Curse

Silly Warrior · Mar 28, 2007, 05:50 PM // 17:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inde

Hey! The MSNBC article! Any of that from our forum goers when we requested that? I'd love to hear if they used your quotes!! Let us know.

Lol, me.

I requested, but she already had it all filled up with quotes by the time I spoke on the phone with her a few days later.

HOWEVER:

She is planning on quoting me on an article about "How MMO's are becoming more mainsteam and not taking over you life"...something named like that.

So while my quotes won't be in this one when I spoke to her, I'm hoping that that she will use mine for her next article or so.

I don't think anyone from Guru is on there...is there?

Either way..cool!

Feminist Terrorist · Mar 28, 2007, 05:54 PM // 17:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inde

Hey! The MSNBC article! Any of that from our forum goers when we requested that? I'd love to hear if they used your quotes!! Let us know.

I spent two hours writing an email answering her questions, but nothing got put in the story.

bamm bamm bamm · Mar 28, 2007, 06:38 PM // 18:38

Quote:

“Our design goal when creating ‘Guild Wars’ was this: ‘If I’ve got 30 minutes before dinner, will I have fun playing this game?’” says Strain.

There are a lot of good quotes in that article but that's probably my favorite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Reading this article, I realise that I've never seen a really technical article on GW, telling more about the game engine and the streaming techniques used. Anyone got an article like that? (may be it's Anet secret...)

This should be pretty close to what you're looking for.

ValaOfTheFens · Mar 28, 2007, 06:43 PM // 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

I think what people fail to realize that "jumping" isn't some willy nilly silly WoW-knock-off addition to the game.

The current GW engine is basically a 2D map, with no real Z axis. We can't negotiate terrain properly. In fact, GW maps are pretty small and only seem so big because we zig zag across predetermined paths.

Theres no real interaction with the environments we're in.

Adding "Jumping/Climbing/sliding" is a sign of a much more robust and complex game engine and opens up the door to more open ended map designs as well as more possibilities in PvP.

Honestly, ANET will have to create the need for jumping. In the current environment its unneccessary and would be downright annoying in PvE. Since I don't PvP I don't care if ANET adds a 500 foot sheer cliff to every PvP map. *shrug*

lakatz · Mar 28, 2007, 07:20 PM // 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inde

Lakatz, the senior editor at MSNBC asked me to gather a few Guild Wars players together to send her some emails for comments on the game. I put up the announcement and my PM box was promptly flooded so it was taken down after only 2 minutes.

I believe we sent about a dozen her way and I'm just wondering which forum users had their quotes put up.

All of two minutes huh? hmmm... well then I can't imagine how I missed it.

Thanks

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

...Adding "Jumping/Climbing/sliding" is a sign of a much more robust and complex game engine and opens up the door to more open ended map designs as well as more possibilities in PvP.

But we do have climbing, and it appears to me it utilizes pretty much the same collision detection algorithms of other 3D apps I've been in... but...

I could be fooled. I've been fooled by other effects in this game before.

EternalTempest · Mar 28, 2007, 09:37 PM // 21:37

I loved how NCSoft felt that GW was going to be failure, then looks at what they were doing.. then got nervious about taking the chancing or risk there competitor from getting it then buying the company going 100% full steam

Puebert · Mar 28, 2007, 09:44 PM // 21:44

What was the experiment? No monthly fees?

Kuldebar Valiturus · Mar 28, 2007, 09:51 PM // 21:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puebert

What was the experiment? No monthly fees?

No, releasing a game without jumping.

Quality free to play games are a dime a dozen, really.

Yeah.

Omega X · Mar 29, 2007, 02:14 AM // 02:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens

Honestly, ANET will have to create the need for jumping. In the current environment its unneccessary and would be downright annoying in PvE. Since I don't PvP I don't care if ANET adds a 500 foot sheer cliff to every PvP map. *shrug*

Lyra was talking about GW2 vs GW1.

A true 3D engine needs 3D movement, that is the "X", "Y", and "Z" axis. The GW2 environment is going to be fully interactive.

The current GW engine does not support that at all. That is what was being explained.

Knowing ArenaNET, there will be a reason to jump/swim/climb/slide in GW2 rather them just being aesthetic movement.

Rhedd · Mar 29, 2007, 04:02 AM // 04:02

Quote:

For those fans that like their current “Guild Wars” just fine, Strain asks for their indulgence — and trust.

“’Guild Wars’ has been a phenomenal success, and we’re proud of it,” he says. “We’re not going to ruin it by making it more like every other MMO on the market.”

Not to sound like a poop, but given that everything we've heard so far directly contradicts this, might I suggest that someone at Anet prove this statement.

Prove it soon.

Shadis · Mar 29, 2007, 05:19 AM // 05:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhedd

Not to sound like a poop, but given that everything we've heard so far directly contradicts this, might I suggest that someone at Anet prove this statement.

Prove it soon.

This is how I feel as well. News with GW2 seems to point to them turning the franchise into another clone. Playable Races is something I like, if it's only to "look different" (I really, REALLY hope they don't have "racial attributes" that make them superior to another using the same class), possibly dropping the level cap: Would it be just a number or would balance go out the window for the people who want their superman "uber" characters?

Kotetsu Rain · Mar 29, 2007, 05:27 AM // 05:27

I liked the article...it shows just how cool Jeff really is.

Rhedd · Mar 29, 2007, 05:34 AM // 05:34

I find it interesting that so many people on this thread said that the article was "positive". I'd say it's neutral, overall.

Read it again...

Page 1: What Guild Wars is, why it is successful, and what we're talking about in this article.

Page 2: How Anet is planning to change the formula, why fans who actually like the game are upset, and assurances from Anet that they won't really ruin everything as much as it seems like they might.

On an unconnected note, I'm actually very offended at the implication that the game is "now seven years old", and therefore getting a bit tired.

I've been playing since day one, so if that's true, where the heck are my other SIX Birthday presents??

The game isn't old.

Shmanka · Mar 29, 2007, 05:38 AM // 05:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhedd

Not to sound like a poop, but given that everything we've heard so far directly contradicts this, might I suggest that someone at Anet prove this statement.

Prove it soon.

I don't even care anymore, all of this talk about GW2 and "he said this/that" is not only contradicting us, its making us confused as hell. I even abruptly asked Anet to answer questions on the other thread. No reply. Not only that Anet has definitely lost its value in their word to me as well, especially this new 8v8 HA scenario, where they declared they wanted 6v6. You can't trust one damn thing they give us as customers for the truth. I've lost alot of interest, but I still have hope, otherwise this will go into the EB 15$ game rack soon.

DutchGun · Mar 29, 2007, 05:54 AM // 05:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega X

Lyra was talking about GW2 vs GW1.

A true 3D engine needs 3D movement, that is the "X", "Y", and "Z" axis. The GW2 environment is going to be fully interactive.

The current GW engine does not support that at all. That is what was being explained.

Knowing ArenaNET, there will be a reason to jump/swim/climb/slide in GW2 rather them just being aesthetic movement.

Just to clarify a bit, naturally the GW engine is a true 3D engine (seeing as everything is rendered in 3D). What is *not* 3D is their pathing and collision system - meaning where your characters and creatures can run in the world.

Perynne · Mar 29, 2007, 06:13 AM // 06:13

I really liked this article, it was well written and showed the GW series in a very good light. Cheers to Anet!

One part of the article that really stuck out was the part about fans being "freaked out" by GW2. I for one am not one of those freaked out fans. Everything I've heard about GW2 has sounded great, including the jumping options and playable races. I don't understand why so many people are against this. I trust Anet, and I trust that they will make the new game different from all the other online games out there. Sure, it will have jumping like WoW... but jumping is only natural and one of the base movements your character should be able to do. They're not copying WoW, they're taking the movement from real life.

Even if they use some elements from other games, I don't think that's so bad. They've had a couple years to test the way GW worked, and if it was all pure and holy and perfect, there would be no need to change it and they would stick with it. As it is, I completely agree with the comment that the original GW has even become a bit bloated. Sure it's fun to play, but I don't want to see a bazillion campaigns with the same kind of content as all the rest. Sometimes it's a good idea to have a fresh start, change the game engine and try something new. I love my characters in GW but that will not keep me from playing GW2. I can always play both, since I'm sure Anet will keep supporting the older one too.

I remember that at least a while ago in the forums, tons of people agreed that something should be done to make the game feel exciting again. For example, after Nightfall came out lots of people claimed they'd stop playing if new content was not implemented, some even wanted an entirely new game. Now that these people have been listened to, it seems that most have decided to switch opinions and start complaining.

It seems to me that Anet listens to it's fans and does most of the sensible things asked of them (if those things are within their power to do without incurring too much loss of gameplay, or going against what the game engine can do), and still all they get as thanks are the negative cries of spoiled gamers who are never satisfied.

Lonesamurai · Mar 29, 2007, 08:25 AM // 08:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shmanka

I don't even care anymore, all of this talk about GW2 and "he said this/that" is not only contradicting us, its making us confused as hell. I even abruptly asked Anet to answer questions on the other thread. No reply. Not only that Anet has definitely lost its value in their word to me as well, especially this new 8v8 HA scenario, where they declared they wanted 6v6. You can't trust one damn thing they give us as customers for the truth. I've lost alot of interest, but I still have hope, otherwise this will go into the EB 15$ game rack soon.

Ok, two things...

1, I've been covering these topics on my show and confirming bits before i mention anything, or at least finding out for the next show

2, if you mean your copy of the game going back to EB, remember, once you have an account set up and you have used your activation key, you CANNOT sell the key again, a, because its already part of your account and b, because its against the EULA for the game and as such, the account would be shut down if ANet found out

Fril Estelin · Mar 29, 2007, 12:52 PM // 12:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by bamm bamm bamm

There are a lot of good quotes in that article but that's probably my favorite.

This should be pretty close to what you're looking for.

It's really good, many thanks for the link! But I guess in 3 years, the engine has evolved massively, new threats and solutions have been discovered, and with the 2 new campaigns (and heroes) they probably reworked quite a lot of it.

In a sense I guess that you don't get this sort of article because it takes long to do and Anet concentrates on the game itself and community relations.

Alex Weekes · Mar 29, 2007, 01:11 PM // 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhedd

Not to sound like a poop, but given that everything we've heard so far directly contradicts this, might I suggest that someone at Anet prove this statement.

Prove it soon.

I would actually say that no one has enough details about GW2 yet to be able to make a judgement about the direction the game is going in. Yes, the game will become more like a traditional MMO at a very broad level (eg with the added persistence), however it's the smaller details that define a game. That's where the quote from Jeff becomes very important at this stage: the dev team have a lot of things they want to do with GW2, but at the same time they still want to retain the essence of GW that you've all enjoyed so much.

I really don't see any contradictions myself.

Moving on to GW being 7 years old ... it is, if you go all the way back to the original conception of the game. It's only been available to buy for just short of two years, however the history of the game goes back a lot further through pre-release testing and original design concepts. I think (and based on reaction to the quote, many of you would agree) that the game has withstood the test of time very well, which tells us that the original design decisions were good ones. That takes me back to the future - the design team knows what you all enjoy about GW and they're not going to throw it away. They're going to make it better.

boxterduke · Mar 29, 2007, 01:39 PM // 13:39

Very nice to see, hope GW take over all online games.

Give me a hear hear