Curse

Lonesamurai · Aug 09, 2009, 10:30 PM // 22:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

Server vs server (or world vs world or whatever you want to call it) is a much better idea than good vs evil on the same server. You can avoid population imbalances by picking appropriately sized worlds to fight each other each week. You now have "server" pride, which is more personal than "good/evil side" pride, as there are many servers, but only 2 good/evil sides.

I always thought it was weird that in some MMOs that half the population on your server you could never, ever group up with, and that they were basically just taking up space that could have been allocated for people on your side. If it was a game on a PvE type of server, the interaction between sides could be so small that the other side might as well have have not been there at all.

for the love of god and all that is holy, why do people want Server Segregation to be part of the PvP mechanic?!?

"Server Pride"?!? I want to play with anyone whenever, like I can on GW, not have to roll a new character on another server and restart my guild a second time just to play with people I know

Qing Guang · Aug 09, 2009, 10:59 PM // 22:59

Personally I like the idea that the playables aren't sorted between "good" and "evil".

That's one thing that bugs me about other games, this insistence that you be a goody goody or a baddie. And usually, the good guys are pretty and the bad guys are monstruous. Lamelamelame. I don't care what BS they try to feed me about WoW, it's pretty obvious that most Alliance are "good guys", most Horde are "bad guys", etc. It's a dumb system, but then they go and try to add dimension to it by saying "oh, well see we screwed up" or "oh, see we do care" and it falls on its face.

That was one of the good things about Guild Wars - (mostly) everybody important was human (or formerly so), so even if there were "good guys" and "bad guys", there were also people in between, and it was a spectrum across the whole race. Yeah, Kormir is awesome and selfless, Shiro is badass and evil, but there're others who are more normal. Bokka, for example - he's greedy and foolish, yes, but not evil, just complacent. Or the Kurzicks and the Luxons - proud and arrogant, to the point that they are almost unwilling to work together for mutual defense, but they do want to take care of their peoples.

I hope that we maintain something resembling moral ambiguity in GW2. It'll probably come down to either Races of Alignment or Races of Hats, and personally I'd rather have stereotype-species than alignment-species, especially since EotN did such a good job of setting out all the hats for us.

And everyone's gonna play Chaotic Neutral anyway, so yeah.

Jonii · Aug 09, 2009, 11:05 PM // 23:05

They've said switching servers should be as easy as switching districts, I believe, so no worries over rerolling to play with friends on a different server and no sense in "server pride."

Gigashadow · Aug 09, 2009, 11:18 PM // 23:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

for the love of god and all that is holy, why do people want Server Segregation to be part of the PvP mechanic?!?

"Server Pride"?!? I want to play with anyone whenever, like I can on GW, not have to roll a new character on another server and restart my guild a second time just to play with people I know

They already said, 2 years ago now, that you can switch worlds so that you can play with your friends. Their stated reason for having separate worlds in the first place, was to have a smaller community, so that you would encounter the same people out in the world. Since they also said the battles will be world vs world, with benefits given to worlds that win in PvP, there will naturally be some server pride aspect coming from that. There is an implication that it is different from today's district situation, otherwise why even mention the concept of worlds, if it's just districts. Probably you can't switch worlds constantly to get the uber bonus from whichever world is currently winning. It would kind of defeat the build a small community aspect, if everyone is constantly switching.

How do they balance being able to switch whenever you want so that you can play with friends, against everyone switching to the world with the current uber bonus? Well, that's a design problem they can figure out.

]HM[ Sabre Wolf · Aug 09, 2009, 11:20 PM // 23:20

For the Good vs Evil idea... I believe ANET did say there would be 2 direct plot lines to reach the end of GW2... this could be the Good Road vs the Evil Road... like in KOTOR2. But I am just guessing like everyone else is.

draxynnic · Aug 10, 2009, 02:47 AM // 02:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

They already said, 2 years ago now, that you can switch worlds so that you can play with your friends. Their stated reason for having separate worlds in the first place, was to have a smaller community, so that you would encounter the same people out in the world. Since they also said the battles will be world vs world, with benefits given to worlds that win in PvP, there will naturally be some server pride aspect coming from that. There is an implication that it is different from today's district situation, otherwise why even mention the concept of worlds, if it's just districts. Probably you can't switch worlds constantly to get the uber bonus from whichever world is currently winning. It would kind of defeat the build a small community aspect, if everyone is constantly switching.

How do they balance being able to switch whenever you want so that you can play with friends, against everyone switching to the world with the current uber bonus? Well, that's a design problem they can figure out.

It might be that, whatever the benefits are, you needed to belong to that server at the time they were earned to receive them. Even then, though, there might be the risk of all the good players congregating onto one so they could hold onto them.

The best solution is probably simply to make it prestige-based in some form and not make it good enough that people are going to switch servers for it. Given the favour thing, I suspect ANet has learned about letting PvP control PvE.

Coney · Aug 10, 2009, 03:17 AM // 03:17

Without reading this thread, I have to laugh. A friend (father of my brother-in-law) asked me about alignment/good/evil in GW.

I was kinda confused, as it seems you're always on the good side (PvE) or playing some CTF-wannabe (PvP) sports-match.

I do miss the good ole' days of DnD where alignment was a major part of the game. Ahh, to run up to evil NPC's and play them for fools!!!

Avarre · Aug 10, 2009, 04:14 AM // 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

Oh FFS, why the F**K do we need sides in GW2, we already have Alliance/Horde, Order/Destruction in others, and the Big Epic PvP Battles are going to be GvG styled like in Guild Wars 1, cos funnily enough... IT'S CALLED GUILD WARS!!!

I agree. Adding in 'alignment' sides to GW2 would just distract from the fact that the game is about a world of warring Guilds. Or at least, it was. GW shifted from notable guilds (White Mantle, Stone Summit etc) to clans, to nations. Still, I think it's a more interesting idea than the typical race v race/good v evil.

Racthoh · Aug 10, 2009, 05:12 AM // 05:12

I don't understand the purpose of alignments in an MMO. Considering the appeal of an online game lies in the interaction with other players splitting the population for the sake of lore doesn't make sense.

draxynnic · Aug 10, 2009, 05:52 AM // 05:52

It wasn't even for lore reasons. Everything that happened in Frozen Throne was purely to set up the circumstances they wanted for WoW, and the last part of that to be completed was (surprise!) the campaign which resplit Horde and Alliance after being united against the common enemy pre-expansion. They could easily have left the races unsplit without violating the lore - start everyone in Kalimdor and have sorting out the Lordaeron situation and the racial tension remaining there as one of their plot points.

In fact, the split was something that came up mid-development.

AmbientMelody · Aug 10, 2009, 09:31 AM // 09:31

Charr ... no, they are not 'evil', unless by evil you mark everyone who opposes the human race. Charr are exactly like men you know ... they burn, rape and kill, have their own philosophy and warrior's code and conquer adjacent territories as well as plan ahead their invasions, not to mention magical and technical aspect of their warfare.

I suspect few really evil factions/sides myself:

- dragons (pretty obvious, but they are sort of above-good-and-evil)
- undead in Orr ruins
- undead/ghosts in Ascalon ruins (not sure yet if they will expand and be a threat to everyone or just are lost Ascalonian Souls who pursue eternal revenge on Charr ... and for some reason can't enter The Mists)
- destroyers (bitten, weak and scattered, with stone dwarves on their toes, but still exist ... perhaps reunited and strengthened under Primordus banner?)
- Summit Dwarves ... not really evil just like the Charr, unless corrupted by some malicious force and used as a standing army in GW2
- turmoil in Kryta ... new civil wars and fights for the throne, depending on who takes real power and becomes a grey eminence behind the stage (Mursaat again? You never know, they weren't completely extinct to be honest in GW after titan invasion, they simply hid themselves well to survive ... and plot revenge)
- Cantha ... conservative Emperor is not really evil, but you can't say who's behind the stage again and what did Emperor use to bind Luxons and Kurzicks to his will as well as completely cut off the borders besides military might (sort-of NF case with using the demons to do your bidding ...)
- corrupted monsters in Kurzick forest ... perhaps stone cathedral getting out of control and becoming a powerful gateway and gathering place for all kinds of creatures lurking in the shadow
- jade monsters in the jade sea ... similar as Kurzick case
- Krait ... since I was impressed by the conspirational theory behind them
- destroyer-like faction which could be seen on concept art from cancelled Utopia campaign and many other things we have no idea about
- Tengu wars all over again ... they are not really evil (human syndrome) but their hate towards Sensali is yet to diminish ... and they didn't like how humans treated them either, so perhaps periodic alliance with Sensali is an option

Gun Pierson · Aug 10, 2009, 09:41 AM // 09:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

I'd rather not copy WoW/WAR/TOR/SWG/CoX and any other MMO with a good vs evil side.

And humans are evil. To quote Paul Barnett from Warhammer Online
"Humans are basically humans. Wonderful dreams. Terrible Nightmares. Don't really think things through. Will chop down an entire forest without thinking of the consequences."

This and I'll add Aion to that list.

Eliz Genevieve · Aug 10, 2009, 10:29 AM // 10:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmbientMelody

- dragons (pretty obvious, but they are sort of above-good-and-evil)
- undead in Orr ruins
- undead/ghosts in Ascalon ruins (not sure yet if they will expand and be a threat to everyone or just are lost Ascalonian Souls who pursue eternal revenge on Charr ... and for some reason can't enter The Mists)
- destroyers (bitten, weak and scattered, with stone dwarves on their toes, but still exist ... perhaps reunited and strengthened under Primordus banner?)
- Summit Dwarves ... not really evil just like the Charr, unless corrupted by some malicious force and used as a standing army in GW2
- turmoil in Kryta ... new civil wars and fights for the throne, depending on who takes real power and becomes a grey eminence behind the stage (Mursaat again? You never know, they weren't completely extinct to be honest in GW after titan invasion, they simply hid themselves well to survive ... and plot revenge)
- Cantha ... conservative Emperor is not really evil, but you can't say who's behind the stage again and what did Emperor use to bind Luxons and Kurzicks to his will as well as completely cut off the borders besides military might (sort-of NF case with using the demons to do your bidding ...)
- corrupted monsters in Kurzick forest ... perhaps stone cathedral getting out of control and becoming a powerful gateway and gathering place for all kinds of creatures lurking in the shadow
- jade monsters in the jade sea ... similar as Kurzick case
- Krait ... since I was impressed by the conspirational theory behind them
- destroyer-like faction which could be seen on concept art from cancelled Utopia campaign and many other things we have no idea about
- Tengu wars all over again ... they are not really evil (human syndrome) but their hate towards Sensali is yet to diminish ... and they didn't like how humans treated them either, so perhaps periodic alliance with Sensali is an option

-dragons --> /agree
-Undead in Orr --> They are Undead Dragon's Minions, so they aren't an side force or another threat, they just make part of a bigger threat: the Ancient Dragons.
-Undead/ghosts in Ascalon ruins -->

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Movement Of The World/Ascalon

Until then, everyone is the enemy.

so yeah, basically Charr aren't going to be the only hostiles to the Ghosts.
-Destroyers -->Whilst I continue to say that the Dwarf race decimated every single bit of the Destroyers, and with the last mission of GWEN, we all know that the Destroyers were tied to The Great Destroyer,and, as we know, again, we killed the Great, making all the other: puff. and who survived, if any, in 250 after that, would be already dead. So, whilst I continue to say that, that assumption always comes up.
-Summit Dwarves -->

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes.

The Stone Summit were mostly wiped out at the end of Prophecies due to the death of their leader in Thunderhead Keep and the destruction of their main base called Sorrow's Furnace. Those in EN that we see are the exiles. Slavers' Exile is the last bastion of the Stone Summit. Duncan the Black's death means the end of the Stone Summit.

Also, they worshipped the Great Destroyer on large.

Stone Summit leaders after Dagnar's death were the Heirophants. Most were killed in Sorrow's Furnace, the last (hence the quest name "The Last Heirophant") was in Slavers' Exile. After that, all the leaders would be dead, and probably the possible leaders as well.

Read that, I won't even comment.
-turmoil in Kryta --> /agree
-Cantha--> The actual emperor isn't the one who wiped the Kurzs and the Luxons, but yeah, if 'what the Emperor used' to bind them and to drive-off the non-human races, was passed through generations, yeah, that could mean that there was someone behind the scene, so /agree.
-corrupted monsters--> don't know how/why that would work.
-Krait--> meh.
-destroyer-like faction-->the Tanneks, were the destroyers in Utopia. The destroyers were the Tanneks in GWEN.
-Tengu --> They will probably go into hiding after the attack of the Emperor.

AmbientMelody · Aug 10, 2009, 11:22 AM // 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eliz Genevieve

-dragons --> /agree
-Undead in Orr --> They are Undead Dragon's Minions, so they aren't an side force or another threat, they just make part of a bigger threat: the Ancient Dragons.
-Undead/ghosts in Ascalon ruins -->

so yeah, basically Charr aren't going to be the only hostiles to the Ghosts.
-Destroyers -->Whilst I continue to say that the Dwarf race decimated every single bit of the Destroyers, and with the last mission of GWEN, we all know that the Destroyers were tied to The Great Destroyer,and, as we know, again, we killed the Great, making all the other: puff. and who survived, if any, in 250 after that, would be already dead. So, whilst I continue to say that, that assumption always comes up.
-Summit Dwarves -->

Read that, I won't even comment.
-turmoil in Kryta --> /agree
-Cantha--> The actual emperor isn't the one who wiped the Kurzs and the Luxons, but yeah, if 'what the Emperor used' to bind them and to drive-off the non-human races, was passed through generations, yeah, that could mean that there was someone behind the scene, so /agree.
-corrupted monsters--> don't know how/why that would work.
-Krait--> meh.
-destroyer-like faction-->the Tanneks, were the destroyers in Utopia. The destroyers were the Tanneks in GWEN.
-Tengu --> They will probably go into hiding after the attack of the Emperor.

@ Stone Summit

Well, I won't quite agree on this one. Stone Summit is along most mysterious factions in the original GW and I pretty much doubt they would cease to exist completely. Notice how the Charr have lost their rule of 'titan worshippers' just to quickly reorganise. They worshipped titans (and in turn destroyers somewhat) too, but they didn't fall with their demise. The fact is that we don't really know much of how do they cope later, it's merely an assumption. I'm more than certain they will make an appearance, perhaps going into underground and back to dark cults instead of launching open invasions on the Deldrimor Dwarves (who are in way worse situation after turning to stone, actually they have way higher chance to be extinct than the Stone Summit!).

@ Undead at Orr

What you speak is GWEN novelty, but before nothing was really known about those dragons. At that time one could only presume consequences of fatal magic spell which blown the Orr and it's inhabitants. Not much is known about undead bone Dragon in Majesty's Rest as well and even less about the real power of the Sceptre of Orr as well as it's future user (I don't really buy that fairy tale about Livia getting a hang on this). The dragon sleeping in the depths has likely something to do with this, but it's doubtful that such a place wouldn't attract dark cultists and other sorcerers trying to control the undead for their own purpose and learn something of the ancient magic used there, no matter whether the dragon liked that or not.

As for the destroyers, I'm not so sure they were exactly in GWEN what they were meant to be in Utopia.

Eliz Genevieve · Aug 10, 2009, 11:35 AM // 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmbientMelody

@ Stone Summit

Well, I won't quite agree on this one. Stone Summit is along most mysterious factions in the original GW and I pretty much doubt they would cease to exist completely. Notice how the Charr have lost their rule of 'titan worshippers' just to quickly reorganise. They worshipped titans (and in turn destroyers somewhat) too, but they didn't fall with their demise. The fact is that we don't really know much of how do they cope later, it's merely an assumption. I'm more than certain they will make an appearance, perhaps going into underground and back to dark cults instead of launching open invasions on the Deldrimor Dwarves (who are in way worse situation after turning to stone, actually they have way higher chance to be extinct than the Stone Summit!).

Huh, as far as I know, we didn't kill the leader of the Charr *or their equal, if they have one, which I doubt*, we didn't kill their last Hierophant, and we didn't completly destroyed the Charr HQ's. The Stone Summit are pwned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmbientMelody

@ Undead at Orr

What you speak is GWEN novelty, but before nothing was really known about those dragons. At that time one could only presume consequences of fatal magic spell which blown the Orr and it's inhabitants. Not much is known about undead bone Dragon in Majesty's Rest as well and even less about the real power of the Sceptre of Orr as well as it's future user (I don't really buy that fairy tale about Livia getting a hang on this). The dragon sleeping in the depths has likely something to do with this, but it's doubtful that such a place wouldn't attract dark cultists and other sorcerers trying to control the undead for their own purpose and learn something of the ancient magic used there, no matter whether the dragon liked that or not.

Before GWEN, not much was known. But this is post-GWEN, so much is known. here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Movement Of The World/Orr

Risen from the ocean by the will of a powerful undead dragon, Orr no longer stands under human control. The beings roaming those lands are twisted, perverted remnants of Orr's once-magnificent culture. Drowned by magic and then raised into service by the will of a monster so terrible there are only whispers of its nature, they now serve a dragon more horrible and more powerful than any other being in Tyria.

Regarding the Destroyers matter, yeah, me neither.

Jaythen Tyradel · Aug 10, 2009, 12:57 PM // 12:57

As a specific race being evil? No.

A choice by the player to be evil or good? Yes.

In the pre-searing quest A Gift for Althea, you are needed to get three gifts to offer as a suggestion to what would be a perfect gift for her. However, you could collect only one, and give it to Althea yourself.
Not the best example of good vs evil, but I like the idea behind the choice.
Help Rurick out finding a good gift (a good alignment?) or rat him out to Althea (evil alignment?) about him delegating her present to some new recruit.

I wish there were more choices like this in GW. An obvious end solution that the quest gives you, but if you were to take the off beat path of "what if I did this instead" you might find a different solution and change the experience and involvement of the quest.
This also is nice to have when playing through the game multiple times as you would have more than one way to play instead of knowing the answer and what to do everytime you get that quest.

For Gw2, make some quests that offer long term consequences for the player for either good or evil. I would too keep in mind that the depth of the consequence be kept in check so there is less likely for QQ, I didnt want my character be like that or have that end result.
For example, in the game Chrono Trigger, at the beginning of the game you go to a festival. Depending on how you either help or don't help, leave alone or take, who you talk to or don't talk to you, will affect an event later on in the story where you are on trial. Your actions and choices affect whether you are found guilty or not guilty. The end result is not game ending nor does it ruin the ability for the character to miss out on something else in the game. It just changes how the story plays out.

Lihinel · Aug 10, 2009, 02:22 PM // 14:22

The problem with all those multiple solutions is that they take as much time to develop as x other quests, where x is the number of possible solutions.

It just drains away development time, of cause it adds replay value, BUT the time you gain by playing in new ways was lost to your first character.
In the extreme, that might halve the time of your first playthrough in favor of later ones.

Plus false choices may make things worse. Whats the use of being allowed to be an antisocial asshole in every sidequest when the game forces your character to be the goody good guy to progress through the main storyline. That just causes more QQ.

therangereminem · Aug 10, 2009, 02:27 PM // 14:27

good is only a state of thought for yourself evil is the same thing things that are evil to you might be good to other so more like good vs evilvsgoodvsevil over and over

FoxBat · Aug 10, 2009, 02:30 PM // 14:30

I don't know whether its probable or good for GW2, but this is exactly what The Old Republic is doing. Light/Dark side meter, with multiple very different solutions to instanced quests. So the idea is perfectly conceivable.

What we know of GW so far suggested that the various once-hostile races (such as charr) are forced to band together with everyone else to defeat the dragons. And it's already been established that casual PvP will be divided by server vs server, not faction vs faction. The latter always has side-balancing problems so I'm glad they are taking this approach.

Test Me · Aug 10, 2009, 02:52 PM // 14:52

I hate brain dead games with good vs evil factions.

Nothing is good, as well as nothing is evil just so... I like factions driven by different interests not just some mindless evil orcs against the good fancy pretty elfs... just because.

And I want more than 2 factions as well.