Curse

Vinraith · Sep 21, 2007, 10:47 AM // 10:47

Quote:

GW2 will be a major improvement than what we have now. Persistent world which means it will improve the social aspect of the game.

Walk into any city in GW, turn on "local" and "emote," and explain to me how beinng forced to interact with that in the game world is a "major improvement."

I much prefer a model where I get to take who I choose and ONLY who I choose into the game world and can simply ignore everyone else. Again, if it weren't for whole-world instancing I'd never have bought GW1, and without it I have serious qualms about 2.

Lonesamurai · Sep 21, 2007, 11:00 AM // 11:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

Walk into any city in GW, turn on "local" and "emote," and explain to me how beinng forced to interact with that in the game world is a "major improvement."

I much prefer a model where I get to take who I choose and ONLY who I choose into the game world and can simply ignore everyone else. Again, if it weren't for whole-world instancing I'd never have bought GW1, and without it I have serious qualms about 2.

Then i guess we won't be seeing you there as its been stated that all but storyline missions will be persistant world in GW2

cya

Bryant Again · Sep 21, 2007, 01:26 PM // 13:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

Then i guess we won't be seeing you there as its been stated that all but storyline missions will be persistant world in GW2

cya

Holy snaps source??

Lonesamurai · Sep 21, 2007, 01:41 PM // 13:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Holy snaps source??

Jeff strain interview way back when... oh, and Izzy IRC conversation

Bryant Again · Sep 21, 2007, 02:06 PM // 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

Jeff strain interview way back when... oh, and Izzy IRC conversation

Oooh, I never had the time to watch the rest of that. Sounds pretty cool.

Lonesamurai · Sep 21, 2007, 02:18 PM // 14:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Oooh, I never had the time to watch the rest of that. Sounds pretty cool.

yeah and with map travel and instatravel in group to a full persistant world, theres no more waiting for someone to get back to a town or outpost to team up with them and trek out together

and the buddy system (same as City of Heroes Mentoring) will enable lower levels to join teams with higher levels to do things...

and i'm especially pleased that although persistent, I won't need to worry about being ganked by idiot players when waiting for a boss spawn, or when treking to places i need to go before I can start map travelling... but then once there, map travel FTW!

Yeah, i'm really looking forward to GW2, i'm looking forward to having Guild wars with a better, more expanded game engine and more to do... I'm even looking forward to the character developement

Bryant Again · Sep 21, 2007, 02:34 PM // 14:34

In all honesty, the only things I'm concerned about GW2 are:

1. The animation. Best I've ever seen in an RPG (next to KotOR, of course), and I hope it's as kick ass as it was in the original.

2. System Requirements. Not much else to say there : (

Shoitaan · Sep 22, 2007, 08:22 AM // 08:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

First off yes, it's very early to be concerned about GW2. However, the concerns I'm going to discuss here are very fundamental to the underlying design of the game and have already been mentioned in dev reviews, so I don't think I'm too far out of line.

Anyway, things that brought me to GW:

1) Instancing. I don't play "true" MMO's because I don't like other people being able to interfere with my game. I don't have that much time to play, it's not worth my while to waste it dealing with loot thieves, kill thieves, or just general nuisances of various sorts. I also hate the respawn that tends to accompany persistent explorable areas.

2) Henchmen, heroes, and soloability. I have a few friends that play the game, and enjoy playing with them, but frequently we aren't able to coordinate game time. If a game doesn't have a strong SP component it isn't worth my while. I enjoy being able to play this game seamlessly with friends or with AI help. One of my few real aggravations with the game is that pesky 3 hero limit, but that's already been done to death in other threads.

3) No fee. I don't believe in paying for a game over and over again, so I like the structure NCsoft and Anet are using here.

4) The skill system. The collection and combination of skills keeps me coming back more than any other element of the game design. If it weren't for the 8 skill limit, and the thought that has to go into builds (both for myself and heroes) I wouldn't still be playing.

What's all this got to do with GW2? Well, we already know from dev discussion that 1) will be significantly reduced and 2) will not be present in the design. 4) is up in the air. I'm not going to stand here and scream about the fact that GW2 will be terrible, but I do want to voice my personal concern that, with 2 of the main things that brought me to Guild Wars in the first place gone, GW2's design seems to be headed in a direction away from myself and customers like me. I don't buy games because of the name on the box, I buy them because they suit my playing preferences. I'd like to see the Guild Wars franchise keep some of these crucial elements that make it unique from other online RPG's, and consequently the only one I own and play.

I too joined GW's for the same reasons as you, jumping ship from WoW as a matter of fact. I don't believe GW2 will be a WoW clone but I think there's plenty of wow/typical mmo-esque touches to it.
I liked instancing but I've made no friends from GW's whereas I did make a few from WoW. The reason being that instancing means I'll likely never see someone I meet ever again unless I spend all day in a closed environment like RA/TA/HA. I'm all for a mixed instanced/persistent world.

I love the soloability in GW's especially if it means not wiping at the hands of incompetent pugs. Many may say this kills the human aspect of the game but I look at it like this: I play games to have fun, wiping due to incompetence is not fun. Then the pug bickering over who's fault it was, is not fun. The monk ragequitting and then being forced to spend another 40minutes looking for a group? Most certainly not fun. Henchies and heroes lets me play the game and - wait for it - have fun. When i feel like playing with people I either go PvP or load up my 360 and log onto XBL. I think Anet will turn down the solo game a fair bit but I don't think it'll be the case where you must group with people to do anything.

Fees? Not gonna happen, they already said so

Skills: I fully agree and share with your concerns. I love making builds, maybe its the inner MTG player but its to me the best part of Guild Wars. "Deck" building and testing

I dunno what I'll do if they get rid of it in GW2 and have a system like WoW.
I'd probably skip the game entirely I think

Guild Wars skills system = strategic planning. Please don't kill the thinking Anet!

strcpy · Sep 22, 2007, 08:50 AM // 08:50

GW PvE world has two major groups. The first sees the game as an MMO that one can use the hench/hero to fill parties out and maybe solo an area or two if you feel like it. The second sees it as a Single Player game that one or two people can take the place of hench/heroes and you can PUG if you feel like it. The two groups do not mingle very well.

Initially the Dev team is in the first group, and from posts I believe they are still there - that is their "vision" for the game (and why we will not get 7 hero slots). Many of us (myself for one and I suspect you also) fit into the second. As far as I can see there are quite a few games out there in the first class and GW is the only decent one in the second - thus many of us in the second class flock here.

I fear that Anet wants to see us move into the first - I've played MMO's and dislike them greatly, monthly fee or not. They tried to bridge the two groups in this game and somewhat failed (at the least, like most compromises they just made each side angry), I think they will continue to try and continue to fail, the two groups have too much difference in views to play the same game. In the same way they have learned they have to separate PvE and PvP these two groups will not mix either.

IMO opinion as a game that caters to the first group the only real thing they have going for them is no monthly fee, WoW and others will eat their lunches and take their women. In the latter group there is no competition and none scheduled for the future either plus it is where they have made most of their sales. At some point this will be an issue.

In the end I'll wait to see what GW2 offers before complaining. Until then I will re-iterate the above and hope the devs think on it. While their vision has a great deal to do with the success our desire to purchase the game does also. If I'm in the minority then I would agree - ignore me, I just do not think that I am in the minority on this, especially given the requests for 7 heroes. If they try and ride both groups like they currently do I'll be mostly satisfied and still play/purchase the game. I'm just somewhat apprehensive that they are going to try and force grouping based on interviews. I have some amount of faith that they will not break the basic ideas of GW in GW2.

agrios · Sep 22, 2007, 04:20 PM // 16:20

I agree with you Vinratih, in eevery single word.

The reasons cos Im actually playing GW over other games are hinted to vanish in GW2 (instancing, heroes/henchmen, low level cap, optional grind). If I wanted a more "social", persistent, non-instaced game I would be at WoW, like many of my netpals.

Thats sad news to me...thats why im not investing too much in HoM. I dont know if I will be at GW2.

I believe this is a wrong business decision. ANet found its own place on the gaming market for being *AS IT IS*. Changing its ways will make it *just another* MMO, always shadowed by WoW, L2 and other heavyweights. If that is what they want...good luck ANet, do GW2 without me, cos I will stick here untill the servers are closed..

thats my .02

Sha Noran · Sep 22, 2007, 06:27 PM // 18:27

Yes, the way the game was is why many people have played it as long as they have. Unfortunately, that business plan failed; this is why we have Guild Wars 2 instead of Guild Wars Utopia. Guild Wars 2 is going to be drastically different in a few key categories because, frankly, the original system did not make enough money. I really don't think making the changes they're suggesting will give them any hope of competing with upcoming titles and beyond, but meh, it's their game.

Vinraith · Sep 22, 2007, 06:54 PM // 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by strcpy

GW PvE world has two major groups. The first sees the game as an MMO that one can use the hench/hero to fill parties out and maybe solo an area or two if you feel like it. The second sees it as a Single Player game that one or two people can take the place of hench/heroes and you can PUG if you feel like it. The two groups do not mingle very well.

Initially the Dev team is in the first group, and from posts I believe they are still there - that is their "vision" for the game (and why we will not get 7 hero slots). Many of us (myself for one and I suspect you also) fit into the second. As far as I can see there are quite a few games out there in the first class and GW is the only decent one in the second - thus many of us in the second class flock here.

I fear that Anet wants to see us move into the first - I've played MMO's and dislike them greatly, monthly fee or not. They tried to bridge the two groups in this game and somewhat failed (at the least, like most compromises they just made each side angry), I think they will continue to try and continue to fail, the two groups have too much difference in views to play the same game. In the same way they have learned they have to separate PvE and PvP these two groups will not mix either.

IMO opinion as a game that caters to the first group the only real thing they have going for them is no monthly fee, WoW and others will eat their lunches and take their women. In the latter group there is no competition and none scheduled for the future either plus it is where they have made most of their sales. At some point this will be an issue.

In the end I'll wait to see what GW2 offers before complaining. Until then I will re-iterate the above and hope the devs think on it. While their vision has a great deal to do with the success our desire to purchase the game does also. If I'm in the minority then I would agree - ignore me, I just do not think that I am in the minority on this, especially given the requests for 7 heroes. If they try and ride both groups like they currently do I'll be mostly satisfied and still play/purchase the game. I'm just somewhat apprehensive that they are going to try and force grouping based on interviews. I have some amount of faith that they will not break the basic ideas of GW in GW2.

I hadn't thought of it that way, but this is a very insightful analysis. I pretty much agree with everything you've said here, and I too would naturally count myself in the second group. It appears, as you say, that Anet is still suffering from the delusion that they can force us into the first group, or that they can get by without us, one of the two. I wish Anet all the luck in the world, they've provided a profoundly enjoyable game here, but I am the kind of player that I am and if my needs aren't met in a new title it's a given I'm not going to purchase that game. Slapping the "Guild Wars" name on it but removing everything that made Guild Wars unique among online RPG's isn't a very sound business strategy, to my thinking. I hope that, early press aside, that's not really what they're going to do. There's plenty of time for change.

Omega X · Sep 22, 2007, 08:09 PM // 20:09

I guess that I might be the only one here worried about gameplay and whether or not they will continue to use their god awful mob building skillz.

If its current Guild Wars without instancing, then you might as well call it Guild Wars 1.5. I don't think that is something that I'm gonna pay for. If they want to evolve Guild Wars then fine. Evolve it for the better. But I can't pretend that the current Guild Wars doesn't have flaws and moving into a supposedly "new" Guild Wars with the same flaws is not appealing at all.

Another thing that I always see is the constant comparison to WoW. I doubt that many know why WoW became the top dog. And to watch Developers try to figure that out has been sort of entertaining and annoying at the same time. The answer is simple, but they all fall back on the excuse that their audience is "different". If that is the case then sure, those developers deserve their 100,000 subscriptions. But those aiming higher should simply make the game more accessible. And not just technically, Guild Wars has that down pretty much since the game can run on integrated graphics. But the gameplay should be the same.

Currently the gameplay starts of sort of well for new people but can turn ugly quickly. And if they ran to lvl 20 quickly then they have not learned much. Which is one of the reasons why being in PuGs can be so painful. Once you get into lvl 20 lands the difficulty becomes unstable. Instead of a constant ramp up, difficulty becomes distorted. Traditional leveling made that ramp obvious. But since traditional leveling is pretty much minimal, cap breaking monsters had to be developed. Those monsters just made the difficulty ramp even more unstable. Due to constant PvP balancing of the skills, it got worse until the demand for PvE skills was issued(something that a lot of other MMOs had already). I'm afraid that if GW2 doesn't bring better accessibility, everyone would just end up in the same game with new backgrounds.

Agree, disagree, ignore me, don't care. Just my .02.

Sha Noran · Sep 22, 2007, 09:48 PM // 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega X

I guess that I might be the only one here worried about gameplay and whether or not they will continue to use their god awful mob building skillz.

If its current Guild Wars without instancing, then you might as well call it Guild Wars 1.5. I don't think that is something that I'm gonna pay for. If they want to evolve Guild Wars then fine. Evolve it for the better. But I can't pretend that the current Guild Wars doesn't have flaws and moving into a supposedly "new" Guild Wars with the same flaws is not appealing at all.

Another thing that I always see is the constant comparison to WoW. I doubt that many know why WoW became the top dog. And to watch Developers try to figure that out has been sort of entertaining and annoying at the same time. The answer is simple, but they all fall back on the excuse that their audience is "different". If that is the case then sure, those developers deserve their 100,000 subscriptions. But those aiming higher should simply make the game more accessible. And not just technically, Guild Wars has that down pretty much since the game can run on integrated graphics. But the gameplay should be the same.

Currently the gameplay starts of sort of well for new people but can turn ugly quickly. And if they ran to lvl 20 quickly then they have not learned much. Which is one of the reasons why being in PuGs can be so painful. Once you get into lvl 20 lands the difficulty becomes unstable. Instead of a constant ramp up, difficulty becomes distorted. Traditional leveling made that ramp obvious. But since traditional leveling is pretty much minimal, cap breaking monsters had to be developed. Those monsters just made the difficulty ramp even more unstable. Due to constant PvP balancing of the skills, it got worse until the demand for PvE skills was issued(something that a lot of other MMOs had already). I'm afraid that if GW2 doesn't bring better accessibility, everyone would just end up in the same game with new backgrounds.

Agree, disagree, ignore me, don't care. Just my .02.

This man spouts wonderful, delicious truth like a chocolate fountain at a wedding. Nice work.

Archaic · Sep 22, 2007, 09:53 PM // 21:53

I wonder, since we will be able to swim, will we be able to swim out too far, and get eated by a big fishie? Like in Ratchet and Clank? That'd be fun.

Bryant Again · Sep 22, 2007, 10:04 PM // 22:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archaic

I wonder, since we will be able to swim, will we be able to swim out too far, and get eated by a big fishie? Like in Ratchet and Clank? That'd be fun.

Hah, signed.

strcpy · Sep 22, 2007, 10:26 PM // 22:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

but I am the kind of player that I am and if my needs aren't met in a new title it's a given I'm not going to purchase that game.

Well, one bright light in the thing is that they are still trying to do what they originally tried to do. That is - if you create a game that *any* part can be soloed all of it will be solod. They are still looking to create an MMO that you can solo when you feel like it, reality is I always feel like it. Persistent worlds will not really change this.

I also note that the heroes were added so they aren't really against us solo players. Personally I think they originally wanted us to be in the first class I described but aren't stupid about their player base. Much of what see now is looking at compromises between the two groups - but my favorite definition of a compromise is a solution that makes neither side happy.

I was also apprehensive about GWEN, usually when they laud "level 20 content" they remove the hench, I was quite happy there. Heck, we can even take them into this expansions "elite" dungeon so I don't really expect them too, but some of what they say worries me. I generally think they will do our type of player OK but will continue to try some type of compromise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sha Noran

Yes, the way the game was is why many people have played it as long as they have. Unfortunately, that business plan failed; this is why we have Guild Wars 2 instead of Guild Wars Utopia. Guild Wars 2 is going to be drastically different in a few key categories because, frankly, the original system did not make enough money. I really don't think making the changes they're suggesting will give them any hope of competing with upcoming titles and beyond, but meh, it's their game.

Anet is one of NCsofts largest money makers - in terms of profit GW has been more than successful building on casual game play, not making enough money has never been stated. In fact, it is considered GW biggest success.

What failed is continually adding new classes and new skills with all standalone campaigns - it made balance for *both* PvE and PvP near impossible. It also caused much of the jumping around in difficulty that many complain about (have to have noob isle yet most of the campaign has to be for level 20+'s). Not to mention the "every six months" thing was a bit unrealistic over a long period of time. They are moving to a more traditional expansion type of release schedule.

Personally if their level of profit is a failure I would love to fail that much at every venture I started on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega X

I guess that I might be the only one here worried about gameplay and whether or not they will continue to use their god awful mob building skillz.

No, you aren't. However there has been nothing said about that in interviews so no reason to think it will go either way. Not to mention that I have enjoyed over 2 years of those god awful mobs and can live with more of that (even if I would prefer something better).

Plus, as I mentioned, a large part of your complaints falls more to how they had to try and balance the campaigns as standalones - that was *explicitly* mentioned as a failure and something they intend to fix. If they will fix it in a way that you like is another question.

Winstar · Sep 22, 2007, 10:41 PM // 22:41

My main worry is with the skill system (in the PvP context), and whether or not the additional layer of complexity introduced by things like jumping makes the game more interesting than the current 8 skill system. For example, does executing a jumping or crounding attack do anything functionally valueble, like allowing you to avoid a block, or increase the chance of critical, or cripple etc. If this is the case then it sounds great, because you get a lot more diversity out of the same number of skills, or even a smaller number. It sounds like, from the little I've seen, that there is going to be less work done by the skill itself and more work done by the player using the skill to get the desired effect. So instead of hit one skill like crippling slash which has the effect of applying 2 conditons built into the skill, you have a more basic skill which can apply multiple effects depending on how it is used. This sounds like it would add more skill to the game, and less mindless mashing of buttons.

Anyway...i'm getting way too carried away with speculation.

bianca periwinkle · Sep 23, 2007, 12:48 AM // 00:48

My main reason for playing (and enjoying) GW is that I can be healed.

Hench/hero - it doesnt matter, I can g out and do quests missions etc and not worry too much about my health.

I get the feeling this is not going to be the case for gw2 - I do hope I'm wrong, but GW is the only game I have found that has this capability - I;m not the world's best gamer, but I do enjoy the game - and that is one of the primary reasons for playing gw.

So, pleaseAnet, let us be healed

-Loki- · Sep 23, 2007, 12:58 AM // 00:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

What's all this got to do with GW2? Well, we already know from dev discussion that 1) will be significantly reduced and 2) will not be present in the design. 4) is up in the air. I'm not going to stand here and scream about the fact that GW2 will be terrible, but I do want to voice my personal concern that, with 2 of the main things that brought me to Guild Wars in the first place gone, GW2's design seems to be headed in a direction away from myself and customers like me. I don't buy games because of the name on the box, I buy them because they suit my playing preferences. I'd like to see the Guild Wars franchise keep some of these crucial elements that make it unique from other online RPG's, and consequently the only one I own and play.

There's absolutely nothing stopping you from not buying GW2 and just playing Guild Wars with your friends after GW2 releases, as they have said they will keep the Guild Wars servers running.