Curse

Ninna · Jul 31, 2007, 12:11 PM // 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

CoH/V has 4million odd players to name a few...

where you getting that COH/V number? its GROSSLY overstated

heres my source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Heroes

Quote:

As of March 2007 City of Heroes has around 143,127 subscribers in the US & Europe, according to financial reports released by NCsoft in May 2007

DreamRunner · Jul 31, 2007, 02:27 PM // 14:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

He's actually being very considerate and polite. It would be nice of you to show the same.

Not people you party with, per se, but just any random person. For instance: There's this Tauren guy who I danced with at level 12, and I kept running into him when I was questing, and now whenever I see him, I dance with him (I'm Alliance, btw). In Guild Wars, the chance of meeting someone familiar is very slim, since a large majority of the time you're not in an outpost - so you don't "bump into" anyone.

That's obvious. His point was that it's much more likely to run into someone familiar in WoW than it is to run into someone familiar in Guild Wars.

...Now that I think about it, I've *never* partied with the same person twice.

It's not that I don't want to say anything more about it, there's nothing TO say about it.

And how many people are ever *IN* an International District for a mission? I'd say about zero to two, excluding roleplayers and bots.

This sounds anti-Guild Wars.

Population ALWAYS matters.

...And this sounds pro-WoW.

How 'bout I just tell you right now, since half of my characters are on a low server: We're much more connected, since there's so few of us. It works out better than you'd think. But then again, experiences vary.

.....

Ahh, by telling me that I've brought in false info? Nice way of putting it. But I do wonder in which of my posts have I said that was "false information"

If you haven't had that type of experience or lack of in GW, then what can I say.. that sucks for you. */face palm*But do you know why you see the same people again and again? Maybe it could be the way WoW has set out its servers?

And again its far to subjective. But you've never ever partied with someone else twice in GW? Like whoa, thats insane.

So.... there aren't many people in the international district, but that really depends where you go. But what does matter is that friends\family can connect and play from overseas.

Anti GW?! Are you trying to say that GW is divided up upon its outposts? Because its really not. You are still playing with the WHOLE population who are in the American territory who are mostly U.S\Australian\NZ.

If you divide up the whole population, like WoW has. I really do believe population becomes very much less important. You are not playing with everyone! You are playing with the limit amount of people on your server.

Pro-WoW? *sign* ok, I dont think my point is being understood. There is no way for me to explain this other than what I already am. The whole population of GW is divided upon territories. Divided, meaning forced into groups. Anet has set on how many times you can change your territories, this is how they force them into groups. You can change though! But players can still play with each other in PvP and PvE, international district ect. So players are connected and can stay connected to other people across the world. So now, everyone can play GW, the same GW everyone else is playing.

The whole population of WoW is divided upon regions again but has absolute force on where players are divided into regions. Meaning if you buy WoW in the U.S\AuS\NZ you can only play in U.S servers, Europe can only play on the Europe servers ect. So you can't choose which region you want at first. Now that population is divided again into servers, around 100+ in the U.S alone and the only way that population is connected is through PvP in which you have around 5-10 servers are connected. (I am unsure about the amount, It could be smaller) You cannot PvE with another server, you cannot communicate in a PvE environment to another server, nor is the economy connected either. You can however start another character on another server, or you can pay to move your existing character to another server. The restricting that apply to character transfer are on the WoW website.

I'm pretty sure you know this already, but can you please see the difference that im trying to get at. If I'm playing a game, I don't want to to be limited to a certain population where I cannot connect to other players. I want to play the same game as everyone else, which GW does!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miral

I think you have your logic a bit backwards... pop music is more popular because it has better music. that would be more applicable logic.

Errr...? Are you really trying to tell me that pop music is better because its has more people behind it? My point was just because it is more popular than others, it doesn't mean its better. Yeah... group thinking ftl Although some people like being a sheep, where they don't have to think.

Miral · Jul 31, 2007, 04:34 PM // 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamRunner

Errr...? Are you really trying to tell me that pop music is better because its has more people behind it? My point was just because it is more popular than others, it doesn't mean its better. Yeah... group thinking ftl Although some people like being a sheep, where they don't have to think.

way to not read what I wrote at all. I'm saying something has more people BECAUSE it is better, not the other way around like you keep trying to say.

Miral · Jul 31, 2007, 04:40 PM // 16:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by drago34

This thread is so pointless lol. All this thread has is a bunch of people from both sides pointlessly arguing, since no one is going to change their mind.

I'm actually on the fence about buying WoW or not

Lonesamurai · Jul 31, 2007, 04:43 PM // 16:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninna

where you getting that COH/V number? its GROSSLY overstated

heres my source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Heroes

yeah, i got that one wrong, I was typing and having a vent conversation at the same time whilst reading the figures, Loki pointed it out to me afterwards but i couldn't be bothered to change it

plus, my wording should have read, "Copies sold", not active players...

I apologize, but i am a humble man and cannot multitask

Bryant Again · Jul 31, 2007, 04:57 PM // 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamRunner

But do you know why you see the same people again and again? Maybe it could be the way WoW has set out its servers?

Yeah. It's a good thing, actually.

Quote:

And again its far to subjective. But you've never ever partied with someone else twice in GW? Like whoa, thats insane.

So you're just going to pick on that and miss my point? k I'll be a little more specific: I've never partied with the same RANDOM person twice.

Quote:

So.... there aren't many people in the international district, but that really depends where you go. But what does matter is that friends\family can connect and play from overseas.

Right. So, you don't really connect with more people around the world in International district. They're there more for people who know each other

Quote:

Anti GW?! Are you trying to say that GW is divided up upon its outposts? Because its really not. You are still playing with the WHOLE population who are in the American territory who are mostly U.S\Australian\NZ.

Yes it is divided among it's outposts. And it's territories. And the U.S, Austrailia and New Zealand does not equal "the whole world".

Quote:

If you divide up the whole population, like WoW has. I really do believe population becomes very much less important. You are not playing with everyone! You are playing with the limit amount of people on your server.

[QUOTE]I am not saying I'm playing with everyone in the world in WoW. My Horde server isn't very large. But it is so easy to communicate with everyone on my server, and that's what's important.

Like I said, if I can play with the whole world, I don't care as long as I'm able to connect with them. Guild Wars does not provide that.

Quote:

Pro-WoW? *sign* ok, I dont think my point is being understood. There is no way for me to explain this other than what I already am. The whole population of GW is divided upon territories. Divided, meaning forced into groups. Anet has set on how many times you can change your territories, this is how they force them into groups.
You can change though!

Only six times. If you could switch as many times as you'd want, I'd be on your side and agreeing with you completely. I too would be saying "You can play with the world!" But you can only switch six times. I really would like to say that you play with the whole world, I really do. But it's just very hard to achieve, and not worth mentioning.

Yes, there's PvP, but how many people pick up this game for that?

Ninna · Jul 31, 2007, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miral

I'm actually on the fence about buying WoW or not

I recommend for anyone to try wow

can always quit later
(I've quit WoW 4 different times myself after hitting max level

)

I prefer GW but I like both games

Gaidax · Jul 31, 2007, 07:23 PM // 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamRunner

Ahh, by telling me that I've brought in false info? Nice way of putting it. But I do wonder in which of my posts have I said that was "false information"

DreamRunner, please, spare me... I feel I am losing patience with you.

I won't start digging up posts like a forum shrew, but isn't that you who said things like: In WoW you need to sit in Stormwind or other major city and spam LFG to get a group, which is a COMPLETE BS totally, speaking straightly... Or Outland being instanced... Or inablity to find a random party outside cities. Make some self check, will you?

I still give you a benfit of a doubt, seing that you obviously played WoW, but at the same time I politely point out that your information about WoW is very outdated and your arguements based on it hold no water.

What is annoying is that you are obviously unaware of the changes that happened recently in WoW and spread information about how WoW felt and looked in 2005, which is quite simply false for 2007.

And that all while glorifying the "connect to the whole world" ability, which is possible in theory, but fails miserably in practice (everyone prefer home districts due to latency and language and there is pretty much no real player activity in international district, except for gold farmers/sellers and bots of course).

Your arguement about mostly instanced enviroment with "option" to connect to the whole world being superior to the static, persistent worlds of WoW is laughable at best. Social-wise it is a very well-known fact that a limited player amount persistent world is far superior to any kind of instanced world.

Even Anet realises that and wishes to have persistency in Guild Wars 2, as it is far superior to the current system where the life exists only in cities and everything outside is a dead, playerless desert.

You can, of course, try to prove with foam at your mouth that WoW sucks and that it is worthless and that GW beats it to dust, but seriosuly... do you honestly believe that a game with 9 million fully active subscribers is that bad? Is it simply Blizzard inventing some mind-control techniues which cause people to play their game? Heck no! People play WoW because it is an exceptionally good, well thought-out game!

In fact the only reason for me playing GW over WoW currently is that WoW is not casual friendly, but even then I acknowledge the progress Blizzard made in this field - Burning Crusade is much more casual friendly than original WoW and knowing blizzard - they will go on and make it better.

Kool Pajamas · Jul 31, 2007, 10:08 PM // 22:08

I've recently gone to WoW myself and all I can say is that each game has their ups and downs. Some things I like better in wow over gw, and some things I like gw over wow. Don't expect them to be similar because they aren't. It's 2 different games with 2 different play styles. If you are thinking about trying WoW you should. You can get it for just $20 and play for a month before you have to pay any subscription fees. If you don't like, cancel before fees kick in. Don't bash it till you've tried it.

With all that said I'm really looking forward to GW2. I hope they are able to combine the best of both worlds.

jkyarr · Jul 31, 2007, 11:23 PM // 23:23

I'm 30 years old with a full time job and a 5 person family to support. I tried WoW 2 different times at the behest of 2 different life-long friends. A 14 day trial each time.

I'm a lifelong gamer also. Had lots of different gaming experiences, tried every genre of game out there on practically every gaming system made since the Commodore64.

The season of my life where I can get involved in a computer game of the caliber of WoW, or SWG (back in the old days) or LoTRO, are gone. While these games offer very enjoyable and very involved content, the accessibility of the truly entertaining content is such that it is beyond me, and I believe my demographic, to dedicate the level of commitment inherently required in these types of games.

There were other factors that entered in to my decision to never play WoW. Paying a subscription fee is subversively asking for a higher level of commitment to the game itself, if on nothing more than a subconscious level, because of the innate human requirement to get your money's worth out of the things that you pay for. The effect is to increase the amount of time people are dedicating to the game, and the result is that people are more highly invested in the outcome. That sets all players up for an inexorable day of reckoning where something in the game changes and they just snap and decide they've had enough.

Putting these type of requirements on their players and then not even giving them aesthetically pleasing graphics added insult to injury. If you want me to spend hours in your game, give me something to look at already! If I wanted cartoons I'd turn on cartoon network!

And then there was the camping. My 2 WoW trials happened months apart, approximately 3 and 8 months after WoW originally hit the market. each and every time I got on to play, whenever I took a mission/quest/whatever I spent around 20% of my time in town prepping, selling, etc. 20% of my time travelling to the objective locale, and 60% of the time camping the pet-kitties that were the spawn that the 8300 noobs and I were there to kill. NOTHING ABOUT THIS EXPERIENCE SUGGESTS GOOD DESIGN OR GAMEPLAY.

Admittedly I never got any of the characters I tried beyond level 8, but I'm an experienced enough gamer to know when I like something and when it doesn't hold my interest.

On the other hand, I've played Guild Wars 2000 hours over 24 months, and I'm still going back for more. Heres why.

The time commitment fits my needs better. - The vast majority of the content in GW can be accepted from the offering NPC, prepped for in town, Travelled to instantaneously, attempted multiple times, and completed in 2 hours or less. Get in, get ready, achieve, get out. That's a recipe I can live with. There is more hefty content... I've never cleared out the Underworld or the Fissure of Woe, nor killed Mallyx, nor experienced a victory in the Hall of Heroes, but I'm ok with that. Those things are for players that have longer to spend in the game than I do, or who achieve better results than I do with the time they spend on it.

My point is that GW is renovating the genre in ways WoW hasn't begun to fathom. Non-subscription based MMO, Awesome graphics AND content in the same game, instantiated zones to minimize spawn camping, map travel to eliminate superfluous travel time. All these things contribute to an optimized gaming experience. And no I don't want to hear about the high level dungeons that are instantiated in WoW, nor hear mention of the griffons that save so much time travelling across Azuroth or whatever the freak the continent is called. Good concept, weak implementation.

And I grow weary of the 12 year olds that complain about the "level cap" in guild wars. The concept of character level inarguably comes from the good old days of PnP DnD. It was a mathematical cornerstone of the D20 gaming system. The undeniable facts of the matter are that such a system is ill-suited for a straight-across-the-board video game implementation. In PnP DnD encounters where not repeatable like video games require them to be. That fact meant that if you survived the encounter, you were meant to have the xp, loot, and character levels that went with that success. Farming, boss camping, and virtually every re-use of the same encounters hyper-inflates and ends up falsifying what the "all-seemingly important" character level number is supposed to represent in that traditional PnP DnD fashion. Need proof? Tell me how many level 60 characters you've grouped with in WoW outside your guild that totally sucked crap and doing their part to keep the team alive? Tell me how many level 20 characters have come out of pre-searing in Guild Wars. Now answer me how many of those power-leveled farmers knew JACK about how to play in such a way that actually represented their "so called representative" character level number.

Leveling is about earning access to content, loot, encounters, and prestige based on how well you know your profession's strengths and weaknesses, and how skillful you are at playing them. In a world where guildmates help their noob friend shoot up the character level number and farmers can reach the "top" by repeating the same kill 9700 times, that little number next to your name means NOTHING about how well you play.

GW hints at this by shifting gears after level 20 to skill acquisition and encounter variation. It's all about having a good skill repetiore and being able to switch up for varying circumstances that may come up during encounters. The Character Level number is tertiary... nearly insignificant.

So why all the pussies begging for validation that they don't get from their parents in the form on an interminably escalating character level number? Go play tetris already! I don't want misrepresentative numbers jackin up the gameplay in my game!

/end rant
/end the need for character level number
/end the madness that is WoW

arcanemacabre · Jul 31, 2007, 11:39 PM // 23:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

yeah, i got that one wrong, I was typing and having a vent conversation at the same time whilst reading the figures, Loki pointed it out to me afterwards but i couldn't be bothered to change it

plus, my wording should have read, "Copies sold", not active players...

I apologize, but i am a humble man and cannot multitask

And yet you never corrected Lineage having 24 million subscribers... Interesting.

Bryant Again · Aug 01, 2007, 03:50 AM // 03:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkyarr

...instantiated zones to minimize spawn camping...

There's actually very little spawn camping in WoW, since respawn times are so quick. The one time that I did have to spawn camp, I only had to wait about a minute, and in that minute I got another quest done.

Quote:

And no I don't want to hear about the high level dungeons that are instantiated in WoW, nor hear mention of the griffons that save so much time travelling across Azuroth or whatever the freak the continent is called.

How bout I tell you about all the low level instances? They're really cool, too.

On the topic of fast-travel: There's also these items called Hearthstones that can teleport you back to an inn or city in an instant. You can only use them every hour, though, but I use that hour for questing and the like.

Quote:

Farming, boss camping, and virtually every re-use of the same encounters hyper-inflates and ends up falsifying what the "all-seemingly important" character level number is supposed to represent in that traditional PnP DnD fashion.

It's a well-known fact in WoW that level 70 =/= Highly skilled. The only thing that truly shows your skill is your gear, which can only be obtained by doing instances, which can only be completed by playing well.

Basically, it's easier to "fake it" in Guild Wars than it is in WoW.

It doesn't matter if it takes no skill, though. It's old school, it's traditional, it's fun!

Quote:

/end the madness that is WoW

I also want to add that you can't judge WoW when you've only leveled to 8.

Sharp.Edges · Aug 01, 2007, 07:36 AM // 07:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voltar

yeah, i've played both. wow is bigger with more to do. the problem with wow is that stats are gear-based and blizzard keeps shifting the cap on gear. that means you put a lot of effort into grinding rep or something and then blizzard adds an expansion that has green lvl 60 quest rewards that nail your epics.

f blizzard

I played WoW for over 900 hours, 700 of which were before the expansion. I was two days from level 60 when the exp came out and all those end game raiding and epics became useless. Which is why I find GW funner (or more fun). You can grind and grind for the green items and they are still useful once the new expansion comes out (in my experiences at least). They both have pros and cons, but GW is just easier for me to stay playing over time, and I don't have to worry about grinding up again just so I can stay on par with all the rest of the people on the server.

Fril Estelin · Aug 01, 2007, 10:57 AM // 10:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I also want to add that you can't judge WoW when you've only leveled to 8.

Sorry, no offense, but with that kind of "logic", you won't get very far: you can't judge the president until you become vice-president, and vice-president until you become minister, and so on ...

I feel very close to jkyarr's position, GW is definitively a more subtle and flexible game than WoW, where the scale of things may be impressive but it is too repetitive. (and I haven't tried it, though read a lot about it, and I'm still allowed to have an informed opinion)

raiala · Aug 01, 2007, 01:59 PM // 13:59

Both games are really good, GW is just some bit better.

Bryant Again · Aug 01, 2007, 02:16 PM // 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Sorry, no offense, but with that kind of "logic", you won't get very far: you can't judge the president until you become vice-president, and vice-president until you become minister, and so on ...

Uh it's actually more like giving a full review on Guild Wars when you've only made it to level 4. I think you're going a little far with that.

I'm saying that a game needs to be played more before you judge it.

Zinger314 · Aug 01, 2007, 03:47 PM // 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I also want to add that you can't judge WoW when you've only leveled to 8.

I'll once again say that the breaking point for a opinion, not a full review! is lv. 20 and/or you have done the Deadmines instance. The Deadmines instance alone was one of the key impressants back in 2004.

Quote:

Originally Posted by raiala

Both games are really good, GW is just some bit better.

Well now, what a compelling and well-researched argument! Your attention to the detail between the two games is astounding!

Seriously, if you want to make a relevant post in this thread, as many other have, post an argument in favor of Guild Wars...

Ouchie · Aug 01, 2007, 03:54 PM // 15:54

I tried WOW - lasted 15 minutes and never went back however LotRo is pretty good

jkyarr · Aug 01, 2007, 04:09 PM // 16:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Uh it's actually more like giving a full review on Guild Wars when you've only made it to level 4. I think you're going a little far with that.

I'm saying that a game needs to be played more before you judge it.

I probably should have mentioned that I played 7 different characters to level 8, deleting and remaking different races, professions etc. SO 7 X 8 = 56 character levels... Given this isn't the same as a single 56 level character, but now long do you have to taste crap before you spit it out?... oh wait... that might be candy... no I think it's crap.... or is it cinnamon? ... no definately crap >----spit----<.

I mean come on fhqwhgads! I'm no rookie when it comes to understanding quality PC gaming. WoW is great for folks with the time and money to burn. Peeps who demand more for their investment are revolted by the pay-to-suffer ...er play model.

I'd like to hear a list of innovations to the genre that are all WoW's contribution. Popularity is great, but irrelevant to innovation. I want to believe that WoW has done some great things to better the genre, but I've never seen anybody put an explanation forward.

As for these low level instantiated dungeons in WoW... that's truly news to me. I dare say they were retro-fitted, not in the original game, right? Were they added with patches or added with Burning Crusade?

I'm ready for Starcraft 2! I could have done entirely without WoW. Starcraft 2 should have been first in the queue... but I suppose they need a little more exploration of the Starcraft storyline before they make "World of Starcraft" I just hope they don't feel like they have to wait until the "Zergie Throne" expansion of StarCraft 3 before they do "WoS".

jkyarr · Aug 01, 2007, 04:18 PM // 16:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ouchie

I tried WOW - lasted 15 minutes and never went back however LotRo is pretty good

Me likey the swimming in LotRO! What is it about swimming in video games that's so cathardic? Did you notice they listed it as one of the things definately included in GW2? How funny is that? Hurray for swimming!

/exhalesmoke