Curse

generik · Dec 19, 2006, 12:27 AM // 00:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

Unless the engine is really, really, really poorly designed, they probably can add another storage row. Then they just have to migrate all of the old storages. Whoopie.

Not designed for an auction house? They managed to integrate a STORE into the game engine, I'm sure they can implement an auction house.

It uses up extra server bandwidth.

lyra_song · Dec 19, 2006, 01:10 AM // 01:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

Please, jumping was an example - something that everyone noticed was impossible the first time they played. Coming from FPSs (original, old-school PvP), not being able to jump is a shock. Other examples with real 'tactical use' would be an actual y-axis, and unique abilities like [limited] flying, grappling/throwing, destroying/altering scenery and using it to your advantage, etc. These are things that would make GW much, much better and simply cannot just be implemented in it's current form - the point I was trying to make.

It doesn't take a long to understand this very very simple fact.

Guild Wars isn't in 3d. You move left to right. You move forward and back. There is no up and down.

Your client displays a 3d world, but a 2d overhead map style game would work exactly the same way.

Implementing some of those ideas you mentioned would not requiring rewriting or changing the code. Its called working within the limitations of the game engine.

Flying characters: Disable body blocking. Set the character's rigging to have the root bone "below" the character mesh, allowing it to animate high above the terrain (ala Kuunavang)

Destroying scenery: explosive kegs anyone?

grappling/throwing: The Lich can teleport you. Replace teleport with "animation of a player getting tossed".

Quote:

Right, that's why Anet wastes hundreds of thousands of manhours working on PvE, designing monsters, AI, weapon/armor skins, missions/quests, storyline, economy, etc. /sarcasm

Monsters = Use the same skills as players (with exception)
AI = Used in PvP
Weapon/armor skins = Irrelevant. You could have 1 weapon skin per weapon type, and 1 armor per class and the game would work the same way.
Missions/Quests - Walk around, kill stuff. It still revolves around the PvP engine.
Storyline - Thats great, but i dont play the story. I watch it. I play the game. THe game involves fighting monsters. Which uses the PvP engine.
Economy - pardon me while i die with laughter

arcanemacabre · Dec 19, 2006, 01:33 AM // 01:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

It doesn't take a long to understand this very very simple fact.

Guild Wars isn't in 3d. You move left to right. You move forward and back. There is no up and down.

Your client displays a 3d world, but a 2d overhead map style game would work exactly the same way.

Implementing some of those ideas you mentioned would not requiring rewriting or changing the code. Its called working within the limitations of the game engine.

Flying characters: Disable body blocking. Set the character's rigging to have the root bone "below" the character mesh, allowing it to animate high above the terrain (ala Kuunavang)

Destroying scenery: explosive kegs anyone?

grappling/throwing: The Lich can teleport you. Replace teleport with "animation of a player getting tossed".

This is exactly my point. The engine itself is outdated, it's not truly 3D. Right now it's just a prettier version of Diablo 2. Yeah, they could continue to muck up all the already established code for a propietary engine by adding a few neat tricks... or they could just work on a new engine that is actually 3D, and more 'with the times'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Monsters = Use the same skills as players (with exception)
AI = Used in PvP
Weapon/armor skins = Irrelevant. You could have 1 weapon skin per weapon type, and 1 armor per class and the game would work the same way.
Missions/Quests - Walk around, kill stuff. It still revolves around the PvP engine.
Storyline - Thats great, but i dont play the story. I watch it. I play the game. THe game involves fighting monsters. Which uses the PvP engine.
Economy - pardon me while i die with laughter

Your point? How does any of that prove what you said about the game being designed around 'streamlined PvP'. Just because the PvP is streamlined doesn't mean the entire game and engine is built around it. If that were the case, even in the slightest, they would be working on the stuff that, according to you, could be incorporated into the current engine, and would be seriously tactical... ya know, instead of all that pesky PvE stuff...

Simply put, Guild Wars will die if Anet doesn't change up and add some serious features, like the ones I mentioned.

Thallandor · Dec 19, 2006, 01:38 AM // 01:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

I'm sure they can add another storage row. But it's not a matter of what Anet can or can't do with future add-ons or patches, its their game, they can do what they want.

My point is, it wasn't in their original design of the game.

I'm sure Anet could have made it so storage holds 100 items and your bags hold 50 each.

But they didn't.

Ask yourself why.

Guild Wars was, and always will be, built around PvP.

I think perhaps you should question your own strings of thought before you denouce others. Despite Skills balancing in favor of PvP and cash prizes events for GvG, it is the PvE component that sell the chapters of the game, not the PvP alone. I dare GW to make a PvP chapter w/o the PvE to prove Lyra right.

The lack of Implementation of PvE upgrades (Party serach for PvE missions on the way) isnt the same as telling PvErs to G&FO to play PvP or go away, there could be other technical issues that need to be resolved.

Please dont make this into another PvE vs PvP thread cause i will gladly join in the fray.

bart · Dec 19, 2006, 01:53 AM // 01:53

i think the next GW should either go back in time to explain about the Charr or come out with GW2. What more is there to do? Prophecies started the game, Factions came out for PvP, Nightfall for PvE. we need something fresh!

lyra_song · Dec 19, 2006, 01:59 AM // 01:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

This is exactly my point. The engine itself is outdated, it's not truly 3D. Right now it's just a prettier version of Diablo 2. Yeah, they could continue to muck up all the already established code for a propietary engine by adding a few neat tricks... or they could just work on a new engine that is actually 3D, and more 'with the times'.

At what cost? The 2d engine is cheap and low in bandwidth.

I think going to 3d would make this a pay game, but thats just me.

Quote:

Your point? How does any of that prove what you said about the game being designed around 'streamlined PvP'. Just because the PvP is streamlined doesn't mean the entire game and engine is built around it. If that were the case, even in the slightest, they would be working on the stuff that, according to you, could be incorporated into the current engine, and would be seriously tactical... ya know, instead of all that pesky PvE stuff...

PvE sells the game. Thats a fact.

But the game's fighting system and engine is built around keeping a balanced PvP.

Armor. Weapons. Skills. It's for PvP.

Unfortunately, it seems to me that GW has attracted players who want a free version of WoW, instead of embracing GW for what it is. A great game with a PvP and a PvE aspect.

Anet is now forced is to cater towards the audience that's shelling out the dough.

I'm primarily a PvE player (rank Zero FTW!). However, i feel that it would be naive to think that this game was designed around PvE. Theres lots of things they could easily add to this game that would make it a much better PvE game, but an imbalanced PvP game.

Quote:

Simply put, Guild Wars will die if Anet doesn't change up and add some serious features, like the ones I mentioned.

I think Guild Wars will lose veteran players very easily. But it will gain new players just as easily.

It's just too cheap and quick to pick up to pass up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thallandor

I think perhaps you should question your own strings of thought before you denouce others. Despite Skills balancing in favor of PvP and cash prizes events for GvG, it is the PvE component that sell the chapters of the game, not the PvP alone. I dare GW to make a PvP chapter w/o the PvE to prove Lyra right.

Ive laid out my thoughts as clear as i can. PM me if you want me to elaborate.

Guild Wars is a PvP game thats has PvE to transition PvE players into PvP by training them against AI controlled NPCs first. Thats the true end game content. Thats the original design.

Anet has broken away from this original design to satisfy its playerbase.

We should be happy that Anet has abandoned its original design to make us players happy.

However we should not be unreasonable in our requests and expectations because the game was not built the way we wanted it to. Its only being adapted to make our gaming experience more satisfying.

lightblade · Dec 19, 2006, 02:00 AM // 02:00

Think similar games like Magic: The Gathering and Yu-Gi-Oh!

MTG have almost 14 years of history and it's still selling.
Yu-Gi-Oh! have 10 years of history and it's still selling.

So, GW will run for at least another 8 years.

Hell Marauder · Dec 19, 2006, 02:10 AM // 02:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

Simply put, Guild Wars will die if Anet doesn't change up and add some serious features, like the ones I mentioned.

No, GW won't die, unless another prettier "3D" MMORPG coming along with features you mentioned AND doesn't charge monthly fees.

BTW, why does everybody uses WOW as a comparison, as if a game not selling as well as WOW is doomed to fail?? Eve online has only 300k subscribers, did anyone dare to say it's gonna fail?? Lots of MMORPG's with fewer than 100k subscribers are doing just fine. With its engine GW can do many things other MMORPG's can't; for one thing, it can streamline its servers and can evolve at a faster pace with each standalone chapter than other persisting world MMORPG's. I would see many other online games go bellyup before GW does. GW also doesn't have to compete with other online games for customers, because it has its niche customers that few other online games can touch: kids with no credit card and adults who hate to pay monthly charges.

Thallandor · Dec 19, 2006, 02:13 AM // 02:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

PvE sells the game. Thats a fact.

But the game's fighting system and engine is built around keeping a balanced PvP.

Armor. Weapons. Skills. It's for PvP.

Unfortunately, it seems to me that GW has attracted players who want a free version of WoW, instead of embracing GW for what it is. A great game with a PvP and a PvE aspect.

Anet is now forced is to cater towards the audience that's shelling out the dough.

I'm primarily a PvE player (rank Zero FTW!). However, i feel that it would be naive to think that this game was designed around PvE. Theres lots of things they could easily add to this game that would make it a much better PvE game, but an imbalanced PvP game.

I think Guild Wars will lose veteran players very easily. But it will gain new players just as easily.

It's just too cheap and quick to pick up to pass up.

Ive laid out my thoughts as clear as i can. PM me if you want me to elaborate.

Guild Wars is a PvP game thats has PvE to transition PvE players into PvP by training them against AI controlled NPCs first. Thats the true end game content. Thats the original design.

Anet has broken away from this original design to satisfy its playerbase.

We should be happy that Anet has abandoned its original design to make us players happy.

However we should not be unreasonable in our requests and expectations because the game was not built the way we wanted it to. Its only being adapted to make our gaming experience more satisfying.

No, that wont be neccessary, i agree with you in this post.

Omega X · Dec 19, 2006, 02:54 AM // 02:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hell Marauder

With its engine GW can do many things other MMORPG's can't; for one thing, it can streamline its servers and can evolve at a faster pace with each standalone chapter than other persisting world MMORPG's.

That is an awful stretch to state. For one Guild Wars doesn't evolve faster than the rest. It only seems that way. In 6 months time a traditional MMO could have released an update just as big. They have more resources so it takes half the time with everyone there working on it. As for servers, traditional MMOs might suffer a little down time but something has to pry the players from the screen for a second.

arcanemacabre · Dec 19, 2006, 02:57 AM // 02:57

For the record, I really don't want a 'free-to-play WoW'. I want GW. I love this game for what it is, as you say Lyra, "A great game with a PvP and a PvE aspect." That, I completely agree with. GW is both, and both equally. I wouldn't play WoW (again) if it was free.

lightblade, you bring up a very good point. Those card games still sell, just like games like Unreal Tournament (the original), Everquest, and Sims (original) are still played all the time, despite their age. Guild Wars may well go the way of these games, having a solidified role as a classic.

The big differences is, the card games can bend and flex easily, with little effort (no coding/modelling needed), making upgrades (to rulesets/playstyle/even design) a cinch. The video games I listed, they all have sequels. They updated with the times. This can actually make the prequel versions healthier, as they acquire a sense of nostalgia, and there is always players that claim the original is always better.

IMO, this is what GW will have to eventually do. Maybe not now, with chapter 4, but soon. The engine has been in-the-works since what, 2001? I know it's seen a lot of improvements, but still, it's old, it's outdated. As time moves on, it will only get more outdated. For now, though, it's fine. I'd just like to see some new, fresh, and unique features implemented. Guild Wars just needs an overhaul.

The Ernada · Dec 19, 2006, 03:33 AM // 03:33

When will people learn not to quote a long long post only to add a lame one sentence reply to it?

It took me a while to get used to GW's engine because it was so limiting but I think it's just fine when playing PVP. Still...it could use some updating and improving.

Riotgear · Dec 19, 2006, 05:25 AM // 05:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by generik

It uses up extra server bandwidth.

More bandwidth than the non-stop spam in district 1 of Lion's Arch, Kaineng, Kamadan, and Drok's?

Quote:

Your client displays a 3d world, but a 2d overhead map style game would work exactly the same way.

Bridges and almost every map in Kaineng City kind of disprove this.

big papi · Dec 19, 2006, 05:32 AM // 05:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by bart

i think the next GW should either go back in time to explain about the Charr or come out with GW2. What more is there to do? Prophecies started the game, Factions came out for PvP, Nightfall for PvE. we need something fresh!

i agree gw2 would be nice

generik · Dec 19, 2006, 05:39 AM // 05:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

More bandwidth than the non-stop spam in district 1 of Lion's Arch, Kaineng, Kamadan, and Drok's?

And how many people are in district 1 of LA, Kaineng, Kamadan, and Droks?

A few districts gets spammed, opposed to spending tons of dev time to code up an auction house, test it for exploits, and implement it on the server.

I have not even talked about the increased processor and storage requirements that Anet will need to do the auction house. You have to understand that Anet is not in the position to do what they want with the servers, which are 0wn3d solely by NCSoft. I can certainly imagine they have quite a lot of technical limitations as to what is possible and what isn't.

Besides, who is to say the auction house won't turn into a free storage extension for players? Put item on to auction, bid using another account for 1 million gold. Free storage space for length of auction.

lyra_song · Dec 19, 2006, 05:43 AM // 05:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

Bridges and almost every map in Kaineng City kind of disprove this.

This is the reason bridges, stairs, or anytype of prop thats walkable on gets buggy, causes players to get stuck, disappears, causes players to float, etc.

Its the same reason you can hit enemies with melee or use traps next to them while they are on a bridge.

Its why i walk on a bridge and "fall" and "disappear" and pop out the other side.

There is no Z-axis. Its all an illusion.

In fact. Go to any cave. Look up at the ceiling. You will notice the ceiling doesnt blend in with the wall......its just a polygon mesh to cover the hole over your head.

dreamhunk · Dec 19, 2006, 07:02 AM // 07:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

It doesn't take a long to understand this very very simple fact.

Guild Wars isn't in 3d. You move left to right. You move forward and back. There is no up and down.

Your client displays a 3d world, but a 2d overhead map style game would work exactly the same way.

Implementing some of those ideas you mentioned would not requiring rewriting or changing the code. Its called working within the limitations of the game engine.

Flying characters: Disable body blocking. Set the character's rigging to have the root bone "below" the character mesh, allowing it to animate high above the terrain (ala Kuunavang)

Destroying scenery: explosive kegs anyone?

grappling/throwing: The Lich can teleport you. Replace teleport with "animation of a player getting tossed".

Monsters = Use the same skills as players (with exception)
AI = Used in PvP
Weapon/armor skins = Irrelevant. You could have 1 weapon skin per weapon type, and 1 armor per class and the game would work the same way.
Missions/Quests - Walk around, kill stuff. It still revolves around the PvP engine.
Storyline - Thats great, but i dont play the story. I watch it. I play the game. THe game involves fighting monsters. Which uses the PvP engine.
Economy - pardon me while i die with laughter

that is the truth i was on another fourm saying the same thing as the bomb! any way the game is dying.

Arcador · Dec 19, 2006, 07:14 AM // 07:14

Well if we take UO for example...althou many many players left and EA broke the game - it is still alive and a lot of people play it. So making such an assumption is a difficult task.

To lyra_song. There are a lot issues with the Z axis , but there are some that use the Z axis. The biggest example I can now remember is the projectile curve + the bow attacks curve AND damage. I've seen an arrow from a flatbow making a shot over a obstacle that recurve or longbow cannot do. So the engine uses Z axis and it is 3d, but some parts do not use that in their checks.

The Ernada · Dec 19, 2006, 07:27 AM // 07:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

that is the truth i was on another fourm saying the same thing as the bomb! any way the game is dying.

Not only did you quote a long well written post just to write a line of lameness, you totally misunderstood the post you were quoting and twisted it to suit your lame statement that the game is dying.

dreamhunk · Dec 19, 2006, 07:35 AM // 07:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Ernada

Not only did you quote a long well written post just to write a line of lameness, you totally misunderstood the post you were quoting and twisted it to suit your lame statement that the game is dying.

no it seems everything is based on pvp. I have been on these fourms long enough to know. Any way gw hack and slash will not retain it's player base. no new content will not reatin it's players base