Curse

Redfeather1975 · Jan 06, 2008, 12:10 AM // 00:10

Current preferences can be influenced by the order we played the games.
Once I had my fill of EQ2, I switched to WoW. Once I had my fill of that I went to GW. And each time I was all like 'this is so cool, it's much bettar!'.
I'm sure whatever game I play next I'll be all like 'this is the bestest evar!'.
If we want to have a completely unbiased comparison, we need to find someone who's played neither and make em play both at the same time.

moriz · Jan 06, 2008, 01:02 AM // 01:02

GW and WoW are pretty much uncomparable. reason being is that GW was never intended to be a mmorpg. calling GW a mmorpg is like calling diablo2 a mmorpg. after all, they have many similarities:

-both are completely instanced, 8 players per instance (unless it's pvp)
-both have linear and highly defined storylines, which are mostly absent in mmorpgs
-D2 has the battle.net chat channels. GW has towns and outposts which does the same thing.
-both are focused on action and fighting, where-as mmorpgs focus on... essentially everything
-the "immersion factor" is completely absent in both, where-as mmorpgs are all about the "immersion factor"

if anything else, we should compare GW with D2, and hellgate:london. all three belong in more or less the same category of games. WoW is not in that category.

Bryant Again · Jan 06, 2008, 01:58 AM // 01:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriz

GW and WoW are pretty much uncomparable. reason being is that GW was never intended to be a mmorpg. calling GW a mmorpg is like calling diablo2 a mmorpg. after all, they have many similarities:

-both are completely instanced, 8 players per instance (unless it's pvp)
-both have linear and highly defined storylines, which are mostly absent in mmorpgs
-D2 has the battle.net chat channels. GW has towns and outposts which does the same thing.
-both are focused on action and fighting, where-as mmorpgs focus on... essentially everything
-the "immersion factor" is completely absent in both, where-as mmorpgs are all about the "immersion factor"

if anything else, we should compare GW with D2, and hellgate:london. all three belong in more or less the same category of games. WoW is not in that category.

Quoting my exact thoughts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redfeather1975

If we want to have a completely unbiased comparison, we need to find someone who's played neither and make em play both at the same time.

So logical, but humorous at the same time. It's probably the "at the same time" that gets me : )

Spike · Jan 06, 2008, 04:09 AM // 04:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriz

GW and WoW are pretty much uncomparable. reason being is that GW was never intended to be a mmorpg. calling GW a mmorpg is like calling diablo2 a mmorpg. after all, they have many similarities:

-both are completely instanced, 8 players per instance (unless it's pvp)
-both have linear and highly defined storylines, which are mostly absent in mmorpgs
-D2 has the battle.net chat channels. GW has towns and outposts which does the same thing.
-both are focused on action and fighting, where-as mmorpgs focus on... essentially everything
-the "immersion factor" is completely absent in both, where-as mmorpgs are all about the "immersion factor"

if anything else, we should compare GW with D2, and hellgate:london. all three belong in more or less the same category of games. WoW is not in that category.

Sigh another sad person who "thinks" GW is not an MMORPG. Now lets look at what MMORPG really means shall we. (M)assive (M)ultiplayer (O)nline (R)ole (P)laying (G)ame. Now I will go though each part in turn.

(M)assive. Well I would say that being able to play with any one who owns GW anywhere in the world, which is about one million players vs the few thousand you have to play with in wow. Certinaly qualifys GW as being massive.

(M)ultiplayer. Since you can play with up 16 players at once in GW. That more than meets the definition of multiplayer.

(O)nline. DO I REALLY need to explain this bit? or the RPG bit.

So since GW more meets the definition of an MMORPG. I can't see why its can't be called one. The only reason some people(IE sad lil wow fan boys) do NOT call it one as they can't have anything thats better than thier beloved wow being compared to it. So thay have to come up with stupid ways of saying its not the same.

Yes I KNOW Anet says this is a CMORPG as they wanted GW to be different. And it is but that does not mean its not a MMORPG as well.

Redfeather said "Current preferences can be influenced by the order we played the games" This could be true, BUT not for everyone. For me the best MMO I've played was the first one. Star Wars Galaxies at least before SOE ruined it, with the CU and the NGE. Now since then I have played about 10 other MMO's * while some have had better graphics or combat systems or other parts. Nothing has been better as whole.

* This includes wow, Saga of Ryzom, eve, Mankind, Dungeon Runners, Guild Wars and LORTO.

As for which I think is better. Well lets just say I spent about 2-3 hours playing wow before I got bored, And 2700+ hours later I'm STILL not bored of GW. I think that says it alL.

Bryant Again · Jan 06, 2008, 04:22 AM // 04:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spike

(M)assive. Well I would say that being able to play with any one who owns GW anywhere in the world, which is about one million players vs the few thousand you have to play with in wow. Certinaly qualifys GW as being massive.

You can do the same with Diablo and Counter-strike.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spike

(M)ultiplayer. Since you can play with up 16 players at once in GW. That more than meets the definition of multiplayer.

Again, Diablo and Counter-strike.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spike

(O)nline. DO I REALLY need to explain this bit? or the RPG bit.

...

Diablo 2 and Counter-strike: Source?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spike

So since GW more meets the definition of an MMORPG. I can't see why its can't be called one. The only reason some people(IE sad lil wow fan boys) do NOT call it one as they can't have anything thats better than thier beloved wow being compared to it. So thay have to come up with stupid ways of saying its not the same.

Entirely wrong reason of why I do not call it such. I don't call it that because GW doesn't have anything an MMORPG player (hell, even a few RPG players) would want: End-game, emphasis on levels, gear relevancy.

I just don't want my friends to get disappointed - not because Guild Wars is a shitty game (it's a beautiful game), but because I don't want them acquiring false hopes.

Master Knightfall · Jan 06, 2008, 05:13 AM // 05:13

Ever notice how people just keep making excuses for GW's and never answering my questions or the real questions that matter? What has the most number of sales, the most population and is on the top 10 list of best selling computer games since its release? Cmon you can type those 3 BIG letters can't you? WOW!

Redfeather1975 · Jan 06, 2008, 08:08 AM // 08:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

Ever notice how people just keep making excuses for GW's and never answering my questions or the real questions that matter? What has the most number of sales, the most population and is on the top 10 list of best selling computer games since its release? Cmon you can type those 3 BIG letters can't you? WOW!

I guess Halo 3 is the highest quality fps shooter ever made, since it sold more than System Shock 2.
Heck do a litany of comparison between Halo 3 and System Shock 2. Despite them being technically 2 different genres.

Turtle222 · Jan 06, 2008, 02:16 PM // 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriz

GW and WoW are pretty much uncomparable. reason being is that GW was never intended to be a mmorpg. calling GW a mmorpg is like calling diablo2 a mmorpg. after all, they have many similarities:

-both are completely instanced, 8 players per instance (unless it's pvp)
-both have linear and highly defined storylines, which are mostly absent in mmorpgs
-D2 has the battle.net chat channels. GW has towns and outposts which does the same thing.
-both are focused on action and fighting, where-as mmorpgs focus on... essentially everything
-the "immersion factor" is completely absent in both, where-as mmorpgs are all about the "immersion factor"

if anything else, we should compare GW with D2, and hellgate:london. all three belong in more or less the same category of games. WoW is not in that category.

wow and gw are rpg, thus they are "pretty" comparable

Balan Makki · Jan 06, 2008, 02:45 PM // 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

You can do the same with Diablo and Counter-strike....Again, Diablo and Counter-strike....Diablo 2 and Counter-strike: Source?

Who's talking about CS and D2?? Just because their are a few similarities. . . Point Being. GW has all the attributes of MORPG. Claiming D2 and CS somehow qualify in the comparison is flawed logic, and dancing around the point. Sure D2 could qualify, but seeming like you personally have exclusive rights to how people see the acronym MORPG, is shorts-sighted.

Quote:

Entirely wrong reason of why I do not call it such. I don't call it that because GW doesn't have anything an MMORPG player (hell, even a few RPG players) would want: End-game, emphasis on levels, gear relevancy.

I just don't want my friends to get disappointed - not because Guild Wars is a beautiful game, but because I don't want them acquiring false hopes

(fixed your quote, your being transparent Again, Bryant)

You mean GW does not have the Endless Grind that Dated MMO RPGs do, or the dated Number Parsing that Dated MMO RPGs do, or the Dated Evercrack addiction routine that has sucked in unsuspecting gamers, and left millions blinded to the values of Reality. "We're just having a little fun" same thing most crack addicts say, Heroin addicts, Gambling addicts, Alcoholics . ..

Fundamentally speaking, the only difference between WoW and GW is: WoW requires a player to sacrifice their Real Life to play the game as DESINED (Evercrack Formula).

GW game-play is designed as optional.

Too bad you keep feeding your friends VR crack and not the alternative. Vendor - Delete, it's your best chance for leading a real life. If the truth hurts, you have two choices, Fight it or Acccept it.

For those of you claiming you're Not one of the WoW zombie class, here's what's not happening in your household

WoW's effect on Family Life.

and this, Freakout, Keyboard Murder

Just go down the list to the right, you'll see plenty more of where that came from.

boko · Jan 06, 2008, 05:37 PM // 17:37

Comparison between GW and WoW is impossible (well not exactly impossible, more like ridicule... One excels where the other fails and vice versa). They both cater to different types of customers.

As an MMO, WoW just simply beats the current GW hands down. (If we were still in the Proph stage, I would say GW was a close competitor, but not anymore.). The current GW fails as an MMO/CORPG.

ANET might as well close the PvE servers and release a completely offline game and the current crop of players will still be happy,if not delighted. PvE in GW is simply mind-numbingly boring for an online game. The current PuGs are either awfully bad or just plain annoyingly arrogant. MAjority of the people just solo everything and there is no real sense of achievement from anything in GW PvE. Add Lootscaling to that and you have one of the most useless grind ever. GW simply has the worst PVE game community among MMOs now. That's where WoW wins hands down, and assert its supremacy despite its flaws (cartoony graphics, etc...). WoW actually feels like an MMO.

GW should be placed in the same category as Warcraft 3 with offline campaign and online pvp, but then it will have serious competition from the upcoming starcraft 2.

Simply put, WoW is better as an MMO, but GW is better as a competitive game (more balanced like Magic card game).

Redfeather1975 · Jan 06, 2008, 05:50 PM // 17:50

Balan Makki, there are people like that in lots of online games. Even first person shooters!
But I love all the parodies of that video. Some of the parodies are hilarious.

Balan Makki · Jan 06, 2008, 06:22 PM // 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redfeather1975

Balan Makki, there are people like that in lots of online games. Even first person shooters!

But WoW is such a big target, very easy to hit. I did love the time I spent in WoW, and it's not really WoW specifically that I'm complaining about, but the Evercrack formula, The "slight of hand", and deceit to fool the player into thinking the content of such games have any real-life value--enough so that they will sacrifice far more important things.

Archaic · Jan 06, 2008, 06:26 PM // 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

Ever notice how people just keep making excuses for GW's and never answering my questions or the real questions that matter? What has the most number of sales, the most population and is on the top 10 list of best selling computer games since its release? Cmon you can type those 3 BIG letters can't you? WOW!

Yes, but that game came from an established franchise, as did the Sims, the game that outrivals WoW 3 to 1. :P

Bryant Again · Jan 06, 2008, 06:40 PM // 18:40

Quote: