im with Novaseeker. thats how i feel about this game.
i dun care what you call it, it just understanding its not an MMORPG as the industry stands now.
i dont give a crap about what the actual name is i just mean its not a game like any of the large MMORPG titles out there atm.
and if your looking for something like that then you will be sorely disappionted with GW as I was.
i mean really, its all just context. i use the term MMORPG to describe a set of games that i know about.
i use the word 'blue' to describe a colour i know about, from examples of blue ive seen around. now ppl can agrue that something is blue or green or what the hell ever, im only using the term 'blue' as a POINT OF REFERENCE so i can RELATE WHAT IM SEEING TO SOMETHING I CAN IDENTIFY WITH.
this is what the whole 'is GW a MMORPG' debate misses, as do all the people that break up the word MMORPG and say 'well GW has all those elements (arugably) so its a MMORPG'.
its clearly NOT part of the genre that is the MMORPG scene. Novaseeker discusses it, i rant about and anyone thats actually played a MMORPG will agree it is 'different'.
as for content, player customisation and depth of character building, items, magic systems, story, PvP and pretty much anything else you dare to name GW is a light weight version of it. which it INTENDED to be from the start.
so dont go calling the light weight version by the name we use to discribe the HEAVYIEST OF HEAVYWEIGHTS in the gaming industry!!
Not really... Everquest II for example. Even you must agree that Everquest II fits into the MMORPG genre? Still, it has a simpler character creation and development than Guild Wars, almost making it loose the right to have RPG added in the end. You play a premade character decided by the devs, with little to no control over his skills.
So, by your definition... If Guild Wars is not one, then Everquest II is not either... Now... I can see the problem here... What you LIKE does not decide what genre a game is. So your "I like MMOs. I did not like Guild Wars. Guild Wars is not an MMO" does not fly...
"This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force"
even those monsters mmorpg you call the real ones have subdivisions of some kind , like servers , that make the paralel worlds ... so its preaty much the same , just a matter of ralation to numbers ..
better ask eisntein then.
i dont know why people love so much to find others camping when doin a quest or mission ?
i get that having a perm world where everyone is in it , its cool and amazing ... but not really a must , cose our mind is not linear anymore , we can take great use from virtual concepts , like those districs , in fact , thats what makes this a free montly game possible.
so dont call it a mmorpg , who cares ? one thing im sure , there are loads of people inside !
Originally posted by m3th LISTEN.CAREFULLY.My post ISNT a flame.you GWers are getting too sensitve because of all the flames leveled at GW on these boards, like the utterly retarded thread started recently by some braindead mongoliod. YOUR MISSING THE POINT.TO CLAIM GW IS A MMORPG IS GIVING PEOPLE THE WRONG IMPRESSION ABOUT WHAT GW IS.........right. im done. cya lol. im going back to BF2.
Uhhh what? You have done nothing but flame on this form.
Originally posted by m3th except you have to buy it to try it. which is bullshit.Guild Wars is so NOT an MMORPG. it sucks, i wish i had never bought it and use the money for a copy of battlefeild 2 now.its not persistant, so 'balanced' no matter what you do youll always be about the same as everyone else, becomes so damn boring its not funny, the community is the WORST ive ever come across and that includes Diablo.generally its for 14 year olds that like the hack and slash genre. if Diablo go you going then you might want to try it, but it isnt even as good as Diablo. in that the 'balancing' means blandness. i really hate GW now and need to stress to anyone thinking of trying it the last thing it is is a MMORPG. its SO NOT THAT. MMO being anying large and online i guess it would be that. but its NOT AN MMORPG. If you want the depth, community, action, involvement, story and general GAME you get with an MMORPG, Guild Wars is not for you!
Originally posted by Novaseeker Okay, here's my take on it: Guild Wars is not an MMORPG. It is best described as a "MOG", or multiplayer online game. Why? It's not massively multiplayer because you don't run into large numbers of people when you are out campaigning in the world. The instancing approach to the game is innovative and useful in amny respects, but one impact is that when you are doing anything other than loitering in a town, your experience is either single-player or multiplayer, but it is never massively multiplayer in the sense of virtually every other MMO where most of the time you can come across any number of people anywhere in the game, say hello to people on the side of the road and the like. R: sure you can , in towns you talk to everybody in it. main chat. It's also not an RPG in the sense that other MMORPGs are ... where characters are interacting with each other in character in an open-ended virtual RPG setting ... it's more like a single-player CRPG, where you control your character and manipulate it through a linear world, rather than your character as your alter-ego in a more open-ended virtual world, which is what most MMOs are like. GW is basically a cooperative linear CRPG (that is, a CRPG you can play on a multiplayer basis with a few other people working your way through a linear world) combined with a good PvP element as well (again, multiplayer PvP not massively multiplayer PvP. R : the missions are linear , but you can make huge short cuts , im still doin quests and exploring zones from the so called missions line to the end , but i did the so called last mission long time ago. Hells Percepice. None of this means that GW isn't a fun game. It's quite a fun game to play, as are many games that are not MMOs. But I think placing it together with other MMOs mischaracterizes the game and sets up false comparisons. GW shouldn't really be compared with other true MMOs like WoW or EQ2 or EVE or what have you because GW is not really trying to create a virtual world that players have freedom to do what they please in ... the idea was to create a great linear CRPG that you could play on a multiplayer basis and have fun with in that way. To me, it's like comparing apples and oranges, because the two kinds of games are really very different. One can play both and enjoy both, but one ought to realize that they are very different in kind, and it makes no more sense to compare them to each other than it makes to compare WoW to HALO.
This game is not like monster hunter, its a lot better. It has great character customization, wide arrange of weapons and skills, it is by far better than WoW, or at least i think so. Guild Wars also will get much more features when new chapters are realeased that will add new races and classes, along with skills, items, and possible more areas to explore. Guild Wars, however, is not an mmorpg but a global online roleplaying game. Whats the difference you may ask? Well when you get with a group of friends and go on a huge quest called a mission, you get your own copy of the area where that mission is taking place, so it is jsut your party doing the mission and you have no interferance. Guild Wars is labeled a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game). You can play with or against other players, and all players are in a constant battle where they represent there country. There is also no servers in Guild Wars. You can form partys with anyone you meet in the world. Example: You live in America, and you get to play with someone in Japan or Korea.
This game is really fun, the only reason i don't play it that much is because my video card sucks and i don't get the full experience. But, nevertheless, this is a good game.
Is it an MMO, yes it is. Is it an MMORPG....yes, but, sorta, kinda, somewhat.....clear huh >.>
It is fun, fast and fairly wasy to get into. It has depth, but not near the depth of some MMORPG. But, in my opinion it doesn't need that extra depth. Why? personally i play it when my main game servers are down, or i am killing that hour until i have somethign to do. I simply couldn't accomplish anythign in other games in this time frame.
Meh, i have fun on it, but i don't play daily anymore really. But i do think i got more than my value out so far. more in depth than PSO.
Seems like everyone agrees that GW has RPG O and one M of MMORPG, but where people get hung up is the massive part.
I can't help but think that if you really think about it few games are MMORPGs by definintion
A massively (or massive) multiplayer online role-playing game or MMORPG is a multiplayercomputer role-playing game that enables thousands of players to play in an evolving virtual world at the same time over the Internet. I stole this from Wikipedia
Now strict addherrence to the definition would automaticly cut out any console MMO, like PSO, FFXI(ps2 version), Citizen Zero, and TFLO
The thousands of players thing alot of games have that including GW, it has the common cities thing
evolving virtual world, well I havn't played everygame but if I am interepting evolving correct then few games have this part so goodbye to WoW, AO, EQ and such
and being played over the internet...well every game has that
after all this you are left with what 2 or 3 games
I guess the point I am trying to make is you don't have to label everything.
Besides if GW were or were not a MMORPG, would you play it any more or less?
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
R: sure you can , in towns you talk to everybody in it. main chat.
Right, the *towns* are massively multiplayer, but the instanced zones are not. You can always chat with anyone over the chatline, but you never come across someone else in the field, and that makes it seem much less massively multiplayer to me. Each instanced zone is only as multiplayer as the number of actual players in my group ... which is hardly massive, leaving aside the chatlines. Don't get me wrong, the instanced zones have many advantages, but they do diminish how massively multiplayer it feels when one is outside of towns.
R : the missions are linear , but you can make huge short cuts , im still doin quests and exploring zones from the so called missions line to the end , but i did the so called last mission long time ago. Hells Percepice.
Okay I agree, with respect to the side quests. But all of this still makes the game less MMO like to me. Each of us has his or her own definition of what an MMO is, but a part of my definition is that it is a persistent, virtual world where people interact in real time (a la EQ or WoW or EVE or many others). GW is very fun, and has a lot of content, but it feels less like a sandbox to me than some of these other games are. One could argue that some of them are simply linear games wearing a good sandbox disguise, and that may be true, but nevertheless GW doesnt even try to make it like a sandbox at all ... which is probably one of its strongpoints as a game, in terms of playability and fun, but in my book it's one of the things that makes is something other than an MMO.
In any case, the point is to enjoy the game, reagrdless of the genre it falls into. My issue with that is that you have to take care not to compare with other MMOs because you're then comparing apples to oranges in my opinion.
Originally posted by m3th first that long drawn out rubbish about choosing primary and secondary classes. he said 'you choose both a primary and secondary class, which can be any of the 6 classes available'. well he said alot more than that but this is actually what he meant, ill translate the language 'retard' for you. 6 times 6 is 36. you still following this GW-Gamer? that means there are a total of 36 combinations available to the entire GW community. all 30 thousand players or more than play this game are one of only 36 combinations of possible characters. in a community of 30 thousand players, thats 833 players that are the EXACT SAME CHARACTER AS YOU. oh btw, all character types have about 4 armour types availble to them and only them. meaning if your a warrior primary all you can wear is one of these 4 types. you cant wear monk armour, you cant wear mesmer armour, you can just wear the same four as EVERY OTHER WARRIOR IS WEARING. Runes. same damn deal. you can only infuse the runes into your armour that ARE FOR YOUR CLASS. thats means there are warrior runes and memser runes and monk runes and so on. about 10 per class (or a few more, hell i dont care). so, every warrior you see has to be wearing one of 4 types of armour and if they even have runes is only using any one of around 10 runes. now some runes are more powerful than others, some armours are stronger than others. hold on, that means at the pvp or level 20 senario there are even less than the 4/10 armour/rune mix to really choose from. sounding lame? it hasnt even started yet. what about pvp? well listen up MMORPGers, you pvp in an arena. only in groups and only with an objective. if you win you get.. well nothing. if you lose you get.. well nothing. having fun? well yeah, for the first week when its all new. then your like.. so why am i even here? nothing to stop me just running off and suiciding on my own, hell there is no penalty for dying and its not like im going to get something cool for my character if we win. oo thats right, the entire point of pvp is to get a sigil, to make a guild hall. what do you do with the guild hall? pvp again for... rank on the gw ladder. no items, no rewards, no character advancement.. rank on a website with 1000 other guilds. finally items. well only players with some experience outside GW will understand just how incredibly lame this is. heres a property from one (this isnt a crap property, this is the BEST YOU CAN GET ON ANY WEAPON FOR THIS PROPERTY). Double Adrenaline (20% chance) Add +1 to Strength (20% chance) that means, you have a 1/5 chance every time you swing that the property is actually going to to ANYTHING at all. and.. 20% IS THE BEST. i havent found 20% yet, they are RARE!! goddamn it. ive had it with this. i havent heard one experienced MMORPGer actually make any sense as to why this game is good.
Well actually for pvp there are rewards for winning. You get Faction with Balthazar, the God of War. You can use these points to buy thing like weapon upgraes, runes, and skills. And you do get advancement in pvp, you can get xp for killing others.
And as far as runes go, why would you want to use runes from another class if you don't have that attribute to increase.
Characters can look different in many ways, size, face, class, armor, dyed armor.
As far as a penatly for death, there is one. Every time you die you get a 15% death penalty.
Obviously this guy hasn't gotten past ascalon or he would see how great this game is.
As far as a penatly for death, there is one. Every time you die you get a 15% death penalty. Obviously this guy hasn't gotten past ascalon or he would see how great this game is.
Well, there isn't a significant death penalty in PvP (probably because most people hate PvP with real death penalties like EVE has) and the PvE death penalty is reset as soon as you leave the instance ... that really doesn't feel like much of a penalty to me. I'm not arguing that a game has to have a strict death penalty to be a good game, in fact this is one of the things that makes GW so appealing to so many people, but I think it's fair to say that GW has a light death penalty.
I read that producer interview cited above. My, how disappointing. My "favorite" line is this one:
So in Guild Wars the world is constantly changing and evolving as a result of your actions. That's the most important aspect in creating a believable RPG world, that sense of 'I'm having an impact on this world'. You can't do that in a traditional MMORPG.
What nonsense!
First of all, you don't need linear quests in order to give players a sense that they have an impact on the world around them. LOOK AT EVE ONLINE, for example! What you really need is to give players more power to shape the world around them in the sandbox you create. I agree that many fantasy MMORPGs fail in this effort, but it's not impossible to do it, and it's not endemic to having a "persistent world" that is the same for all players.
What he's really saying here is that when you have a persistent world, you can't have a prefab storyline that each player is engaged in similar to what you would have in a linear offline game because not everyone is playing the story at the same time. To me the way you solve that is not by taking an online game and making it more like an offline game (which is his answer really), but by handing the story creation over to the players ... give the players the power to create content themselves by taking over terrotiry, depfending it, engaging in intrigue and the like.
I respect what GW's producers have done in making a fun game, and I've really enjoyed playing it myself, but I think they're dead wrong about the genre. Yes there are issues if you try to create the content through quests and missions. So don't do it that way ... hand the content over to the players and let them make their own content, just give them the sandbox and the tools to do it.
Originally posted by Novaseeker What he's really saying here is that when you have a persistent world, you can't have a prefab storyline that each player is engaged in similar to what you would have in a linear offline game because not everyone is playing the story at the same time. To me the way you solve that is not by taking an online game and making it more like an offline game (which is his answer really), but by handing the story creation over to the players ... give the players the power to create content themselves by taking over terrotiry, depfending it, engaging in intrigue and the like.
I don't think that either way is 'the best', just different types of games. I see the MMO spectrum as ranging from player-driven open-ended worlds to online story-based cooperative RPG's.
Having played Eve and GW I appreciate the different games they are - one gives me complete control over what I do, who I kill, where I go, the other gives me a much more structured approach and more organised PvP. Both are fun in their own ways. Eve can sometimes take the simulation of real life too far, certain elements are more work than fun, GW can sometimes lack depth and be too easy.
Most MMORPG's are somewhere in the middle, with progression through zones (and expansions). You could compare Eve with most MMORPG's and make the same conclusions...it is by far the best example of a player-driven environment.
---sig---
PvE in general is pretty lame, if you think long and hard about it. You are spending your time beating a severely gimped AI that would lose to a well trained monkey. Best not to think too long and hard why you are wasting time playing games in general actually...
Comments
im with Novaseeker. thats how i feel about this game.
i dun care what you call it, it just understanding its not an MMORPG as the industry stands now.
i dont give a crap about what the actual name is i just mean its not a game like any of the large
MMORPG titles out there atm.
and if your looking for something like that then you will be sorely disappionted with GW as I was.
i mean really, its all just context. i use the term MMORPG to describe a set of games that i know about.
i use the word 'blue' to describe a colour i know about, from examples of blue ive seen around. now ppl
can agrue that something is blue or green or what the hell ever, im only using the term 'blue' as a POINT
OF REFERENCE so i can RELATE WHAT IM SEEING TO SOMETHING I CAN IDENTIFY WITH.
this is what the whole 'is GW a MMORPG' debate misses, as do all the people that break up the word
MMORPG and say 'well GW has all those elements (arugably) so its a MMORPG'.
its clearly NOT part of the genre that is the MMORPG scene. Novaseeker discusses it, i rant about and
anyone thats actually played a MMORPG will agree it is 'different'.
as for content, player customisation and depth of character building, items, magic systems, story, PvP and pretty much anything else you dare to name GW is a light weight version of it. which it INTENDED to be from the start.
so dont go calling the light weight version by the name we use to discribe the HEAVYIEST OF HEAVYWEIGHTS in the gaming industry!!
your misleading people!
Not really... Everquest II for example. Even you must agree that Everquest II fits into the MMORPG genre? Still, it has a simpler character creation and development than Guild Wars, almost making it loose the right to have RPG added in the end. You play a premade character decided by the devs, with little to no control over his skills.
So, by your definition... If Guild Wars is not one, then Everquest II is not either... Now... I can see the problem here... What you LIKE does not decide what genre a game is. So your "I like MMOs. I did not like Guild Wars. Guild Wars is not an MMO" does not fly...
"This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
It should be thrown with great force"
even those monsters mmorpg you call the real ones have subdivisions of some kind , like servers , that make the paralel worlds ... so its preaty much the same , just a matter of ralation to numbers ..
better ask eisntein then.
i dont know why people love so much to find others camping when doin a quest or mission ?
i get that having a perm world where everyone is in it , its cool and amazing ... but not really a must , cose our mind is not linear anymore , we can take great use from virtual concepts , like those districs , in fact , thats what makes this a free montly game possible.
so dont call it a mmorpg , who cares ? one thing im sure , there are loads of people inside !
Guild - http://lightness.goodforum.net/
Blog - http://www.pierrecarlier.com/
here is an interview with the producer.....doesn't get any clearer than that.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/r/?http://www.computerandvideogames.com/news/news_story.php(que)id=116815
Uhhh what? You have done nothing but flame on this form.
Remember this? Becuause i still do. Please leave.
-----------------------------
Want to get into the game industry? Read the game business advice guide.
Also read GameDev and Gamasutra
Download Impulse - Like steam but only DRM Free Games
Guild - http://lightness.goodforum.net/
Blog - http://www.pierrecarlier.com/
__________________________
Ignorance is Bliss
OK so far what i have hard from others is the this game is Kind-of (IN a relly small way) like Monster Hunter hmm Ill stick with MH then
Meh Smarf <sigh>
This game is not like monster hunter, its a lot better. It has great character customization, wide arrange of weapons and skills, it is by far better than WoW, or at least i think so. Guild Wars also will get much more features when new chapters are realeased that will add new races and classes, along with skills, items, and possible more areas to explore. Guild Wars, however, is not an mmorpg but a global online roleplaying game. Whats the difference you may ask? Well when you get with a group of friends and go on a huge quest called a mission, you get your own copy of the area where that mission is taking place, so it is jsut your party doing the mission and you have no interferance. Guild Wars is labeled a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game). You can play with or against other players, and all players are in a constant battle where they represent there country. There is also no servers in Guild Wars. You can form partys with anyone you meet in the world. Example: You live in America, and you get to play with someone in Japan or Korea.
This game is really fun, the only reason i don't play it that much is because my video card sucks and i don't get the full experience. But, nevertheless, this is a good game.
Is it an MMO, yes it is. Is it an MMORPG....yes, but, sorta, kinda, somewhat.....clear huh >.>
It is fun, fast and fairly wasy to get into. It has depth, but not near the depth of some MMORPG. But, in my opinion it doesn't need that extra depth. Why? personally i play it when my main game servers are down, or i am killing that hour until i have somethign to do. I simply couldn't accomplish anythign in other games in this time frame.
Meh, i have fun on it, but i don't play daily anymore really. But i do think i got more than my value out so far. more in depth than PSO.
Wow there do seem to be alot of these threads
Seems like everyone agrees that GW has RPG O and one M of MMORPG, but where people get hung up is the massive part.
I can't help but think that if you really think about it few games are MMORPGs by definintion
A massively (or massive) multiplayer online role-playing game or MMORPG is a multiplayercomputer role-playing game that enables thousands of players to play in an evolving virtual world at the same time over the Internet. I stole this from Wikipedia
Now strict addherrence to the definition would automaticly cut out any console MMO, like PSO, FFXI(ps2 version), Citizen Zero, and TFLO
The thousands of players thing alot of games have that including GW, it has the common cities thing
evolving virtual world, well I havn't played everygame but if I am interepting evolving correct then few games have this part so goodbye to WoW, AO, EQ and such
and being played over the internet...well every game has that
after all this you are left with what 2 or 3 games
I guess the point I am trying to make is you don't have to label everything.
Besides if GW were or were not a MMORPG, would you play it any more or less?
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
Right, the *towns* are massively multiplayer, but the instanced zones are not. You can always chat with anyone over the chatline, but you never come across someone else in the field, and that makes it seem much less massively multiplayer to me. Each instanced zone is only as multiplayer as the number of actual players in my group ... which is hardly massive, leaving aside the chatlines. Don't get me wrong, the instanced zones have many advantages, but they do diminish how massively multiplayer it feels when one is outside of towns.
Okay I agree, with respect to the side quests. But all of this still makes the game less MMO like to me. Each of us has his or her own definition of what an MMO is, but a part of my definition is that it is a persistent, virtual world where people interact in real time (a la EQ or WoW or EVE or many others). GW is very fun, and has a lot of content, but it feels less like a sandbox to me than some of these other games are. One could argue that some of them are simply linear games wearing a good sandbox disguise, and that may be true, but nevertheless GW doesnt even try to make it like a sandbox at all ... which is probably one of its strongpoints as a game, in terms of playability and fun, but in my book it's one of the things that makes is something other than an MMO.
In any case, the point is to enjoy the game, reagrdless of the genre it falls into. My issue with that is that you have to take care not to compare with other MMOs because you're then comparing apples to oranges in my opinion.
Well actually for pvp there are rewards for winning. You get Faction with Balthazar, the God of War. You can use these points to buy thing like weapon upgraes, runes, and skills. And you do get advancement in pvp, you can get xp for killing others.
And as far as runes go, why would you want to use runes from another class if you don't have that attribute to increase.
Characters can look different in many ways, size, face, class, armor, dyed armor.
As far as a penatly for death, there is one. Every time you die you get a 15% death penalty.
Obviously this guy hasn't gotten past ascalon or he would see how great this game is.
Well, there isn't a significant death penalty in PvP (probably because most people hate PvP with real death penalties like EVE has) and the PvE death penalty is reset as soon as you leave the instance ... that really doesn't feel like much of a penalty to me. I'm not arguing that a game has to have a strict death penalty to be a good game, in fact this is one of the things that makes GW so appealing to so many people, but I think it's fair to say that GW has a light death penalty.
I read that producer interview cited above. My, how disappointing. My "favorite" line is this one:
What nonsense!
First of all, you don't need linear quests in order to give players a sense that they have an impact on the world around them. LOOK AT EVE ONLINE, for example! What you really need is to give players more power to shape the world around them in the sandbox you create. I agree that many fantasy MMORPGs fail in this effort, but it's not impossible to do it, and it's not endemic to having a "persistent world" that is the same for all players.
What he's really saying here is that when you have a persistent world, you can't have a prefab storyline that each player is engaged in similar to what you would have in a linear offline game because not everyone is playing the story at the same time. To me the way you solve that is not by taking an online game and making it more like an offline game (which is his answer really), but by handing the story creation over to the players ... give the players the power to create content themselves by taking over terrotiry, depfending it, engaging in intrigue and the like.
I respect what GW's producers have done in making a fun game, and I've really enjoyed playing it myself, but I think they're dead wrong about the genre. Yes there are issues if you try to create the content through quests and missions. So don't do it that way ... hand the content over to the players and let them make their own content, just give them the sandbox and the tools to do it.
I don't think that either way is 'the best', just different types of games. I see the MMO spectrum as ranging from player-driven open-ended worlds to online story-based cooperative RPG's.
Having played Eve and GW I appreciate the different games they are - one gives me complete control over what I do, who I kill, where I go, the other gives me a much more structured approach and more organised PvP. Both are fun in their own ways. Eve can sometimes take the simulation of real life too far, certain elements are more work than fun, GW can sometimes lack depth and be too easy.
Most MMORPG's are somewhere in the middle, with progression through zones (and expansions). You could compare Eve with most MMORPG's and make the same conclusions...it is by far the best example of a player-driven environment.
---sig---
PvE in general is pretty lame, if you think long and hard about it. You are spending your time beating a severely gimped AI that would lose to a well trained monkey. Best not to think too long and hard why you are wasting time playing games in general actually...