Sega, but they didn't they were the first on the scene with motion control. It was solid tech, it added fun and innovative gameplay, and it was accessible to EVERYONE. This was also a boon to some the hardcore fanbase, but it helped to mainstream the market for gamers, hell, my wife even plays games now, which allows for easier "discussions" about the importants of me getting new games. My point is, just because they may not be successful at everything, doesn't make them failures. I'm sure overall, Nintendo as a company, is doing just fine.
Arenanet - They've made GW1 and GW2. They've crafted a rich and plentiful universe to tell their tales in, they've created games using a business model that allows people to purchase the game once and play forever without a subscription (I'm still waiting for WoW to catch up with that - they manage to get ppl to pay for the game / expansions / subscriptions / addon services / and now an items market ALSO??? That's just greedy. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy wow, I just didn't see why I should be spending my money on that when something equally good was available. of course, I could always play SWTOR(Sub) or Allods(F2P) too, since they are probably the best made WoW clones. I have SWTOR on preorder, just because its star wars.
All three of these were successful in their own rights, perhaps not monetary success, but innovative success none-the-less. However, I'm pretty sure that GW1 did okay for itself in sales.
First off, if you don't like it... DON'T PLAY IT... no need to cry about it, it's not like they stole your lunch money or anything.
I personally LOVE GW1 and can't wait for GW2. I enjoy the fact that I can dual class, which i can't do in most games (runescape excluded), I love being able to solo stuff since my individual class can handle several roles at a given time, and that seems to increase with the developments in GW2, and I love the fact that GW1 and the upcoming GW2 are very "story-centric". It doesn't control the game, nor does it take away from the game, but the strong primary story line narrative gives the games a purpose (not just making it seem like you're grinding your way up so you can get better gear)
GW1 's story kicks the a$$ of most any other game out there, and GW2 has amazing art, an incredible story and universe, the classes are cool, the combat and the "not removal" but "dispersal" of the holy trinity functions seems intriguing. I would imagine that anyone who enjoys strategic gameplay would relish the idea of being able to heal themselves, assist other players, throw down local buffs and debuffs, use their own class specific tank ability and still do some dps. In my opinion, the trinity plays more of a "paper / rock/ scissors" role than anything. This gives the victory, not to the person lucky enough to be on top, but the person who is strategically smarter.
Plus, until you've played the game yourself, in demo, beta or whatever form you can get your hands on, you have no business ridiculing something you have no idea about. You might also want to try to actually watch some of the developer narrated gameplay videos out there. I don't see how a semi-intelligent person can watch the gameplay, listen to their reasoning for the game development decisions, and still not at least understand what it is that they're offering to people.
If it's not your type of game, then fine, but don't rag on it when you're completely uninformed because it's not like your favorite game out there. There are currently TONS of different MMOs out there on the market, from P2P to F2P, surely you can find one that you enjoy, and keep your negativity about the ones you don't like to yourself.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot people don't give two shits for innovation? (The kind you're talking about at least) So long as a game is fun.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot of people DO, and that for them, the conventional standard of MMOs is NOT fun? I am thrilled for you that the combat in SWTOR will make you happy. Go play it when it comes out and have a blast! WoW-like combat, for me, is not satisfying any longer, now that I know that there are no technical limitations requiring that games operate that way.
Read below.
Your concern is noted; your concern that those of us looking forward to GW2 will be utterly disappointed when we find out the gameplay is exactly the same as every other tab-targetting MMO that preceded it (exactly the same, of course, except for the ways in which it is different). Thanks for the warning. Some of us have played the demo too, however, and have as much an idea of what we are getting into as you do.
I don't believe I said utterly disappointed, I said those that think the game will be the next WoW (or something along that line) will more then likly be disappointed.
Not at all, I know that there are people who are tired of the trinity, however MILLIONS (if not billions) of gamers have not played MMOs.
One of the major complaints I had personally against GW1 was the PvE. It felt dull and boring compared to games that had multiplayer trinity.
seems like, Anet wanted to slowly remove the trinity with their first game, but from my point of view, I am not sure the outcome was what Anet wanted. Yes I know the fans of GW will love anything about GW1, but to be honest, I felt as if the PvE in GW1 was nothing but a Zergfest Starcraft style.
Well now, going into GW2, Anet removes yet another trinity role. Now its straight up DPS Zerging down task. Everything will just be Zerg zerg zerg.
even in instances, this will show more. Didnt a Developer mention they they completed a dungeon using less players than was allowed? yeah, I am seeing more red flags about GW2's PvE.
Also I remember Anet talking about Dynamic Events, and how they were removing all quest, and the Symbols above NPC head. Well down the road, they reverted that for some reason. I viewed a video of Dynamic Event in action,,, and I couldnt believe it,,, it was basically a group quest like Warhammer has, but with better animation. I just a bit cautious about the hype going into this. Sad to say, but DE in GW2 seem like a more flashy Group Quest/Rift. The same mechanics are at play, but only more flashier. but that still would be an improvment off of Warhammer and Rift,
but as been proven by those two games as well, it may be fun for the first few times, but it gets old and repetitive after a while.
I am just not sure how long PvE in GW2 will hold up.
Yeah I know its B2P,,, I have also heard that excuse a lot when it comes to defending these concerns. Thats why I made that thread about "B2P MMO are immune to criticism "
Well if all Anet needs is my Box money, what give the impression that they will make PvE gameplay design decisions that fit the "Everlasting" theme of this genre? they been proven before to make static finite PvE designs in Guild Wars 1, so how am I to have faith in a company like Anet to leave their box. Thats like asking Bioware to make a RPG that is more Gameplay focused than Story Focused. Anet also has a history, of being Anti-traditional. Well What if their ideas dont kick off like they wanted. Will Anet's over ego, and blind hatred towards traditional themes, hamper their decisions for taking the right steps in the future? Because I have seen this same Over Ego Development with (Warhammer, Nintendo, Guild Wars 1) and none of them lived up to the hype of their ego centric hatred for traditional concepts.
If you haven't fought the new mobs that were put in the "Winds of Change" update and you don't know the concept of creating coherent "builds" in GW1 then I consider your opinion invalid.
EDIT: You know, I actually didn't read the entirety of your post because I just felt you didn't know what you were talking about but then I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt and I kept reading and then it proved my opinion even more... you really have no idea what you're talking about.
"Will Anet's over ego, and blind hatred towards traditional themes, hamper their decisions for taking the right steps in the future? Because I have seen this same Over Ego Development with (Warhammer, Nintendo, Guild Wars 1) and none of them lived up to the hype of their ego centric hatred for traditional concepts."
One thing you have completely wrong is "Anet's over ego and blind hatred". Seriously? Where the hell did you get that impression from? If anything their design philosophy is to keep things that work, fix things that don't and create new things for the things that are already stale. You can this everywhere in their design, they still have tab targeting, the still have health bars and Ui, they still have a similar crafting system to the other MMOs, they still have a trinity albeit a new type of trinity. You don't become a good game designer by just running around pushing your chest out and changing everything. If they did that then I don't think many people would even be excited for GW2.
I just want to point out that the OP hasn't returned to answer for the epic amount of ignorance crammed into one post. To have that much mis-information as the opening of what had to be a troll is pretty bad. After reading all 9 pages of responces it dawned on me that the OP hasn't had an ounce of input into his own discussion. Just sayen.....
I just want to point out that the OP hasn't returned to answer for the epic amount of ignorance crammed into one post. To have that much mis-information as the opening of what had to be a troll is pretty bad. After reading all 9 pages of responces it dawned on me that the OP hasn't had an ounce of input into his own discussion. Just sayen.....
He rarely does. It's kind of his thing, popping up all over the forums, creating controversial discussions, then moving on to the next subject.
lol Exposed you came to this sub forum and posted this? Good luck man. More power to you. Everything is flat out theory crafting right now and when ArenaNET basically says Guild Wars sucked to the point they had to completely re do it with GW2 that should be your hint.
Let them remove the healr roll in MMORPG and see how it goes. If it pays off we are better for it. If it back fires we are stuck with the trinity easily for another 10 years before anyon tries anything different.
GW2 fans REFUSE to falt out admit that only other dynamic game on the market is Rift. Sorry guys, but ArenaNET is not looking at WoW to figure out how to do this dynamic world stuff because they have ZERO. They are looking at Rift and War PQ's to figure out how to make it work.
If I were an ArenaNET dev I would be playing Rift 8 hours a day/7 days a week trying to figure out what works and what pisses people off. This genre has been dominated by ONE game and Rift is about it for another game that was not down to 4 servers after 4 months. Somethings work and some things do not.
SWToR will be the next MMO to study, but I can not even tell you if their world will be completely dead and no reason to leave the cities. Rift is is a perfect place to draw from and expand on. I tell you right now. They try and make consequences permamnent and I do not think this mmo generation can handle it.
GW2 came about for two reasons. First, they had an idea for dynamic events but they didn't want to change the mission structure that people were used to in GW1. Second, they couldn't build do everything they wanted to do with the engine that they had. It's frankly ridiculous to suggest that the existence of GW2 means that GW1 sucked. Grand Theft Auto 3 is 3D whereas the first two are top-down. Do the originals suck because they ended up being completely reformatted? Or were they good for what they were and then supplanted by a better idea?
As far as GW2 needing to learn from Rift goes, consider this. In August of last year at Gamescom, GW2 was unveiling The Shatterer, an open world dynamic event boss fight that took place after a long chain and allowed for an unlimited number of participants. The dynamic event was also affected by other related DE chains and whether those were successful at repairing the mortar emplacements around the battlefield. This was unveiled 6 months before Rift was released.
Btw, for comparison, not much footage of Rift is available from the same Gamescom, but this is one that I found. That rift just isn't quite the same as the dragon I don't think.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I just want to point out that the OP hasn't returned to answer for the epic amount of ignorance crammed into one post. To have that much mis-information as the opening of what had to be a troll is pretty bad. After reading all 9 pages of responces it dawned on me that the OP hasn't had an ounce of input into his own discussion. Just sayen.....
I predicted that in page 2-3 depending on you posts per page, would have done it in post #2 of the thread, but I was having dinner
Games like Halo and COD havn't changed their basic formula in 10 years yet they are still selling like hot cakes.
Your generalizations are funny as heck, so you are saying that not one Halo or CoD fan likes watching to see what changes are going to happen in the next version of the game. And do you know there is a big difference between basic formula and the game not changing at all. In fact anyone with a few minutes of free time can do a Google search and find game play changes that were made in each version of the series. Now why do they change the game play you might ask, because for anything to survive it needs innovation to take place! If you do not believe that go do a search yourself and find out what changed between Halo 2 and Halo 3.
Or I can give you another example of a series where the formula has not changed, but the game play has, and the fans talk about those changes. Look up the series of Gears of War, the last one is coming out soon Gear of War 3. Now Gears of War 3 uses the same formula as Gears of War 1, it is a story based third person shooter with a cover system. Now that is not what the fans of that series are talking about they are talking about the game play changes that are taking place between gears of war 2 and 3. The biggest game play change is horde 2.0 something most fans of this series is raving about. So how come the game play formula did not change but the game play has, and the fans are excited for it, if your generalizing is right?
In conclusion to say that every Halo fan and CoD fan does not look to see what changes are going to happen in the next game, is short sighted at best! And to link basic formula staying the same to the game not changing at all is downright stupid!
Originally posted by Happyguy83
GW2 isn't doing anything that hasn't been done before in single player games, but people act like its will revolutionive the damn genre.
For some one that just mentioned WoW and this sentence together and did not catch the connection, is beyond funny.
Let’s analyze this sentence and compare it to WoW, “GW2 isn't doing anything that hasn't been done before in single player games”. OK to start off if we replace GW2 in this sentence with WoW does it hold true. Yes it does, because WoW did not do anything at all that had not been done before by a previous game. So we could change that sentence to “WoW didn’t do anything that hadn’t been done before in single player or multiplayer games.
Now for the next part “but people act like its will revolutionize the damn genre.” Now if we take this statement and look at WoW we can see that it is completely false! WoW did not do anything new but it did revolutionize the genre. Basically disqualifying the sentence as opinion and making it nothing but nonsense since history can prove it to be 100% false.
Now do not get me wrong I am not saying GW2 will be the next big thing, that is still up in the air and I personally give it 50/50 in odds at succeeding. But the fact you had that sentence in the same paragraph as WoW, is completely hilarious since WoW did exactly what you just said.
Originally posted by Happyguy83
Not at all, I know that there are people who are tired of the trinity, however MILLIONS (if not billions) of gamers have not played MMOs.
That is true there are millions of people not playing MMOs, and if we take a look at why they are not playing, we can figure out why they are doing what they are doing. One fact that can come up is maybe they are not playing because they do not see the game play of MMOs as appealing. So then wouldn’t it make since to change the game play to try and draw in the ones that feel this way?
To me this is common sense, will it work for ANet, no one can say for sure. But it at least is an attempt to do something
different to draw in new blood into this genre. Now for someone that likes MMO you would think this would be a good thing. After all doesn’t Anet’s manifesto say “if you do not like MMOs you will want to check out GW2, and if you like MMOs you will want to check out MMOs”.
Now you really have to ask yourself is it really such a bad thing that ANet is trying to get people to try their game that has looked at previous MMOs and did not find them appealing? Because by the way your acting you are making it sound like ANet is doing a bad thing here!
Games like Halo and COD havn't changed their basic formula in 10 years yet they are still selling like hot cakes.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot people don't give two shits for innovation? (The kind you're talking about at least) So long as a game is fun. The problem with WAR, AION, and RIFT wern't that they used 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and the Holy Trinity. The problem was that they were emulating WoW and not doing anything else, You make it sound as if people are tired of the things that EQ1 and WoW did yet you ignore that people have been playing the same FPS game for the last 10 years, Hell Dragon Age: Origin sold great and it was using a play set designed (what was it?) 30 years ago, still a great game, same with Never Winter Knights and a lot of other games that use the D&D rulesets.
As far as it being hard to program GW2 I would have to say it isn't when you look at game mechanics. You don't have to enter in any coding for spell aggro or have any advance aggro table and I am sure that takes time to set up. But IDK if someone wants to correct me feel free.
Now I respect what you have said in the span of this thread Happyguy83, most of it made sense. Think think I’m having a problem with here is the way you see MMO games. MMO is not a genre, like Jeff Strain said on Games Convention 2007.
".....you should accept that "MMO" is a technology, not a game design. It still feels like many MMOs are trying to build on the fundamental designs established by UO and EQ in the late '90s. In the heyday of Doom and Quake we all eventually realized that "3D" was a technology, distinct from the "FPS," which was a game design. It's time we accepted that for MMOs as well."
The FPS games like Halo and COD are build on a very simple mechanic, shoot people. Don't really think it's fare to say if it works for FPS it will work for MMOs. I could go and explain why, but I think you're smart enough to realize this.
The reason why I personally am interested in GW2 is because I’m tired of the same old mmo's. I want something new that's GOOD. And you're right to be concerned, so am i. And i'm with you that it is wrong to smack talk all the other mmo's out there, because they're not GW2. I didn't enjoy Rift and that wasn't because i thought it was a bad game it was because it wasn't new enough. I didn't get that exiting feeling i used to get when i first logged it to a new mmo. And I believe I will get that the first time I log into GW2.
".....you should accept that "MMO" is a technology, not a game design. It still feels like many MMOs are trying to build on the fundamental designs established by UO and EQ in the late '90s. In the heyday of Doom and Quake we all eventually realized that "3D" was a technology, distinct from the "FPS," which was a game design. It's time we accepted that for MMOs as well."
.
That's a pretty good quote, as it's very logical, not to mention true. I just don't think it applies to the MMO"RPG", which IMO is very much a game design.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
I should have been more specific in my statement. When I said "sucked and they had to release GW2" I meant that they had done what they could with the game. Just the same way WoW is showing some serious age and just not able to compete anymore the original Guild Wars is doing the same.
Also when I say they should be watching Rift I mean watching it on it's live release. Watching how public grouping works, what type of exploits people found that had to be fixed, and various other things they have done. Like I pointed out. Name another mmo out there who has tried this dynamic stuff? They have very very very little to draw on when it comes to having this stuff live and up and running in a major mmo setting.
".....you should accept that "MMO" is a technology, not a game design. It still feels like many MMOs are trying to build on the fundamental designs established by UO and EQ in the late '90s. In the heyday of Doom and Quake we all eventually realized that "3D" was a technology, distinct from the "FPS," which was a game design. It's time we accepted that for MMOs as well."
.
That's a pretty good quote, as it's very logical, not to mention true. I just don't think it applies to the MMO"RPG", which IMO is very much a game design.
But even within the genre of mmoRPG, there could be a lot more variety. Single-player RPGs aren't all the same, there's plenty of different styles, gameplay differences, settings. A FinalFantasy is quite different from a Baldur's Gate.
".....you should accept that "MMO" is a technology, not a game design. It still feels like many MMOs are trying to build on the fundamental designs established by UO and EQ in the late '90s. In the heyday of Doom and Quake we all eventually realized that "3D" was a technology, distinct from the "FPS," which was a game design. It's time we accepted that for MMOs as well."
.
That's a pretty good quote, as it's very logical, not to mention true. I just don't think it applies to the MMO"RPG", which IMO is very much a game design.
But even within the genre of mmoRPG, there could be a lot more variety. Single-player RPGs aren't all the same, there's plenty of different styles, gameplay differences, settings. A FinalFantasy is quite different from a Baldur's Gate.
Sure but they'd be sub-genres of a genre would they not?
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
".....you should accept that "MMO" is a technology, not a game design. It still feels like many MMOs are trying to build on the fundamental designs established by UO and EQ in the late '90s. In the heyday of Doom and Quake we all eventually realized that "3D" was a technology, distinct from the "FPS," which was a game design. It's time we accepted that for MMOs as well."
.
That's a pretty good quote, as it's very logical, not to mention true. I just don't think it applies to the MMO"RPG", which IMO is very much a game design.
But even within the genre of mmoRPG, there could be a lot more variety. Single-player RPGs aren't all the same, there's plenty of different styles, gameplay differences, settings. A FinalFantasy is quite different from a Baldur's Gate.
Sure but they'd be sub-genres of a genre would they not?
You can call it that if you like. My point was, there aren't enough of them.
I think people didnt like rift on this site because the majority of people who frequent this place are looking for something different. And Rift basically introduced the same style of gameplay but with better graphics.
This is what I dislike about this site (Amoung other things {Looking at you Hype meter} [Srsly how can something be 8.73 hype?]), the fact that a lot of people here make sweeping statements about what People want to see in next gen MMOs (Hence all the TOR/RIFT/WoW vs GW2 threads) while ignoring the fact that most people don't care about basic game mechanics as long as the game itself is fun, GW2 isn't doing anything that hasn't been done before in single player games, but people act like its will revolutionive the damn genre. If people did care about basic game mechanics then games like COD and Halo would have died out years ago, even games like RIFT shouldn't have done as well as it is according to this site.
also dont argue any points on GW2 with evidence from GW1, if you've seen the videos and articles than you knwo they are different enough in terms of gameplay that they should be talked about as seperate entities (except for lore)
Said above makes me more irrate then anything else on the interewebs.
As far as I am concerned its one thing to be waiting egerly for a game, its another to critisize every other game because its not the one you are looking forward to.
Funny, you attack this guy for saying "the majority of people who frequent this place are looking for something different" because it was "a sweeping statement about what people want to see in next gen MMOs."
Question for you. Couldn't your claim that "most people don't care about basic game mechanics as long as the game itself is fun" also be considered "a sweeping statement about what people want to see in next gen MMOs?"
Thats common sense I thought, Unless you wouldn't play a game you found fun unless it was different then a game you played five years ago. I didn't turn my head at all the other Halo games even though they were basically the same exact thing as the previous, and I don't think people should do so with MMOs. I think its narrow minded.
Also, the person you're responding to isn't even inconsistent with what you're saying. The majority of people might not care about game mechanics which is why CoD and Halo are popular. However, what they said which is the majority of people who frequent this site, people who not coincidentally are only here because they don't have an MMO they'd rather be playing instead, probably do want something different.
GW2 might or might not revolutionize the genre, but claiming that it won't revolutionize the MMO genre because you can find a long list of single player games who have each individually done one aspect of what they're doing makes absolutely no sense.
There is more the revolutoinizing something then changing it Pixar and Dreamworks revolutionized animated movies and made them enjoyable for adults, WoW revolutionized the entire gaming world when it showed that an MMO could be the success that it is. GW1 showed that you can have a good MMO with a B2P payment model, Halo showed that you could have a FPS on a console (I know that james bond game was basically the first but Halo was the first mainsteam game to do it). SWTOR is showing that you can have a heavy story based MMO without sacrificing the rest of the game mechanics and so on.
Thanks for backing me up cali59
Personally happyguy, I find your post to be a bit narrow minded. In every upcoming game there will be people who give it more credit than it probubly deserves. Such as when people call GW2 the WoW killer. Or skyrim the second coming. But just because these people are riding the hype train to "unreasonable assumtion land" doesnt mean you have to critisize the rest of the fanbase for being excited for it.
If your trying to tell us that we shouldnt be so optimistic or we will hurt our selves than you should know that many of the people who post the most on this site have been dissapointed by several MMO's before. Thats one of the biggest reasons why Guild Wars 2 has held its "hype" for so long on this site, because the hardened MMO gamers who frequent it found GW2 to be what they where looking for, and considering how much information has been given about the game its truly remarcable how justified their opinions on it are (considering how many games receive hype with little to no information about the game).
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot people don't give two shits for innovation? (The kind you're talking about at least) So long as a game is fun.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot of people DO, and that for them, the conventional standard of MMOs is NOT fun? I am thrilled for you that the combat in SWTOR will make you happy. Go play it when it comes out and have a blast! WoW-like combat, for me, is not satisfying any longer, now that I know that there are no technical limitations requiring that games operate that way.
Read below.
Your concern is noted; your concern that those of us looking forward to GW2 will be utterly disappointed when we find out the gameplay is exactly the same as every other tab-targetting MMO that preceded it (exactly the same, of course, except for the ways in which it is different). Thanks for the warning. Some of us have played the demo too, however, and have as much an idea of what we are getting into as you do.
I don't believe I said utterly disappointed, I said those that think the game will be the next WoW (or something along that line) will more then likly be disappointed.
Not at all, I know that there are people who are tired of the trinity, however MILLIONS (if not billions) of gamers have not played MMOs.
GW2 is aiming to interest MMO and non-MMO gamers alike, and has more than enough features to interest non-MMO gamers than having to focus on something they might not have heard of.
I personally say good riddance to the "holy trinity" in gaming. It's not so much because of the mechanics, but the way it divided people, and certain personality types, into different job functions. This normally wouldn't be such a bad thing, but it puts the power and control into the wrong type of people.
Take for instance the tank. The tank is one of the most important roles in the trinity, and it attracts the most self absorbed, megalomaniac people to perform this role. These people think that nobody is as important as them, and won't let anybody forget it. Well news flash for the self-absorbed, everybody is important. So get off your high horse and join the real world to get the job done. I am so sick of these people I just cringe everytime I see our group even think about pug'ing a tank. They complain when they suck at their job, they blame everyone else for their lack of ability. Shut up, do your job and keep the aggro off the people actually doing the work, or just simply uninstall the game and spend your time posing in the mirror.
Then there are the healers. These are the personality types of the underacheiver. They can't handle the actual constant work of dps, so they take on the responsibility of sending out a heal when the tank doesn't do his job. Seriously, could a job be any easier? The only reason that they have to work at all is that most of the tanks don't know what they are doing. So what if we lose the healers, it's pretty much just a job they made up for the people that don't have a real role to fill.
DPS is the workers. This is the personality type that like to get down to it and get the work done. Dps are the main role in any MMORPG and justifiably so. They are the ones that actually accomplish something, and my hat goes off to all the REAL players in the MMO's out there. Good luck accomplishing anything with just a tank and a healer. lol!
So anyhow, the roles themselves may not seem like a problem, the trinity can seem to make sense, but because of the personality types that get put into positions of power, I think it's a bad system. I applaud Anet for trying to move away from catering to these types of people. It doesn't mean that these people can't play the game either, but it doesn't put them into positions where the real players have to put up with their bad attitude because of necessity. I know the world is made up of all kinds, but I don't like being ordered about just because somebody has an ego problem, or we're stuck waiting around for another underacheiver to get his butt in gear.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I personally say good riddance to the "holy trinity" in gaming. It's not so much because of the mechanics, but the way it divided people, and certain personality types, into different job functions. This normally wouldn't be such a bad thing, but it puts the power and control into the wrong type of people.
Take for instance the tank. The tank is one of the most important roles in the trinity, and it attracts the most self absorbed, megalomaniac people to perform this role. These people think that nobody is as important as them, and won't let anybody forget it. Well news flash for the self-absorbed, everybody is important. So get off your high horse and join the real world to get the job done. I am so sick of these people I just cringe everytime I see our group even think about pug'ing a tank. They complain when they suck at their job, they blame everyone else for their lack of ability. Shut up, do your job and keep the aggro off the people actually doing the work, or just simply uninstall the game and spend your time posing in the mirror.
Then there are the healers. These are the personality types of the underacheiver. They can't handle the actual constant work of dps, so they take on the responsibility of sending out a heal when the tank doesn't do his job. Seriously, could a job be any easier? The only reason that they have to work at all is that most of the tanks don't know what they are doing. So what if we lose the healers, it's pretty much just a job they made up for the people that don't have a real role to fill.
DPS is the workers. This is the personality type that like to get down to it and get the work done. Dps are the main role in any MMORPG and justifiably so. They are the ones that actually accomplish something, and my hat goes off to all the REAL players in the MMO's out there. Good luck accomplishing anything with just a tank and a healer. lol!
So anyhow, the roles themselves may not seem like a problem, the trinity can seem to make sense, but because of the personality types that get put into positions of power, I think it's a bad system. I applaud Anet for trying to move away from catering to these types of people. It doesn't mean that these people can't play the game either, but it doesn't put them into positions where the real players have to put up with their bad attitude because of necessity. I know the world is made up of all kinds, but I don't like being ordered about just because somebody has an ego problem, or we're stuck waiting around for another underacheiver to get his butt in gear.
While I can agree with you for the most part.... I won't. You make it crystal clear what role you like but to try to sum people up this way is funny, I am an altohaulic and a go getter for any guild I run with. Guild is short on any role I have one in waiting. I like to play different roles and I don't think I fall into a single one of your categories. While I have seen tanks with the behavior you describe, I have seen the same amount from DPS with their epeen and constant pointing out of who is doing more damage, forgetting that they are also pulling threat because they are trying to prove who is the bigger prick. Just sayen DPS aint all work and no play.
I love playing healer more than tanking. And I am not an under acheiver. I feel a game like wow has gotten it wrong because good healing doesn't stand out with addons that make the job a sleepwalk. I just always enjoyed the rewards of playing the class and pulling the stupid dps's asses outta the fire because they overspam, or don't wait, and pull threat only to QQ when they almost die. Dipshits. Not to mention the DPS that underachieve by being there but watching porn in the background and only half assing it cause they can get away with it. I used to love seeing DPS charge in and then when I would move the fight, theyd be standing there not attacking shit cause they went afk. Tank and healer can't do that.
It's all about the person not the role is my only point here. Sure some games foster and allow certain players to play a role and this can turn a nice person into a deuche by making them roll a tank for instance because the server seems short on tanks, but that still falls on the player not the role. I am also very glad GW is giving us a break from this type of gameplay.
While I can agree with you for the most part.... I won't. You make it crystal clear what role you like but to try to sum people up this way is funny, I am an altohaulic and a go getter for any guild I run with. Guild is short on any role I have one in waiting. I like to play different roles and I don't think I fall into a single one of your categories. While I have seen tanks with the behavior you describe, I have seen the same amount from DPS with their epeen and constant pointing out of who is doing more damage, forgetting that they are also pulling threat because they are trying to prove who is the bigger prick. Just sayen DPS aint all work and no play.
I love playing healer more than tanking. And I am not an under acheiver. I feel a game like wow has gotten it wrong because good healing doesn't stand out with addons that make the job a sleepwalk. I just always enjoyed the rewards of playing the class and pulling the stupid dps's asses outta the fire because they overspam, or don't wait, and pull threat only to QQ when they almost die. Dipshits. Not to mention the DPS that underachieve by being there but watching porn in the background and only half assing it cause they can get away with it. I used to love seeing DPS charge in and then when I would move the fight, theyd be standing there not attacking shit cause they went afk. Tank and healer can't do that.
It's all about the person not the role is my only point here. Sure some games foster and allow certain players to play a role and this can turn a nice person into a deuche by making them roll a tank for instance because the server seems short on tanks, but that still falls on the player not the role. I am also very glad GW is giving us a break from this type of gameplay.
I probably came across a little more brazen then I should have, but it's not that people of any role can't be jerks, it's that the tendency for particular personality types to adhere to certain roles, and those roles being critical.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I probably came across a little more brazen then I should have, but it's not that people of any role can't be jerks, it's that the tendency for particular personality types to adhere to certain roles, and those roles being critical.
Yeah that was the part I actually agreed with you on. You do tend to see it a lot, especially when servers of said game are short on a role. Like when WoW introduced the dungeon finder tool and tanks decided it was ok to try to sell their services for shorter ques.... really wtf they needed others just like others needed them they just didn't have to wait. this fostered a shitty community to get worse. I actually never spammed but I had a tendacy to switch to a tank and run for free when I saw that. I guess I could have been called a jerk for that but w/e.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot people don't give two shits for innovation? (The kind you're talking about at least) So long as a game is fun.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot of people DO, and that for them, the conventional standard of MMOs is NOT fun? I am thrilled for you that the combat in SWTOR will make you happy. Go play it when it comes out and have a blast! WoW-like combat, for me, is not satisfying any longer, now that I know that there are no technical limitations requiring that games operate that way.
Read below.
Your concern is noted; your concern that those of us looking forward to GW2 will be utterly disappointed when we find out the gameplay is exactly the same as every other tab-targetting MMO that preceded it (exactly the same, of course, except for the ways in which it is different). Thanks for the warning. Some of us have played the demo too, however, and have as much an idea of what we are getting into as you do.
I don't believe I said utterly disappointed, I said those that think the game will be the next WoW (or something along that line) will more then likly be disappointed.
Not at all, I know that there are people who are tired of the trinity, however MILLIONS (if not billions) of gamers have not played MMOs.
GW2 is aiming to interest MMO and non-MMO gamers alike, and has more than enough features to interest non-MMO gamers than having to focus on something they might not have heard of.
All MMOs aim at Non-MMO gamers, I don't believe that there is a single person here that plays only MMOs. I don't see how an MMO is any less appealing to a gamer then say Rome: Total War.
Comments
lol Exposed you came to this sub forum and posted this? Good luck man. More power to you. Everything is flat out theory crafting right now and when ArenaNET basically says Guild Wars sucked to the point they had to completely re do it with GW2 that should be your hint.
Let them remove the healr roll in MMORPG and see how it goes. If it pays off we are better for it. If it back fires we are stuck with the trinity easily for another 10 years before anyon tries anything different.
GW2 fans REFUSE to falt out admit that only other dynamic game on the market is Rift. Sorry guys, but ArenaNET is not looking at WoW to figure out how to do this dynamic world stuff because they have ZERO. They are looking at Rift and War PQ's to figure out how to make it work.
If I were an ArenaNET dev I would be playing Rift 8 hours a day/7 days a week trying to figure out what works and what pisses people off. This genre has been dominated by ONE game and Rift is about it for another game that was not down to 4 servers after 4 months. Somethings work and some things do not.
SWToR will be the next MMO to study, but I can not even tell you if their world will be completely dead and no reason to leave the cities. Rift is is a perfect place to draw from and expand on. I tell you right now. They try and make consequences permamnent and I do not think this mmo generation can handle it.
Games like Halo and COD havn't changed their basic formula in 10 years yet they are still selling like hot cakes.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot people don't give two shits for innovation? (The kind you're talking about at least) So long as a game is fun. The problem with WAR, AION, and RIFT wern't that they used 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and the Holy Trinity. The problem was that they were emulating WoW and not doing anything else, You make it sound as if people are tired of the things that EQ1 and WoW did yet you ignore that people have been playing the same FPS game for the last 10 years, Hell Dragon Age: Origin sold great and it was using a play set designed (what was it?) 30 years ago, still a great game, same with Never Winter Knights and a lot of other games that use the D&D rulesets.
As far as it being hard to program GW2 I would have to say it isn't when you look at game mechanics. You don't have to enter in any coding for spell aggro or have any advance aggro table and I am sure that takes time to set up. But IDK if someone wants to correct me feel free.
Wait till you say, and play the events. It's not the programming that's hard. It's coming up with stuff. Most game suffer from very unimaginative quests. One thing I know about Anet, from even playing GW 1...questing is not like in most games.
If I were interested in gear grind, I'd have become a watchmaker
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot of people DO, and that for them, the conventional standard of MMOs is NOT fun? I am thrilled for you that the combat in SWTOR will make you happy. Go play it when it comes out and have a blast! WoW-like combat, for me, is not satisfying any longer, now that I know that there are no technical limitations requiring that games operate that way.
Your concern is noted; your concern that those of us looking forward to GW2 will be utterly disappointed when we find out the gameplay is exactly the same as every other tab-targetting MMO that preceded it (exactly the same, of course, except for the ways in which it is different). Thanks for the warning. Some of us have played the demo too, however, and have as much an idea of what we are getting into as you do.
I agree completely with most of the responders on here. The thread starter needs to calm down and stop hating on everyone else (Arenanet / Nintendo / Warhammer).
Warhammer - although it may not have been successful, it still tried something new and inovative. It didn't fully work in their game, but it still helped to plant the seeds which have been further developed in games like Rift and now completely function DEs in GW2. It at least deserves credit for laying the groundwork for those that followed.
Nintendo - Some would think that after the Gamecube that they would have started to go the way of Sega, but they didn't they were the first on the scene with motion control. It was solid tech, it added fun and innovative gameplay, and it was accessible to EVERYONE. This was also a boon to some the hardcore fanbase, but it helped to mainstream the market for gamers, hell, my wife even plays games now, which allows for easier "discussions" about the importants of me getting new games. My point is, just because they may not be successful at everything, doesn't make them failures. I'm sure overall, Nintendo as a company, is doing just fine.
Arenanet - They've made GW1 and GW2. They've crafted a rich and plentiful universe to tell their tales in, they've created games using a business model that allows people to purchase the game once and play forever without a subscription (I'm still waiting for WoW to catch up with that - they manage to get ppl to pay for the game / expansions / subscriptions / addon services / and now an items market ALSO??? That's just greedy. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy wow, I just didn't see why I should be spending my money on that when something equally good was available. of course, I could always play SWTOR(Sub) or Allods(F2P) too, since they are probably the best made WoW clones. I have SWTOR on preorder, just because its star wars.
All three of these were successful in their own rights, perhaps not monetary success, but innovative success none-the-less. However, I'm pretty sure that GW1 did okay for itself in sales.
First off, if you don't like it... DON'T PLAY IT... no need to cry about it, it's not like they stole your lunch money or anything.
I personally LOVE GW1 and can't wait for GW2. I enjoy the fact that I can dual class, which i can't do in most games (runescape excluded), I love being able to solo stuff since my individual class can handle several roles at a given time, and that seems to increase with the developments in GW2, and I love the fact that GW1 and the upcoming GW2 are very "story-centric". It doesn't control the game, nor does it take away from the game, but the strong primary story line narrative gives the games a purpose (not just making it seem like you're grinding your way up so you can get better gear)
GW1 's story kicks the a$$ of most any other game out there, and GW2 has amazing art, an incredible story and universe, the classes are cool, the combat and the "not removal" but "dispersal" of the holy trinity functions seems intriguing. I would imagine that anyone who enjoys strategic gameplay would relish the idea of being able to heal themselves, assist other players, throw down local buffs and debuffs, use their own class specific tank ability and still do some dps. In my opinion, the trinity plays more of a "paper / rock/ scissors" role than anything. This gives the victory, not to the person lucky enough to be on top, but the person who is strategically smarter.
Plus, until you've played the game yourself, in demo, beta or whatever form you can get your hands on, you have no business ridiculing something you have no idea about. You might also want to try to actually watch some of the developer narrated gameplay videos out there. I don't see how a semi-intelligent person can watch the gameplay, listen to their reasoning for the game development decisions, and still not at least understand what it is that they're offering to people.
If it's not your type of game, then fine, but don't rag on it when you're completely uninformed because it's not like your favorite game out there. There are currently TONS of different MMOs out there on the market, from P2P to F2P, surely you can find one that you enjoy, and keep your negativity about the ones you don't like to yourself.
Not at all, I know that there are people who are tired of the trinity, however MILLIONS (if not billions) of gamers have not played MMOs.
If you haven't fought the new mobs that were put in the "Winds of Change" update and you don't know the concept of creating coherent "builds" in GW1 then I consider your opinion invalid.
EDIT: You know, I actually didn't read the entirety of your post because I just felt you didn't know what you were talking about but then I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt and I kept reading and then it proved my opinion even more... you really have no idea what you're talking about.
"Will Anet's over ego, and blind hatred towards traditional themes, hamper their decisions for taking the right steps in the future? Because I have seen this same Over Ego Development with (Warhammer, Nintendo, Guild Wars 1) and none of them lived up to the hype of their ego centric hatred for traditional concepts."
One thing you have completely wrong is "Anet's over ego and blind hatred". Seriously? Where the hell did you get that impression from? If anything their design philosophy is to keep things that work, fix things that don't and create new things for the things that are already stale. You can this everywhere in their design, they still have tab targeting, the still have health bars and Ui, they still have a similar crafting system to the other MMOs, they still have a trinity albeit a new type of trinity. You don't become a good game designer by just running around pushing your chest out and changing everything. If they did that then I don't think many people would even be excited for GW2.
This is not a game.
I just want to point out that the OP hasn't returned to answer for the epic amount of ignorance crammed into one post. To have that much mis-information as the opening of what had to be a troll is pretty bad. After reading all 9 pages of responces it dawned on me that the OP hasn't had an ounce of input into his own discussion. Just sayen.....
RIP Jimmy "The Rev" Sullivan and Paul Gray.
He rarely does. It's kind of his thing, popping up all over the forums, creating controversial discussions, then moving on to the next subject.
GW2 came about for two reasons. First, they had an idea for dynamic events but they didn't want to change the mission structure that people were used to in GW1. Second, they couldn't build do everything they wanted to do with the engine that they had. It's frankly ridiculous to suggest that the existence of GW2 means that GW1 sucked. Grand Theft Auto 3 is 3D whereas the first two are top-down. Do the originals suck because they ended up being completely reformatted? Or were they good for what they were and then supplanted by a better idea?
As far as GW2 needing to learn from Rift goes, consider this. In August of last year at Gamescom, GW2 was unveiling The Shatterer, an open world dynamic event boss fight that took place after a long chain and allowed for an unlimited number of participants. The dynamic event was also affected by other related DE chains and whether those were successful at repairing the mortar emplacements around the battlefield. This was unveiled 6 months before Rift was released.
Btw, for comparison, not much footage of Rift is available from the same Gamescom, but this is one that I found. That rift just isn't quite the same as the dragon I don't think.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I predicted that in page 2-3 depending on you posts per page, would have done it in post #2 of the thread, but I was having dinner
"I am not a robot. I am a unicorn."
Your generalizations are funny as heck, so you are saying that not one Halo or CoD fan likes watching to see what changes are going to happen in the next version of the game. And do you know there is a big difference between basic formula and the game not changing at all. In fact anyone with a few minutes of free time can do a Google search and find game play changes that were made in each version of the series. Now why do they change the game play you might ask, because for anything to survive it needs innovation to take place! If you do not believe that go do a search yourself and find out what changed between Halo 2 and Halo 3.
Or I can give you another example of a series where the formula has not changed, but the game play has, and the fans talk about those changes. Look up the series of Gears of War, the last one is coming out soon Gear of War 3. Now Gears of War 3 uses the same formula as Gears of War 1, it is a story based third person shooter with a cover system. Now that is not what the fans of that series are talking about they are talking about the game play changes that are taking place between gears of war 2 and 3. The biggest game play change is horde 2.0 something most fans of this series is raving about. So how come the game play formula did not change but the game play has, and the fans are excited for it, if your generalizing is right?
In conclusion to say that every Halo fan and CoD fan does not look to see what changes are going to happen in the next game, is short sighted at best! And to link basic formula staying the same to the game not changing at all is downright stupid!
For some one that just mentioned WoW and this sentence together and did not catch the connection, is beyond funny.
Let’s analyze this sentence and compare it to WoW, “GW2 isn't doing anything that hasn't been done before in single player games”. OK to start off if we replace GW2 in this sentence with WoW does it hold true. Yes it does, because WoW did not do anything at all that had not been done before by a previous game. So we could change that sentence to “WoW didn’t do anything that hadn’t been done before in single player or multiplayer games.
Now for the next part “but people act like its will revolutionize the damn genre.” Now if we take this statement and look at WoW we can see that it is completely false! WoW did not do anything new but it did revolutionize the genre. Basically disqualifying the sentence as opinion and making it nothing but nonsense since history can prove it to be 100% false.
Now do not get me wrong I am not saying GW2 will be the next big thing, that is still up in the air and I personally give it 50/50 in odds at succeeding. But the fact you had that sentence in the same paragraph as WoW, is completely hilarious since WoW did exactly what you just said.
That is true there are millions of people not playing MMOs, and if we take a look at why they are not playing, we can figure out why they are doing what they are doing. One fact that can come up is maybe they are not playing because they do not see the game play of MMOs as appealing. So then wouldn’t it make since to change the game play to try and draw in the ones that feel this way?
To me this is common sense, will it work for ANet, no one can say for sure. But it at least is an attempt to do something
different to draw in new blood into this genre. Now for someone that likes MMO you would think this would be a good thing. After all doesn’t Anet’s manifesto say “if you do not like MMOs you will want to check out GW2, and if you like MMOs you will want to check out MMOs”.
Now you really have to ask yourself is it really such a bad thing that ANet is trying to get people to try their game that has looked at previous MMOs and did not find them appealing? Because by the way your acting you are making it sound like ANet is doing a bad thing here!
Now I respect what you have said in the span of this thread Happyguy83, most of it made sense. Think think I’m having a problem with here is the way you see MMO games. MMO is not a genre, like Jeff Strain said on Games Convention 2007.
".....you should accept that "MMO" is a technology, not a game design. It still feels like many MMOs are trying to build on the fundamental designs established by UO and EQ in the late '90s. In the heyday of Doom and Quake we all eventually realized that "3D" was a technology, distinct from the "FPS," which was a game design. It's time we accepted that for MMOs as well."
The FPS games like Halo and COD are build on a very simple mechanic, shoot people. Don't really think it's fare to say if it works for FPS it will work for MMOs. I could go and explain why, but I think you're smart enough to realize this.
The reason why I personally am interested in GW2 is because I’m tired of the same old mmo's. I want something new that's GOOD. And you're right to be concerned, so am i. And i'm with you that it is wrong to smack talk all the other mmo's out there, because they're not GW2. I didn't enjoy Rift and that wasn't because i thought it was a bad game it was because it wasn't new enough. I didn't get that exiting feeling i used to get when i first logged it to a new mmo. And I believe I will get that the first time I log into GW2.
That's a pretty good quote, as it's very logical, not to mention true. I just don't think it applies to the MMO"RPG", which IMO is very much a game design.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
I should have been more specific in my statement. When I said "sucked and they had to release GW2" I meant that they had done what they could with the game. Just the same way WoW is showing some serious age and just not able to compete anymore the original Guild Wars is doing the same.
Also when I say they should be watching Rift I mean watching it on it's live release. Watching how public grouping works, what type of exploits people found that had to be fixed, and various other things they have done. Like I pointed out. Name another mmo out there who has tried this dynamic stuff? They have very very very little to draw on when it comes to having this stuff live and up and running in a major mmo setting.
But even within the genre of mmoRPG, there could be a lot more variety. Single-player RPGs aren't all the same, there's plenty of different styles, gameplay differences, settings. A FinalFantasy is quite different from a Baldur's Gate.
Sure but they'd be sub-genres of a genre would they not?
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
You can call it that if you like. My point was, there aren't enough of them.
Thanks for backing me up cali59
Personally happyguy, I find your post to be a bit narrow minded. In every upcoming game there will be people who give it more credit than it probubly deserves. Such as when people call GW2 the WoW killer. Or skyrim the second coming. But just because these people are riding the hype train to "unreasonable assumtion land" doesnt mean you have to critisize the rest of the fanbase for being excited for it.
If your trying to tell us that we shouldnt be so optimistic or we will hurt our selves than you should know that many of the people who post the most on this site have been dissapointed by several MMO's before. Thats one of the biggest reasons why Guild Wars 2 has held its "hype" for so long on this site, because the hardened MMO gamers who frequent it found GW2 to be what they where looking for, and considering how much information has been given about the game its truly remarcable how justified their opinions on it are (considering how many games receive hype with little to no information about the game).
GW2 is aiming to interest MMO and non-MMO gamers alike, and has more than enough features to interest non-MMO gamers than having to focus on something they might not have heard of.
I personally say good riddance to the "holy trinity" in gaming. It's not so much because of the mechanics, but the way it divided people, and certain personality types, into different job functions. This normally wouldn't be such a bad thing, but it puts the power and control into the wrong type of people.
Take for instance the tank. The tank is one of the most important roles in the trinity, and it attracts the most self absorbed, megalomaniac people to perform this role. These people think that nobody is as important as them, and won't let anybody forget it. Well news flash for the self-absorbed, everybody is important. So get off your high horse and join the real world to get the job done. I am so sick of these people I just cringe everytime I see our group even think about pug'ing a tank. They complain when they suck at their job, they blame everyone else for their lack of ability. Shut up, do your job and keep the aggro off the people actually doing the work, or just simply uninstall the game and spend your time posing in the mirror.
Then there are the healers. These are the personality types of the underacheiver. They can't handle the actual constant work of dps, so they take on the responsibility of sending out a heal when the tank doesn't do his job. Seriously, could a job be any easier? The only reason that they have to work at all is that most of the tanks don't know what they are doing. So what if we lose the healers, it's pretty much just a job they made up for the people that don't have a real role to fill.
DPS is the workers. This is the personality type that like to get down to it and get the work done. Dps are the main role in any MMORPG and justifiably so. They are the ones that actually accomplish something, and my hat goes off to all the REAL players in the MMO's out there. Good luck accomplishing anything with just a tank and a healer. lol!
So anyhow, the roles themselves may not seem like a problem, the trinity can seem to make sense, but because of the personality types that get put into positions of power, I think it's a bad system. I applaud Anet for trying to move away from catering to these types of people. It doesn't mean that these people can't play the game either, but it doesn't put them into positions where the real players have to put up with their bad attitude because of necessity. I know the world is made up of all kinds, but I don't like being ordered about just because somebody has an ego problem, or we're stuck waiting around for another underacheiver to get his butt in gear.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
While I can agree with you for the most part.... I won't. You make it crystal clear what role you like but to try to sum people up this way is funny, I am an altohaulic and a go getter for any guild I run with. Guild is short on any role I have one in waiting. I like to play different roles and I don't think I fall into a single one of your categories. While I have seen tanks with the behavior you describe, I have seen the same amount from DPS with their epeen and constant pointing out of who is doing more damage, forgetting that they are also pulling threat because they are trying to prove who is the bigger prick. Just sayen DPS aint all work and no play.
I love playing healer more than tanking. And I am not an under acheiver. I feel a game like wow has gotten it wrong because good healing doesn't stand out with addons that make the job a sleepwalk. I just always enjoyed the rewards of playing the class and pulling the stupid dps's asses outta the fire because they overspam, or don't wait, and pull threat only to QQ when they almost die. Dipshits. Not to mention the DPS that underachieve by being there but watching porn in the background and only half assing it cause they can get away with it. I used to love seeing DPS charge in and then when I would move the fight, theyd be standing there not attacking shit cause they went afk. Tank and healer can't do that.
It's all about the person not the role is my only point here. Sure some games foster and allow certain players to play a role and this can turn a nice person into a deuche by making them roll a tank for instance because the server seems short on tanks, but that still falls on the player not the role. I am also very glad GW is giving us a break from this type of gameplay.
RIP Jimmy "The Rev" Sullivan and Paul Gray.
I probably came across a little more brazen then I should have, but it's not that people of any role can't be jerks, it's that the tendency for particular personality types to adhere to certain roles, and those roles being critical.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Yeah that was the part I actually agreed with you on. You do tend to see it a lot, especially when servers of said game are short on a role. Like when WoW introduced the dungeon finder tool and tanks decided it was ok to try to sell their services for shorter ques.... really wtf they needed others just like others needed them they just didn't have to wait. this fostered a shitty community to get worse. I actually never spammed but I had a tendacy to switch to a tank and run for free when I saw that. I guess I could have been called a jerk for that but w/e.
RIP Jimmy "The Rev" Sullivan and Paul Gray.
All MMOs aim at Non-MMO gamers, I don't believe that there is a single person here that plays only MMOs. I don't see how an MMO is any less appealing to a gamer then say Rome: Total War.