Curse

romeus petrus · Jun 27, 2008, 10:00 PM // 22:00

Well when GW first started out it had no grinding. So maybe they will save up all the GW2 grinding till later on...

Honestly though, if GW2 starts off with some lame title grinding as a req to advance, or improve cetrain skills effectiveness, it will fail at launch.

Leighwyn · Jun 27, 2008, 10:00 PM // 22:00

The only required grind I'm aware of is Sunspear rank, and that isn't exactly an awful amount needing to be achieved. Sure, if you want the most efficient build possible to do a variety of things then you'll be grinding away at reputation titles to use the most imba PvE skills available, but I wouldn't call that a necessity?

WinterSnowblind · Jun 27, 2008, 10:03 PM // 22:03

I didn't think we were even expecting a beta until next year, so that doesn't bother me. And there wasn't really anything new in that press release, but it was still fun to read. I like the idea of scaling difficulty, when bigger parties involved, making the game solo-able for those of us who just want to play by ourselves, or in small groups. One of the reasons I started playing GW over other MMO's was because most others almost force you into groups, and I'd rather just play through the game with a friend or two, that I actually know. So I'm glad they're sticking with that.

And of course, less grind is always welcome. Keep it for people who like that sort of thing, but it should be completely optional.

Arkantos · Jun 27, 2008, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by netniwk

Did any of you guys really expect a beta in 2008 when we have zero,nill,nada info about the game??!?

Yes. Sadly, some people still listen to what game companies say about the release of, well, anything.

Anyways, I can't say I'm surprised that they've pushed back the beta. They announced GW2 almost a year ago (or a little over a year ago), and they've given us very little details.

shoyon456 · Jun 27, 2008, 10:39 PM // 22:39

Hold back the beta, delay the release date, W/E, just give some bloody ideas on how the game will be, how races will play into it, and what kind of professions will be present!

Bryant Again · Jun 27, 2008, 10:39 PM // 22:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Article

How is Guild Wars 2 different from other MMOs?
While Guild Wars 2 adds a persistent world, it retains the unique nature of the original game including a strong narrative, extensive instanced gameplay, an anti-grind design philosophy, and strong support for competitive play.

Let's hope they stay truer to the bolded part than they did in GW1.

It's also sad to see the term "MMO" attached to it. Ah well.

slowerpoke · Jun 27, 2008, 10:47 PM // 22:47

Not much new information in that faq, apart from 2 surprising things.
Of course no beta plans this year, but also the solo play stuff.

The implication of that is teamplay is no longer manditory, or indeed partying with anyone else, human or ai.
Guildwars was build around the idea of the team, each profession bringing something different to the whole, to make a complete unit all complementing each other in one unit.

Mac Sidewinder · Jun 27, 2008, 11:02 PM // 23:02

Yes that may have been true, but GW has de-volved into a single player mmo. (sound kind of silly). If they excluded the single player mentality from GW2, i'm sure they feel they would lose some of their player base.

Nomme Moon · Jun 27, 2008, 11:05 PM // 23:05

No more information confirmed until this time next year!

Pretty disappointed with the no beta in 2008 confirmation. I was expecting a big surprise. I guess I shouldnt get my hopes up...

Knowing a beta was coming in 2008 was really all that was keeping me from quitting GW. It's just not that entertaining anymore with the same events every weekend, and the same "special" events with just different masks. /sigh

Seriously, atleast show us some videos or screenshots, or release information. Another year without anything is really boring when your excuses for what's happening to GW is "we're working on a new one."

No new content, all just really rehashed or reskin....not good when other online RPGs supply new content weekly.

Bryant Again · Jun 27, 2008, 11:11 PM // 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowerpoke

Not much new information in that faq, apart from 2 surprising things.
Of course no beta plans this year, but also the solo play stuff.

The implication of that is teamplay is no longer manditory, or indeed partying with anyone else, human or ai.
Guildwars was build around the idea of the team, each profession bringing something different to the whole, to make a complete unit all complementing each other in one unit.

The only problem is that the party system in GW1 bit itself in the ass.

A large majority of the game required an 8-person party. When a game is as seperated as GW is through instancing, with no good means of finding players from other outposts, with so many explorables and missions in the entire GW-dome, and with each party needing to meet certain criteria...you can see how this would explode.

Now in GW2, I'm worried. How much of the content is soloable? How much of it isn't? Will it be in raids? How will each profession find it's place in a party for these "people only" missions? How independent will each profession be? How versatile?

Largely, soloability is my chief concern. This is what I liked about the heroes and henchmen. They allowed me to see all areas of the game without a full human party sans for two: Urgoz and the Deep. The other areas I soloed, the other "elite" areas I needed only one more person (and whose heroes remained if I wished to stay, and vice versa). This is what I don't want to lose in GW2: I don't want "more soloability" to be sacrificed for more Urgoz's and Deeps. I play WoW if I want to raid, not GW. I want to be able to see all of the content by *myself.*

Of course, part of my hope is in this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Article

"Most content will be designed in a solo-friendly way, though often with mechanisms for scaling up in difficulty when more players are involved. "

I *REALLY* hope they expand in the future of what "most content" is. If most is barely half of the content, then shit. If it's all about two missions, then sweet. Also, this shows that GW2 has the opportunity to head in the direction that many games today are doing with co-op play: experience the whole game alone or with a friend.

So many questions, too few answers, much speculation. And it's all got me worried about GW2 going the direction I never, ever wanted it to head to: in the direction of the run-of-the-mill MMO.

knockturnal · Jun 27, 2008, 11:14 PM // 23:14

The bad thing about no beta this year, at least for me and several of my friends, is that we were counting on that to give us an idea on gw2 before moving on to another game. All I wanted was a look at what's to come. That makes me think it will be at least a year and a half from now before the game will be released. The question then becomes, how exactly does anet intend to keep peoples interest in that time? They've stated no new campaigns, so they really expect people to maintain playing a game for 2+ years without any new content with depth? A LOT of us are already bored; How bad will that be 2 years from now?

Another thing that concerned me was the reference to the level cap. The statement made in the faq is nearly identical to the statement made at the release of gw1. No clearcut answer on even raising the level cap (without even needing to state the level) is a bad omen about what's to come, and yet another game that will be 'max your character and have nothing to do but farm'.

Can you really have a RPG without grind? I mean seriously. Most of us play these games because of the depth of them and the process of evolving characters. This notion of grind=bad is simply not logical. If i wanted to just go hack and slash, there's plenty of other options out there better than GW.

WinterSnowblind · Jun 27, 2008, 11:16 PM // 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

It's also sad to see the term "MMO" attached to it. Ah well.

Why not? Guild Wars is an MMO, despite what silly custom title the developers may have originally chosen to slap on it. Even games like Phantasy Star Online/Universe were called MMO's, and they lack everything GW does that would be considered normal for an MMO, and more. Even if you aren't actively playing with all those other people, it's still Massively Multiplayer.

And considering GW2 features a completely persistant world (except for the story) what reason is there not to consider it an MMO?

Sniper22 · Jun 27, 2008, 11:18 PM // 23:18

"Will Guild Wars 2 be solo-able?
Yes. You will be able to advance your character to the maximum level without ever joining a group if you so desire. Most content will be designed in a solo-friendly way, though often with mechanisms for scaling up in difficulty when more players are involved. This will give players the option to experience the game whichever way they prefer."

Lame, seems like there will be a lack of a pure healer/support class now. Poor monk class will get shafted. Who needs monks when you can spam healing potions... wait, how bout we can all go ursan and spam healing potions at the same time to solo in GW2? Ok seriously, encouraging team work to play through the game is one of GW's best qualities, now GW2 could be a single player game.

Oh, no healing potions please, gw is the only mmo that i know that doesn't use these because monks are always there, now they may turn this into all those other pathetic games.

Bryant Again · Jun 27, 2008, 11:20 PM // 23:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinterSnowblind

And considering GW2 features a completely persistant world (except for the story) what reason is there not to consider it an MMO?

Because "considering it an MMO" is what drove the depth of GW1 into shit in the first place. It was because "people thought it an MMO" that they provided grind. It was because "people thought it an MMO" that they provided bonuses for the grind. It was because "people thought it an MMO" that it abandoned the skill>time concept in favor of some Bears (hint: they start with a "U" and end with "rsan".)

It was because people put the MMO label on it that it lost what made it unique. And that's a large portion of what I just read in this Q&A, "more of an MMO". And that sucks.

These days, the MMO genre is all about expectation. And the original vision of GW1 filled very little of that criteria. Was it doing poorly because of this? Far from it.

And you do realize that based off of your definition of "MMO", you just classified Counter-Strike, Team Fortress 2, and Diablo as MMOs?

Stockholm · Jun 27, 2008, 11:25 PM // 23:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac Sidewinder

Yes that may have been true, but GW has de-volved into a single player mmo. (sound kind of silly). If they excluded the single player mentality from GW2, i'm sure they feel they would lose some of their player base.

And rightly so, they would lose a lot of players that have had enough of stupid random Pugs, we are now spoiled with the Hero system and in no form or fashion would I consider going back to random Pugs.

slowerpoke · Jun 27, 2008, 11:28 PM // 23:28

I not sure how they expect to sustain the current playerbase with no new content updates. With the yearly campaign model abandoned, only new players have something to do. (And i dont think grind is a substitute for new content.)

I guess we can only wait and see how gw2 will turn out. Unfortunately the wait has now become longer.

Bryant Again · Jun 27, 2008, 11:31 PM // 23:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowerpoke

I not sure how they expect to sustain the current playerbase with no new content updates.

Why does everyone feel like they have to? This is another reason I don't consider GW an MMO: It doesn't "pour content". You got what you paid for, why do people feel entitled to more?

slowerpoke · Jun 27, 2008, 11:34 PM // 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Why does everyone feel like they have to? This is another reason I don't consider GW an MMO: It doesn't "pour content". You got what you paid for, why do people feel entitled to more?

I didnt say FREE content updates.

Bryant Again · Jun 27, 2008, 11:35 PM // 23:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowerpoke

I didnt say FREE content updates.

Then they're going to satisfy the playerbase through a great game, like every other great game.

shoyon456 · Jun 27, 2008, 11:38 PM // 23:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowerpoke

I not sure how they expect to sustain the current playerbase with no new content updates. With the yearly campaign model abandoned, only new players have something to do. (And i dont think grind is a substitute for new content.)

I guess we can only wait and see how gw2 will turn out. Unfortunately the wait has now become longer.

Lol, now might be the time to start those GWAMM engines.