Curse

Dante the Warlord · Dec 28, 2007, 03:48 PM // 15:48

Yea, although i hate to admit it, WoW does come out on top by a bit. Guild Wars does prove to be competition to them though since they always bash us on how our game sucks and vice-versa. But i must say its not bad for a game that just started. I hope that GW does continues to grow and beats Warcraft one day...

Bryant Again · Dec 28, 2007, 03:53 PM // 15:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

There are times, seriously, when I wish I could mix GW and WoW (I like them both, after all) in a bag together to make the One Game to Rule Them All.

Can you see why I'm hyped about GW2? ; )

As to people dying over video games, I think there've been two that've died playing Unreal Tournament, and to my knowledge only one over Starcraft (all Korean, I think).

Shadow Longstem · Dec 28, 2007, 04:13 PM // 16:13

man that should be the GW2 motto/slogan "One Game To Rule Them All" bwahahaahahaha!! XD

Fril Estelin · Dec 28, 2007, 04:18 PM // 16:18

Just a short comment on the GW-WoW best-of-both-worlds for a second: it can't happen, that would be a WoW-size MMO without monthly fees and with competitive PvP. Maintaining such a game would be impossible, the company behind it couldn't cope with big number of players, frequent updates and a good average ping on servers.

Anyway, this is an interesting point to explore, in order to realise the gap that stands between the 2 games, which makes the comparison easier. I believe this gap is a sort-of limit between 2 kinds of gaming tradeoff, which encompass not only the financial aspect but also the other ones mentioned before (story, PvP, graphics).

In other words and to emphasize something already said here, we can't go "deeper" into subjectivity but only "wider", i.e. with more opinions but nothing that will clearly separate the 2 games (apart from the monthly fees and the graphics). It's difficult to remain objective when comparing the 2 games.

Turtle222 · Dec 28, 2007, 04:18 PM // 16:18

WoW is better - but the fee means you have to make a lifestyle decision really :\. tbh i don't want to waste so and so a month to do something to relax

netniwk · Dec 28, 2007, 04:19 PM // 16:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle222

WoW is better

this man has the winning arguments!!!!
/fail.

Fril Estelin · Dec 28, 2007, 04:28 PM // 16:28

On the neighbour thread on "most pathetic scams" I stumbled upon this:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...&postcount=404

no-GM-like-WoW claims

Anyone really into this game KNOWS there are not GMs like in WoW.

Is this true? Are there WoW GMs that are preying on the WoW community? (emphasis on the some GMs, I guess most are honest) If this was the case, it would undoubtedly change my vision of WoW and put even more weight into the GW basket.

netniwk · Dec 28, 2007, 04:41 PM // 16:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

On the neighbour thread on "most pathetic scams" I stumbled upon this:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...&postcount=404

no-GM-like-WoW claims

Anyone really into this game KNOWS there are not GMs like in WoW.

Is this true? Are there WoW GMs that are preying on the WoW community? (emphasis on the some GMs, I guess most are honest) If this was the case, it would undoubtedly change my vision of WoW and put even more weight into the GW basket.

no,they meant that there are simply no GM's in Gw.
The Gm's in WOW are fine(if they answer that is).

tmr819 · Dec 28, 2007, 04:57 PM // 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Just a short comment on the GW-WoW best-of-both-worlds for a second: it can't happen, that would be a WoW-size MMO without monthly fees and with competitive PvP. Maintaining such a game would be impossible, the company behind it couldn't cope with big number of players, frequent updates and a good average ping on servers.

I wonder about this, because -- from what little I have heard from ArenaNet officially -- it really sounds as though they are moving at least a few steps closer to the WoW MMO model (i.e., persistent regions, interactive environment, etc.). I imagine if they felt "it can't happen" then they wouldn't be headed in that very direction.

How WoW-like GW2 ends up being is the big question, but I think, at the very least, GW2 will be a lot more WoW-like than GW1, and that has been confirmed (based on what features they have revealed are in the works) by ArenaNet.

Dylananimus · Dec 28, 2007, 06:24 PM // 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

How WoW-like GW2 ends up being is the big question, but I think, at the very least, GW2 will be a lot more WoW-like than GW1, and that has been confirmed (based on what features they have revealed are in the works) by ArenaNet.

I personally hope it doesn't turn into a WoW clone

Persistent worlds are not what I want from this game. That's one thing that makes GW different and allows it to stand apart from the other games like WoW.

I know quite a lot of people who will be sticking to GW1 if it becomes persistent and not instanced. I don't think they need to bring in that aspect and just be another clone of a cartoony, low-brow, tried and tested game that offers nothing more to the genre.

Guild Wars has broken ground on many levels, it would be a shame for it to slide backwards into WoW's pocket.

Darkobra · Dec 28, 2007, 08:33 PM // 20:33

GW2 is definitely gonna be a WoW clone, only free and probably won't rely heavily on items to win.

tmr819 · Dec 28, 2007, 08:36 PM // 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylananimus

Guild Wars has broken ground on many levels, it would be a shame for it to slide backwards into WoW's pocket.

I am less concerned about the use of more persistence in GW2 than I am about the (apparent) elimination of Heroes/henches, the single best feature in GW for a player like me who likes to solo a lot.

Still, I am trying to keep an open mind. GW2 could incorporate a few WoW-like features without becoming a "WoW-clone". I am, in fact, (cautiously) optimistic about what GW2 will be like. It's hard for me to imagine that the developers of GW1, such a great game, would stray that far off the track and that far away from the current GW1 player base.

Darkobra · Dec 28, 2007, 08:38 PM // 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

I am less concerned about the use of more persistence in GW2 than I am about the (apparent) elimination of Heroes/henches, the single best feature in GW for a player like me who likes to solo a lot.

Still, I am trying to keep an open mind. GW2 could incorporate a few WoW-like features without becoming a "WoW-clone". I am, in fact, (cautiously) optimistic about what GW2 will be like. It's hard for me to imagine that the developers of GW1, such a great game, would stray that far off the track and that far away from the current GW1 player base.

There will apparently be bonuses so you can still solo entirely but without heroes, hench and so on. Will it work? Probably not. Let's see how they play it.

Bryant Again · Dec 28, 2007, 08:40 PM // 20:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

I am less concerned about the use of more persistence in GW2 than I am about the (apparent) elimination of Heroes/henches, the single best feature in GW for a player like me who likes to solo a lot.

I too would be concerned if they were making max parties a requirement for GW2. Fortunately, they are not. The whole entire game, from what we've been told, will be soloable.

Not only that, you get to bring 1 companion with you. And you don't have to bring them if you don't want to.

moriz · Dec 28, 2007, 08:49 PM // 20:49

GW2 will be more WoW-like because the vast majority of the current playerbase wants it to be that way.

GW1 is revolutionary on many levels. a game that looks like a mmorpg, that plays like a FPS, combined with a bit of RTS, with a skill system that's based on magic: the gathering (except better). that's GW in its essence. unfortunately, it is TOO revolutionary. being revolutionary does not sell itself. being more WoW-like will.

Slimcea · Dec 28, 2007, 09:03 PM // 21:03

Just one thing I like to point out - in terms of artistic direction, Guild Wars may win hands down, but in terms of sheer ambience, the outdoor environments and cities in WoW make Guild War's seem pale. Areas in Guild Wars are too clustered, too single-track, too one dimensional. You never feel truly part of an living breathing world, instead, you simply are in a map with a start point and an end point.

Compare say the Magumma Jungle to STV or Ungoro. Magumma doesn't really feel like a jungle per se. There are trees sure, but mysteriously enough none grow in areas you travel in, and all the monsters can conveniently be found on the paths. Contrast that with WoW, whereby off the main path, there are actually trees which require navigating around, where monsters may lurk just in that ruin deeper in or flit in between the trees. Which feels more like a jungle?

Other examples in which Guild Wars clearly lacks ambience would be simple stuff such as the Battle of Jahai. Supposedly one of the major battles in Elona's history, it seemed to me nothing more than just 20 small figures fighting another 20 small figures in the distance hapzardly. Take a look at Hellfire Peninsular or Shadowmoon Valley instead. You have NPCs struggling by your side instead of doing God-knows-what in the distance, actual encampments that feel like military encampments and not some hodgepodge obstacle in the terrain with NPCs sitting around a campfire.

Vinraith · Dec 28, 2007, 09:15 PM // 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriz

GW2 will be more WoW-like because the vast majority of the current playerbase wants it to be that way.

GW1 is revolutionary on many levels. a game that looks like a mmorpg, that plays like a FPS, combined with a bit of RTS, with a skill system that's based on magic: the gathering (except better). that's GW in its essence. unfortunately, it is TOO revolutionary. being revolutionary does not sell itself. being more WoW-like will.

That's the theory, anyway. It won't sell the game to me of course, because I like GW because it's GW, not because it's sort of like a fee free MMO.

I have serious doubts as to Anet's ability to beat Blizzard at their own game, though. Duplicating your more successful competition isn't really a very good business model.

tmr819 · Dec 28, 2007, 10:34 PM // 22:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slimcea

Just one thing I like to point out - in terms of artistic direction, Guild Wars may win hands down, but in terms of sheer ambience, the outdoor environments and cities in WoW make Guild War's seem pale.

I agree. The terrain and environments in WoW are more cartoony, but they are also much more open and "real-feeling" even so. I suspect GW2 will definitely correct this problem. In WoW you can fall off a bridge and die a horrible death or drown at the bottom of the ocean; nothing like that ever happens in GW because the pathing is so rigid and, frankly, artificial. In fact, I'd say the ambience in the instances in WoW also makes GW seem pale. ArenaNet could learn a lot from Blizzard on how to build a dungeon well.

I also will confess that the enforced-player-group dynamic that you find in WoW (as much as it irritates me sometimes) does add a certain something to WoW's gameplay. If only finding groups in that game wasn't such a royal pain...

I have had many fun experiences working through some dungeon with a motley crew of other players in WoW; the "wham-bam, thank you, ma'am" mission runs in GW really cannot compare. It's strange, I know, but completing a five-man dungeon run in WoW just feels a lot more ... "real" somehow ... than most group missions with other players in GW. You often build friendships along the way, sometimes really good ones, by the time you get through a dungeon in WoW.

It's ironic, I know, coming from someone who generally prefers to solo, but I'd say some of my best times in WoW were in small groups of strangers and/or friends, clawing your way through some dungeon or other. It almost makes me want to resubscribe ... almost. Maybe it's that the eight players required for most GW missions feels so much less "personal" than the (usual) five players you run with in WoW. I dunno...

In any case, for those of you who dread GW becoming WoW-like, I think it is worth remembering that WoW does a lot of things better than GW, quite frankly, so becoming a bit more WoW-like isn't necessarily a bad thing. A hybrid game of some kind sounds more and more appealing and, at the very least, intriguing.

doctorn · Dec 28, 2007, 11:15 PM // 23:15

I completely agree with Gigashadow about Guild Wars & community. I have not played WoW - my experience comes from LoTRO. I don't like LoTRO as a game. It's too slow (your guildie needs a hand in Annuminas but you are in Misty Mountains? It'd take 20 minutes to get there so sorry, no...). Too much grinding - to level, to get best gear, to get reputation with factions, ... PvP is completely unbalanced, and very very miserable. Most of the quests are very dull (kill 16 boars in Angmar!).

In GW, everything is fast. Quests are actually often much more interesting, and even if not it's ok, since you don't need to run/walk/swim/ride a lot. Gear is not important. PvP is much better. Etc.

On the other hand, LoTRO has a strong community of mostly mature players. Every server has it's forum, and you can see how friendly people are to each other there. Running around in the game world, you continuously see familiar people, from familiar guilds/kins. I've had some bad experiences with PUGs there, but mostly they are ok. In GW, I have had practically no good experience with group play. First of all, I've almost never tried - H/H is good enough to do everything in the game. Second, just to give a concrete example, when I was doing the final quest of GWEN, there was a guy who was looking for a party. I decided that why not, we can do it together. After seeing my skillbar, the guy ragequitted, without saying anything. I then went on and did the quest with H/H: it took only two tries. The forums are better, but not always; and especially in the class forums, people are often called noobs if they offer nonstandard skillbars. I'd really like to try DoA, UW and other areas but because of my previous experience, I am really afraid of PUGs.

This is my major pet peeve with GW. Another problem of course is that now it's a graveyard... GW2 is coming, hopefully, in two years. I don't see many people continuing GW1 up to then unless they decide to produce a new expansion or two.

Smaller annoyances. I think the game (NM) is way too easy. And there's no real reason to do HM unless you are hooked; instead, NM should be tougher. Storylines are too short, and all campaigns by themselves are too small. Combatwise, if you have a good skillbar, then you almost don't need thinking. Spam X, press Y if health below 50%, spam X, press Z, spam X, spam A. And finding a good skillbar is usually easy because Guildwiki and other such resources.

This all doesn't mean I don't like GW. It has major advantages compared to LOTRO (and thus also to WoW). It's free. It's not a timesink - everything is fastpaced. No grinding! Better quests. And I really like the ability to respec.

For everybody, I'd recommend to read http://westkarana.com/index.php/2007...why-mmos-suck/

It points out many common problems in MMORPG design. However, people there either don't know GW or don't consider it worthwhile. I think GW doesn't have all the problems mentioned there and thus suck less, but it could still be improved. Having moddability, especially in the current graveyard status, would be just great.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

WoW is a much more social game than Guild Wars, and each server has its own community. You can walk around town and recognize people and guilds. You can log in, and there is something to do that you can quickly do with others, to advance your character in some way. You can do a dungeon for badges, you can do an AV/AB/EoTS/WSG, you can play the auction house. It really does feel like there is a world going on.

Guild Wars is full of people soloing with their heroes. In fact, Guild Wars doesn't have much of an in-game community at all, and while you might feel that WoW's playerbase are a bunch of immature pre-teens, let me tell you that Guild Wars' in-game community is the worst I have seen in any game, ever. There is absolutely no accountability for being a douche bag in Guild Wars. In WoW, people are immature, but they (and their guilds) do care about their reputation on their server, and people who scam or ninja loot will find themselves kicked out of their guild and ostracized. Overall, the WoW pug experience is far superior to the GW pug experience.

CHannum · Dec 28, 2007, 11:18 PM // 23:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

I agree. The terrain and environments in WoW are more cartoony, but they are also much more open and "real-feeling" even so. I suspect GW2 will definitely correct this problem. In WoW you can fall off a bridge and die a horrible death or drown at the bottom of the ocean; nothing like that ever happens in GW because the pathing is so rigid and, frankly, artificial. In fact, I'd say the ambience in the instances in WoW also makes GW seem pale. ArenaNet could learn a lot from Blizzard on how to build a dungeon well.

I also will confess that the enforced-player-group dynamic that you find in WoW (as much as it irritates me sometimes) does add a certain something to WoW's gameplay. If only finding groups in that game wasn't such a royal pain...

The trick is if they can create a WoW like immersion in the world while simultaneously making it feel fun to every sized group, if they can manage that, they will have beaten Blizzard at their own game. While I agree that some of the best times were in groups, those were such rare times due to time (specifically lack of) that a large percentage of the game content was effectively off limits and a reason why I'm WoW free 17 months and counting

. I'm still not sold on the scaling bonus mechanics they're talking about in the early information to achieve this, though. If it's no harder and no more rewarding to adventure in a party of one versus a party of one + companion versus eight human players then it will feel artificial and kill whatever immersion they've sought to add in with persistent areas.

Admittedly, in one sense, letting us party up with H/H isn't any different, but it feels so different psychologically. Not to mention saying bye-bye to the diversity of choices in party builds and how it affects the game play. I hope I'm wrong, but the whole Eye of the North buff is suggestive of this mechanic and I personally hate it, it doesn't feel like it's "me" doing the work, it's the buff. Each time I've taken a sub-20 character there for the easy access to some heros (which already makes me feel dirty enough

), I leave and don't go back until I actually reach L20. Going up against boss monster "Fredo the Bloody Wang" on Monday in a group of eight and finding him no more challenging solo on Wednesday would disappoint me.