Curse

Biostem · Feb 03, 2008, 03:09 AM // 03:09

Taking the exact same game engine we have now, how effective do you think a GW game could be, but in a modern setting?

There'd still be magic, but instead of bows and arrows we'd have assault rifles & guns. Instead of spirits we'd have turrets and gadgets. Instead of undead we'd have robots. Another idea was to basically add more sci-fi elements on top of what we already have; robots as a new set of summons, but still have undead. Keep spirits but also have turrets. in addition to traps, also have land mines, etc.

Winterclaw · Feb 03, 2008, 03:11 AM // 03:11

I'd prefer cyberpunk... it's close enough to modern, but with a few tweaks.

credit · Feb 03, 2008, 03:13 AM // 03:13

I for sure would not play this.

Biostem · Feb 03, 2008, 03:39 AM // 03:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by credit

I for sure would not play this.

I'm sorry to hear that. Is it you don't like games set in a modern setting? Is it that guns and robots are too overdone? What about, as the other respondent said, a cyber-punk setting, or a steam-punk setting? What about something more Renaissance-era, with simple firearms? Could you expand upon what would turn you off to a different setting?

Operative 14 · Feb 03, 2008, 03:51 AM // 03:51

I wouldn't mind a modern day game based off of the GW engine and game play concept. That sounds kind of fun the way you describe it actually.

HawkofStorms · Feb 03, 2008, 03:54 AM // 03:54

Hellgate London? Maybe?

Amon Warrior · Feb 03, 2008, 04:02 AM // 04:02

I wouldn't like GW in a modern setting for several reasons.

- I prefer the swords and magic theme with minimum gunpowder age involved.

- Assault rifles and such don't mix well with magic IMO. Why would you need them if you could just summon a meteor storm upon your enemies?

- I would be more inclined to play a Sci-fi theme involving advanced technology and space exploration.

- GW, as other online games, is a bit of an escape and relief from a somewhat depressing reality. It's much easier and less divisive to socialize and talk about the woes and joys of the Ursanway (in GW) or the martian faction (in a sci-fi theme) than to talk about blood diamonds and the war in Iraq - from a modern-day setting.

My 2 cents...

credit · Feb 03, 2008, 04:02 AM // 04:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biostem

I'm sorry to hear that. Is it you don't like games set in a modern setting? Is it that guns and robots are too overdone? What about, as the other respondent said, a cyber-punk setting, or a steam-punk setting? What about something more Renaissance-era, with simple firearms? Could you expand upon what would turn you off to a different setting?

Dude I play CoD4: Modern Warfare competitively, it's not the modern part, it's the combination of magic and modern that is an epic fail. Take Harry Potter for example, epic fail.

Biostem · Feb 03, 2008, 04:10 AM // 04:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by credit

Dude I play CoD4: Modern Warfare competitively, it's not the modern part, it's the combination of magic and modern that is an epic fail. Take Harry Potter for example, epic fail.

Well... that's just bad implementation. In the case of Harry Potter, they take modern mannerisms and slap magic onto them. Mechanics-wise, whether your character was firing off a bow or a rifle, what would be the difference (other than the graphics, of course).

I can think of many reasons why one would use a gun even if magic was available; you can fire a gun if silenced, you don't need magical aptitude to use a gun, and perhaps magic and firearms would have other differences implemented - like perhaps some adrenal skills for firearms.

HawkofStorms · Feb 03, 2008, 04:11 AM // 04:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by credit

Dude I play CoD4: Modern Warfare competitively, it's not the modern part, it's the combination of magic and modern that is an epic fail. Take Harry Potter for example, epic fail.

Right, I mean, a multibillion dollar franchise = fail.

*rolls eyes* at people who think that THERE form and ONLY there form of entertainment is "the right one." No one can read this book, interpret this poem, enjoy this song, etc. in a different way then I do.

credit · Feb 03, 2008, 04:35 AM // 04:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

Right, I mean, a multibillion dollar franchise = fail.

*rolls eyes* at people who think that THERE form and ONLY there form of entertainment is "the right one." No one can read this book, interpret this poem, enjoy this song, etc. in a different way then I do.

Did I say that my opinion was the only right one? No. It's my opinion and that is all. He wanted to know what people would think of a modern version of Guild Wars in terms of effectiveness, and I said what I think: epic fail.

If you really want a modern Guild Wars, well you're not going to get one.

Legacy Virus · Feb 03, 2008, 04:38 AM // 04:38

not to say this is a bad idea or anything, but the idea of a "warrior/assassin/dervish" type class fitting into this game play is a little....unreasonable dont ya think?

I mean don't get me wrong watching someone try to run at you with a big weapon and hit you with it while hes being barraged with bullets would be funny to see.....but then it would almost be fps like if we didnt have that.

razor39999 · Feb 03, 2008, 04:41 AM // 04:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

Right, I mean, a multibillion dollar franchise = fail.

*rolls eyes* at people who think that THERE form and ONLY there form of entertainment is "the right one." No one can read this book, interpret this poem, enjoy this song, etc. in a different way then I do.

You mean their.

Anyways I'm also not a huge fan of modern technology combined with magic (I almost stopped playing Vampire The Masquereade when midgame my character went from 13-th century Middle Europe to late 20-th century London). I like the steampunk theme though, or even adding just the most basic of firearms. Also just because something is a financial success doesn't make it a good piece of art/technology/whatever. Take WoW for example.

Biostem · Feb 03, 2008, 04:46 AM // 04:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legacy Virus

not to say this is a bad idea or anything, but the idea of a "warrior/assassin/dervish" type class fitting into this game play is a little....unreasonable dont ya think?

I mean don't get me wrong watching someone try to run at you with a big weapon and hit you with it while hes being barraged with bullets would be funny to see.....but then it would almost be fps like if we didnt have that.

Perhaps it's an issue of scale that we need to get over; how is a warrior charging through a hail of bullets and arrows any different than a warrior charging through a hail of lightning bolts and fireballs? I don't think the power level would need to be completely redone - you could argue that the armor would be capable of protecting the wearer from bullets to the same extent it can protect them from arrows in the current settings. Magic would be a constant, though.

Perhaps firearms would be to magic as daggers are to axes - a lower damage range but higher rate of fire.

Adam of Tyria · Feb 03, 2008, 04:49 AM // 04:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by credit

Take Harry Potter for example, epic fail.

Harry Potter movies and books are very entertaining...

I just dont like the idea of having a game like Guild Wars with guns. Not exactly my forte.

Quick_Prodigy · Feb 03, 2008, 05:14 AM // 05:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biostem

Taking the exact same game engine we have now, how effective do you think a GW game could be, but in a modern setting?

There'd still be magic, but instead of bows and arrows we'd have assault rifles & guns. Instead of spirits we'd have turrets and gadgets. Instead of undead we'd have robots. Another idea was to basically add more sci-fi elements on top of what we already have; robots as a new set of summons, but still have undead. Keep spirits but also have turrets. in addition to traps, also have land mines, etc.

If you want this then play warhammer or starcraft. No point in doing this for guildwars.

Biostem · Feb 03, 2008, 05:17 AM // 05:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quick_Prodigy

If you want this then play warhammer or starcraft. No point in doing this for guildwars.

Well, Starcraft is an RTS, so that wouldn't work. And Warhammer has a different feel.

Honestly, though, I'm surprised there's so much resistance to this premise. Is there some unspoken connection to "high fantasy" that demands it be the only setting that a CRPG/Action RPG can be set in, or have I offended someone?

RamenFiasco · Feb 03, 2008, 05:21 AM // 05:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biostem

Perhaps it's an issue of scale that we need to get over; how is a warrior charging through a hail of bullets and arrows any different than a warrior charging through a hail of lightning bolts and fireballs? I don't think the power level would need to be completely redone - you could argue that the armor would be capable of protecting the wearer from bullets to the same extent it can protect them from arrows in the current settings. Magic would be a constant, though.

Perhaps firearms would be to magic as daggers are to axes - a lower damage range but higher rate of fire.

No, no, no. I'm kind of sick of the whole movie style invincibility of our characters in videogames already. I can tolerate the magic, where apocalyptic thunder bolts of doom are raining down amongst the fighters, inflicting only 5% damage. Because magic is not real, and because it's not real, the fact that characters are fighting against it, these characters should have unreal protection and armor.

However, bullets are part of reality. I dislike the thought of such real life death inflicting objects that could pummel a character and not blow the person asunder. It just doesn't seem right, when all the armor in our modern world can't protect a person against a plethora of weapons. Yet a GW type of game based in our modern era could do the exact opposite in terms of fighting capabilities.

Biostem · Feb 03, 2008, 05:26 AM // 05:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by RamenFiasco

No, no, no. I'm kind of sick of the whole movie style invincibility of our characters in videogames already. I can tolerate the magic, where apocalyptic thunder bolts of doom are raining down amongst the fighters, inflicting only 5% damage. Because magic is not real, and because it's not real, the fact that characters are fighting against it, these characters should have unreal protection and armor.

However, bullets are part of reality. I dislike the thought of such real life death inflicting objects that could pummel a character and not blow the person asunder. It just doesn't seem right, when all the armor in our modern world can't protect a person against a plethora of weapons. Yet a GW type of game based in our modern area could do the exact opposite in terms of fighting capabilities.

Well... it wouldn't be very much fun to roll a character, get bitten by some animal, and spend the next 2 months recouping in some hospital somewhere.

There *has* to be a certain level of suspension of belief for a video game to work, and in the context of the game-world, magic is just as real as the swords or armor in it.

It's very difficult to make a game realistic, especially in a multiplayer environment, and still have it be entertaining.

Personally, I'd rather have a game have a low level of realism in favor of entertainment...

credit · Feb 03, 2008, 05:28 AM // 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biostem

Personally, I'd rather have a game have a low level of realism in favor of entertainment...

Which is why a modern setting would fail.