Curse

Shayne Hawke · Aug 04, 2009, 10:38 PM // 22:38

A game that is much better than GW. Considering its current state, that shouldn't be hard.

[DE] · Aug 04, 2009, 10:41 PM // 22:41

1. No PvE-only skills
2. Balanced PvP
3. Races for aesthetic purposes only

I know the first one won't happen, but I'm begging for the second and third.

fenix · Aug 04, 2009, 10:44 PM // 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

No you shortsighted carebear, you are wrong.

You and your kind, the kind that considers valid commentary to be merely QQing.

No RiskyRanger, you are wrong. Guild Wars, circa 2005, was a great game. Even in 2006 it was a great game. It was a game that took skill, that rewarded time and effort, and had satisfactory rewards for both. It had its imbalances, sure, but they were minor in comparison to what would come in the next 3-4 years.

ArenaNet took its brilliant child, and gave it a lobotomy and fed it Burger King, and now it has a retarded blob.

Judging by the fact that even before GW2 was announced, they were making bad decisions (read: NIGHTFALL), it is doubtful they will make good ones.

ArenaNet's concept of high-end PvE is a bunch of powercreep, with monsters with absurd abilities getting bulldozed by players with equally powerful abilities and pve consumables to help them beat high-end dungeons in 5 minutes.

As for PvP, essays have been written on what has gone wrong there. ArenaNet, on the few occasions they attempted to follow player input, implemented such input in the most mangled, most grotesque way possible, in some instances accomplishing the reverse of what was desired.

No RiskyRanger, it is not QQing, it is a good if sad assumption that ArenaNet DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO NOT SCREW THINGS UP.

Regina whatsherface's commentary that "I've played it, it's a great game" is as credible as "there are nuclear weapons in Iraq". Regina lies, and Gaile didn't know anything.

I'd like you to show me what ArenaNet has done to possibly counter-balance its past errors.

This is an excellent post.

If you read this, and do not comprehend it (3 have already), then you have NO place discussing Guild Wars.

Snow Bunny is totally right about what happened to GW.

Also, all your arguments against him are simply semantics; stop being petty because you know he's right.

Mister_Smiley · Aug 04, 2009, 10:46 PM // 22:46

expectation, you know, GW is a great game, it still is, even after 4 years, it amazing how people are so idiotic towards this game even now. Yes anet has done stupid stuff, and hopefully they have learned from it. But it simple, don't like it, leave.

As for what i expect, a game that blows not only GW away, but Aion, Wow, and even D3, of course its going to be hard to beat Wow and D3 because they have so much more money and stuff to use. But in the end i expect GW2 to blow my mind away just like GW did, after D2 got old. I also hope they make the content even bigger then it is, which will give the game a long team life and i hope Anet goes all out.

slowerpoke · Aug 04, 2009, 10:48 PM // 22:48

I agree with Snow Bunny

FlamingMetroid · Aug 04, 2009, 10:48 PM // 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

This is an excellent post.

If you read this, and do not comprehend it (3 have already), then you have NO place discussing Guild Wars.

Snow Bunny is totally right about what happened to GW.

Also, all your arguments against him are simply semantics; stop being petty because you know he's right.

I agree

Rocky Raccoon · Aug 04, 2009, 11:01 PM // 23:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

This is an excellent post.

If you read this, and do not comprehend it (3 have already), then you have NO place discussing Guild Wars.

Snow Bunny is totally right about what happened to GW.

Also, all your arguments against him are simply semantics; stop being petty because you know he's right.

I can comprehend that he could have the most valid post in the world, but his presentation leaves alot to be desired. I also know exactly which people would say they supported what he had to say, as you are all very predictable. You may call me anything you like but your anti posts are just the exact opposite of what you call carebears. All your opinions (as a group) are no more valid than anyone elses and it seems like you have all case of superiorty complex. Just because you think you know best for all doesn't make it right.

Zahr Dalsk · Aug 04, 2009, 11:01 PM // 23:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Judging by the fact that even before GW2 was announced, they were making bad decisions (read: NIGHTFALL), it is doubtful they will make good ones.

I know you're trolling because no one could honestly be this stupid, but I'll bite anyways.

Nightfall's inclusion of heroes made for a massive improvement in gameplay quality for an estimated 80% of the player base. Nightfall was a good decision.

Now, an extremely thick person is going to disagree with me and claim that heroes were a bad step, or a more intelligent person will argue that (understandably) Nightfall had problems that were not balanced out by the positive influence of heroes. Perhaps both will reply. I'm expecting most will be of the former category.

Also, 7/10. On the one hand, blending in with the people who really think 2005/2006 was a good time for GW helps disguise your troll post, and I was moved to respond - on the other, it's kind of old, and it's also possible that you are actually one of those sad individuals.

Auron of Neon · Aug 04, 2009, 11:02 PM // 23:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

blah

this

Anet has made terrible decision after terrible decision, continues to pump out retarded PvE changes, and yet you all fail to grasp it. You continue to be blind zealot fanbois who think ANet can do no wrong.

Wake up, people. Smell the shit ANet is shoveling in all our faces. PvE is boring. "Hard Mode" areas that once took several hours now take 15 minutes. PvP that was once fun, engaging and skill-based is now countless hours of mashing the same 4 overpowered skills on your bar faster than the shitters you're playing against to grind out fame/glad points/champ points. It isn't fun. It isn't engaging. And it sure as hell ain't skill-based.

I don't know what you're seeing in Guild Wars now, but if you still think it's a good game, you have incredibly low standards. Your low standards will be equally applied to GW2, so even if ANet releases a steaming pile of shit, you will think it is amazing.

I wish I could be like that. I wish I could just ignore reality and play a bad game while pretending it's a good one. Unfortunately, I cannot. I have standards for my games that are above "retards mashing buttons and beating the hardest areas in the game."

I hope each of you zealots buy two accounts to make up for the ones that players who enjoyed a relatively balanced, skill-based game won't buy.

FlamingMetroid · Aug 04, 2009, 11:04 PM // 23:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

I know you're trolling because no one could honestly be this stupid, but I'll bite anyways.

Nightfall's inclusion of heroes made for a massive improvement in gameplay quality for an estimated 80% of the player base. Nightfall was a good decision.

Now, an extremely thick person is going to disagree with me and claim that heroes were a bad step, or a more intelligent person will argue that (understandably) Nightfall had problems that were not balanced out by the positive influence of heroes. Perhaps both will reply. I'm expecting most will be of the former category.

Also, 7/10. On the one hand, blending in with the people who really think 2005/2006 was a good time for GW helps disguise your troll post, and I was moved to respond - on the other, it's kind of old, and it's also possible that you are actually one of those sad individuals.

Yeah, lets ignore the tons of new herp-derp skills that were introduced, and the 2 completely broken classes; those things didn't have any effect on the game at all.

[DE] · Aug 04, 2009, 11:06 PM // 23:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

I know you're trolling because no one could honestly be this stupid, but I'll bite anyways.

Nightfall's inclusion of heroes made for a massive improvement in gameplay quality for an estimated 80% of the player base. Nightfall was a good decision.

Now, an extremely thick person is going to disagree with me and claim that heroes were a bad step, or a more intelligent person will argue that (understandably) Nightfall had problems that were not balanced out by the positive influence of heroes. Perhaps both will reply. I'm expecting most will be of the former category.

Also, 7/10. On the one hand, blending in with the people who really think 2005/2006 was a good time for GW helps disguise your troll post, and I was moved to respond - on the other, it's kind of old, and it's also possible that you are actually one of those sad individuals.

New classes, power creeped skills, and heroes were most definitely a bad step as far as PvP was concerned. When it comes to PvE I wouldn't say that heroes were necessarily a good thing. It certainly changed PvE, but for better or for worse, you can never truly know.

Still Number One · Aug 04, 2009, 11:08 PM // 23:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlamingMetroid

Yeah, lets ignore the tons of new herp-derp skills that were introduced, and the 2 completely broken classes; those things didn't have any effect on the game at all.

It's ok, he obviously has no concern for the PvP side of the game, therefore the thought of skill balancing is of no concern to him. He just thinks Nightfall is the best thing since sliced bread because it gave him broken henchmen that dumbed down the game to a disgusting level. We just have to accept that some people like playing slam head on keyboard and not Guild Wars.

Esan · Aug 04, 2009, 11:13 PM // 23:13

I'm not expecting anything, but I would be glad to see some new faces. I am tired of the same monotonous voices in the GW player community.

Arkantos · Aug 04, 2009, 11:21 PM // 23:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

I know you're trolling because no one could honestly be this stupid, but I'll bite anyways.

Nightfall's inclusion of heroes made for a massive improvement in gameplay quality for an estimated 80% of the player base. Nightfall was a good decision.

Now, an extremely thick person is going to disagree with me and claim that heroes were a bad step, or a more intelligent person will argue that (understandably) Nightfall had problems that were not balanced out by the positive influence of heroes. Perhaps both will reply. I'm expecting most will be of the former category.

Also, 7/10. On the one hand, blending in with the people who really think 2005/2006 was a good time for GW helps disguise your troll post, and I was moved to respond - on the other, it's kind of old, and it's also possible that you are actually one of those sad individuals.

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.

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.

On topic: I'm hoping that GW2 lives up to the potential it has. I'm not holding my breath, though. If GW2 PvE is going to be anything like GW1 PvE currently is, I won't be playing it for very long.

Zinger314 · Aug 04, 2009, 11:23 PM // 23:23

Now everyone on Guru is negative? It appears my evil curse is successful.

The Zinger: 50x more effective than the Thriller.

If GW2 is actually released, I would expect ArenaNet to not handle the grind half-assed (i.e. give grinding a purpose and have a reasonable time:reward ratio).

EDIT: I'll reaffirm that people should hold ArenaNet's quotes of what will happen in interviews with a grain of salt.

capblye · Aug 04, 2009, 11:28 PM // 23:28

Trading House or some form of organixed selling & trading

Lest121 · Aug 04, 2009, 11:31 PM // 23:31

I am hoping they to review other top MMOs out there and try not to repeat there mistakes.

A.k.A
Spawn time for quest bosses.
No Daily quest.
more mob monster for quest item.
also want super Large Raid groups, I have played in 36 group raids i want larger.

hitsuji182 · Aug 04, 2009, 11:33 PM // 23:33

No inscription weapons! This ruins prices for greens which used to be rare and something cool and now almost every green weapon is cheaper than 5k. Also there were so much happy moments when you found weapon with pefect inherent mod.

Still Number One · Aug 04, 2009, 11:37 PM // 23:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

Now everyone on Guru is negative? It appears my evil curse is successful.

Since when is looking at things clearly and logically being negative? The game has gotten progressively worse throughout its history and A.Net has shown time and time again all they know how to do is break their game further. Even if they do start getting some things right, they end up breaking the game again the very next month (see the large random Elite buffs for no reason).

They think they know what is going to be fun and exciting, and everything they deem as fun and exciting, is either extremely boring and pointless, or it destroys whatever balance we currently had.

The worst part is, the entire PvP community is pretty much in agreement on what we want done in order to fix our end of the game, and instead of listening they do what they think is right and end up breaking the game more than we thought was possible. If that fact right there doesn't clearly show you they have no clue on what they are doing then nothing will because your head is too far covered by their baseless promises that there is absolutely no hope for you.

The game used to be great. In fact it isn't a stretch to say this game used to be the best on the market. Why do you think people who have stopped playing still post here? We loved what this game used to be. We want this game to come back. Obviously it won't with Guild Wars 1 because even if they make the game better people won't come back. But they can at least show they know what they are doing and fix the game, so that when a large population of new players comes into GW 2 we at least know it will be managed decently. They have not shown at all that they have even the slightest clue on how to manage the game. Therefore anyone with a brain can connect that to the fact that more than likely this trend will continue in GW2.

Basically, there is evidence that GW 2 will be poorly managed because GW 1 was. There is no proof that it will be managed correctly, because they haven't shown the capability of being able to do that yet. They really should start listening to the people who play this game and know what they are talking about. Cause A.Net has proved they sure as hell don't.

Snow Bunny · Aug 04, 2009, 11:38 PM // 23:38

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...