Curse

snaek · Aug 04, 2009, 11:39 PM // 23:39

-gameplay based on precision, timing, strategy, etc and not spamming things on recharge
-movement and positioning to play an important role, with improved wsad control and no more rubberbanding
-importance placed in multi-player (pvp yes, but also including team-based pve)
-and most of all class/skill balance

one can only dream

fenix · Aug 04, 2009, 11:41 PM // 23:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

He's not trolling. Depending on how you look at it, heroes were a good and bad thing. The good thing was players no longer had to rely on other players, but the bad thing was it just took out the multiplayer aspect of the game. The community was big enough in Nightfall for players to easily get stuff done with other players. Players should have the choice to play solo, but when playing solo is much more desirable and effective in an online game, then there's a problem. Whatever, too late to fix.

Not to mention ANet didn't add the OPTION of heroes, they forced you to use them. Look at the number of missions where you HAD to bring X hero. This automatically resulted in players being seperated from others. It was a completely unnecessary thing to add into the game. You should never be forced to drop a party member in order to use AI.

That's not the only thing Nightfall introduced. They introduced paragons and dervishes, which were both horribly, horribly implemented into the game and both had to undergo massive nerfs just so they were somewhat balanced. That, was horrible.

Then of course there was the massive power creep. I don't think I need to explain why power creep is bad for a game, you're smart enough to know.

Now, take a look at DoA, and PvE skills. End-game Nightfall is nothing but super powerful monsters and horrible environmental effects fighting players with equally as powerful and dumb skills. This made it quite clear that ANet's design for end-game PvE was quite terrible.

I'm very sorry that you cannot comprehend what Snow Bunny was saying, but he's right. Things have just been going down the shitter since the release of Nightfall, from a game design point of view. Guild Wars used to be a game that actually required some sort of skill to effectively play, and you were rewarded for skill as opposed to being rewarded for time. Sadly ANet chose to completely throw that out the window and make Guild Wars a brainless game where the more time you grind, the better you're going to be. It's a shame, because Guild Wars had potential to be much more.

PS: Ironically enough, saying someone is trolling because no one could say something that stupid is trolling. Good job, troll, although I'll give you a 3/10.

The Paragon and Dervish additions weren't just horribly implemented. They were horribly designed. A ranged warrior, and an AoE warrior? Not to mention that the skills the Paragon/Dervish had were HUGELY overpowered (look at 6 man HA, teams held for hours with 2 defensive paragons, and that's not even mentioning Dervishes in GvG....Spearmen at rank 3? What?). The sheer amount of nerfs required to make them even SOMEWHAT balanced ruined game play.

Power creep. Needless to say, ANet gave it a shot in Factions (Kurz/Lux skills/titles), added to it in Nightfall (SS/LB etc etc) and went all out in EOTN. All of which resulted in PvE being turned from challenging and fun, to a joke and boring. Good work there ANet.

DoA. Really? I mean come on. DoA was the worst joke of a zone ever implemented. Firstly, there were huge issues with doing the four zones. Secondly, it was IMPOSSIBLE. Like, literally, actually impossible. The amount of changes that were made to DoA just so it was playable, was ridiculous.

Nightfall wasn't a good change for PvE. Imagine how challenging EOTN would be if they hadn't added power creep and PvE skill trash. Certainly moreso than it is now.

Rocky Raccoon · Aug 04, 2009, 11:46 PM // 23:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

You can think about heroes in two ways - either they helped alleviate a problem or they exacerbated the same problem, that is, players finding other players to play with.

You can say,"Well, pugs were becoming more and more scarce, and so heroes allowed players to form more able groups more quickly with customizable AI."

Or, what I'm saying, is that "It was indeed difficult to form pugs, they did indeed take some effort to get a good one going, but you shouldn't just kill the entire situation by introducing AI that kills the multiplayer aspect of the game."

I mean, why actually form player groups with other players when you and a buddy can spend less time forming up, but in the process kill the PUG aspect that's critical to online RPGs.

With Factions, spirits and assassins were introduced. However, spirits were mauled quickly through nerfs, and the old shock AoD template actually took a decent degree of skill to play, and if you see the way the older GvGers played with shadowsteps it's indicative of the fact that they took more strategy to use more effectively.

Nightfall had none of Prophecies' subtlety, and it took dozens of nerfs to tame it down to a manageable level, but EotN came and wiped that all away.

I didn't mean to derail this topic, in all honesty, and I guess it was wrong of me to begin the initial post by attacking another poster, but for the rest of you disagreeing with me, deconstruct my post thoughtfully if aggressively, or post your opinion independently of mine, but don't just disregard my post as a QQ.

Again, sorry to any Riverside mods that have extra work due to people indignant that I used the word carebear!

edit: to avoid derailment, anyone who's interested please pm to continue discussion...

Now this post is all that your other one wasn't. Your presentation here is much easier to read without the vitrolic parts. When i started this thread it wasn't to praise or blame ANET for anything, just to see what people would like in the new game.

Devastating Flames · Aug 05, 2009, 12:54 AM // 00:54

The amazing Graphics

pinguinius · Aug 05, 2009, 01:07 AM // 01:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkusParkus

So you basically want GW2 to be stupidly confusing and too hard for the average teenager to understand? It'll Never Happen.

WoW has probably 30 skills per class on top of talents and gear, and I wouldn't call it "stupidly confusing" or "hard for the average teenager to understand" considering I started playing it around 4 years ago when I was 17.

NeoNXtoshiro · Aug 05, 2009, 01:26 AM // 01:26

There's an infinite amount of things that we can all collectively "expect" and "hope" for, but being a realist, here some things that I truly believe can be achieved with the release of GW2.

1. The awesome sense of true pride in a game. Those of you who have played since the beginning, or even those of you who chose this game over something more "mainstream" like WoW, D2, FFXI, EQ, or even MapleStory? (Not saying these games aren't worth being proud over, but there was certainly something truly unique about GW that attracted me.)

2. A beautiful game. I'm sure many, if not all of us have had to stop somewhere to observe and take in the beautiful surroundings in this game. I'm thinking about Tyria primarily, though. (Anyone see Aion?)

3. Another engaging storyline, or sense of meaningful progression. The Searing anyone? How heartbroken was most of the community when they first experienced this? This made us want to "beat" the game that much more.

4. Skill balance. Now, this depends on how you view what skill balance is. Are the skills already unbalanced upon release, but no one has discovered the exploitable skill(s), (so they are balanced as we know them, only to have them surface much later) or are the skills balanced so terribly that an immediate nerf is required within a small time frame?

5. This may be hoping for a little too much but a spell check or some sort of grammar policy or incentive (if not for one's own mind) for clear communication? How often do you see people in trade like this: wts worrior tombs

6. Because this may not have a level cap, I'd still like to see epic battles. I don't want to travel to a boss and have the boss one hit me and my party without me earning that defeat with a real mistake. This also goes for PvP.

Hm, I thought I had more. I'm sure they'll turn up.

Winterclaw · Aug 05, 2009, 01:45 AM // 01:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

He's not trolling. Depending on how you look at it, heroes were a good and bad thing. The good thing was players no longer had to rely on other players, but the bad thing was it just took out the multiplayer aspect of the game. The community was big enough in Nightfall for players to easily get shit done with other players. Players should have the choice to play solo, but when playing solo is much more desirable and effective in an online game, then there's a problem. Whatever, too late to fix.

Not to mention ANet didn't add the OPTION of heroes, they forced you to use them. Look at the number of missions where you HAD to bring X hero. This automatically resulted in players being seperated from others. It was a completely unnecessary thing to add into the game. You should never be forced to drop a party member in order to use AI.

Heroes were generally considered bad for pvp. IMO most of the time if you can't organize 4 or 8 people for PvP you are either in the wrong guild or not ready for PvP. I've even managed to put together a HA pug once or twice.

For the missions, a better option would have been to prohibit you from using that hero in a mission and then tag him on as a party NPC.

For farming/vanqing: sabway, discoway, and every other necro-heavy way means if you don't have 2-3 necros with you, you aren't going to do very well compared to those that do. That and they steal all your drops without bothering to give themselves any good equipment or runes.

For the rest of PvE, I think they can be nice when their AI isn't messed up. Considering how bad a lot of pugs can be, they've pretty much turned the game into an all solo affair for most people. I mean why wait around trying to find someone to help you with a quest or mission when the odds of finding someone who can play ok are against you when you can play now with a known quantity.

Quote:

They introduced paragons and dervishes, which were both horribly, horribly implemented into the game and both had to undergo massive nerfs just so they were somewhat balanced.

IMBAgons are imbalanced? Preposterous!

Quote:

Originally Posted by snow bunny

I didn't mean to derail this topic, in all honesty, and I guess it was wrong of me to begin the initial post by attacking another poster, but for the rest of you disagreeing with me, deconstruct my post thoughtfully if aggressively, or post your opinion independently of mine, but don't just disregard my post as a QQ.

I'm not a riverside mod but if you ask me you can only have a reasonable expectation based on past events and you nailed those past events.

Let's talk about NF since it's been brought up. NF was the last full game that Anet put out. It had unbalanced classes and overpowered skills. So are we going to have unbalanced classes and overpowered skills since that is their last best effort? Are they going to hear "nf powercreep" ringing in their ears and respond by making the classes and skills too weak overall only to hear about skills being too weak and then we have powercreep all over again?

As an honest question, when was the last time we had a roughly balanced GW with skills that weren't useless and weren't too powerful?

I'm going back to the stylists because that's still something on my mind. People were asking for them for years. Years I say. All we wanted was a reasonable ingame method to change our hair. Some of us had reasons like our PC's hair had clipping issues we couldn't see in character creation because we couldn't zoom out far enough to see the issues.

What do we get? A microtranaction system that didn't even offer new hairstyles or colors and worse yet you had to by several coins at once even if only one character had something you wanted to change. We ask for something for years, they expect us to pay for it, and they don't even give us their best effort as a company.

How are we supposed to positive when Anet isn't giving their best? How are we to expect them to give a properly balanced skill system with they give us powercreep and when it gets too much they smiters boon things. They can't fix the classes they have or properly add new ones (the first 6 have pretty much been the best classes overall) so how are we supposed to expect the new ones they are creating for the next game are going to be any better?

For all I know they are going to take the worst features of paragons, dervishes, and warriors and roll them into one very bad class. Or that mesmers will still be a joke in pve if they are allowed to stay around.

I'm still willing to give anet a few more chances but right now the winds are against them.

SpyderArachnid · Aug 05, 2009, 02:03 AM // 02:03

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swzh0ngMNJo

My jump button....

Legendm · Aug 05, 2009, 03:55 AM // 03:55

I'm just expecting what Anet said would be in the game. I know things could change as development, but I'm not going to get all butthurt if something I was expecting isn't there.

Not necessary.

Cacheelma · Aug 05, 2009, 04:26 AM // 04:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

However, due to technological limitations and the need to do more than the current game will allow, we are now working on GW3 and only have left one person to maintain GW2.

I can totally see this happening.

Inde · Aug 05, 2009, 04:35 AM // 04:35

I... wow... I have no idea what happened to this thread.

It's so derailed, full of trolling, one-liners and more I would have to delete the majority of it. So let's close this.

I'm sure this topic will appear again in the coming months and I would ask that we try to remain on topic, contributing and at least attempt to have discussion and feedback on the actual topic.