Curse

Riotgear · Dec 19, 2006, 07:39 AM // 07:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

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

The game still has a sense of your coordinates in 3D space, there are numerous signs that it's capable of determining such, including props that obstruct projectiles. Yes, it's somewhat buggy, i.e. you can use touch skills on someone straight above you on a bridge, but it is there. No, adding jumping would not be trivial to such a system, but the system can be revised and built upon.

But again, the question has to be asked, is it worth it? Is it worth having to fix every single glitchy spot where people get stuck when they get wedged between two surfaces too steep to walk on? Is it worth having to redo game mechanics, i.e. figuring out what happens when someone casts Gale on you in mid-air?

Like I said, it can almost be seen as a "feature" at this point, part of the already rather-streamlined gameplay mechanics. Lack of jumping is about as problematic at this point as the lack of skills that cost 20 energy.

Quote:

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.

That's because the engine only supports one layer of terrain and needs to use props for any other geometry. That's not what I'd call a glaring limitation, pretty much any heightfield terrain engine does that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by generik

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.

Most games, the auction house will take a percentage of the winnings, and charge a deposit to submit it.

ectospasm · Dec 19, 2006, 01:06 PM // 13:06

theyll stop making gw when WoW stops charging a monthly

Flukie Lukie · Dec 19, 2006, 01:34 PM // 13:34

The thing about the engine is.. graphics really couldnt be updated past the current requirements it said that gw nightfall was 64mb gfx requirements but they cant update it because the engine runs the first game and if that doesnt work for people with the card that was required in the first place A.net could be sewed

lyra_song · Dec 19, 2006, 01:35 PM // 13:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

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

OMG dreamhunk posts again! Your posts always amuse me.

anyway...

I was illustrating/disputing the game's basic engine, which imo is built around PvP balance.

This is irrelevant to the actual content the engine is used on, which is both PvE and PvP content.

In fact i admire the Anet team for being able to create such a robust PvE system thats based on PvP (which in turn caused a LOT of the positive and negative things about our PvE experience). After you understand this concept, all the various features of Guild Wars' PVE make a LOT of sense, instancing, the level 20 cap, the weapon damage cap, etc.

To say that the game based on a PvP engine cannot be used for anything else is rather silly. After all, Lineage II uses the Unreal engine. I dare anyone to say that Lineage II is a FPS ;P

All those Unreal Tournament based games that use the engine for racing games or other genres are all essentially shooting games? No. They use the same 3d engine, collision detection, map system, etc, but implementation is what seperates it from the original version vs the mod version and creates a totally different experience.

Guild Wars does not need to retain its player base, merely gain new players to survive. You paid your $$$ for the game. Repeat customers are all and good, but its new customers that fuel this game. I want to stress this opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

The game still has a sense of your coordinates in 3D space, there are numerous signs that it's capable of determining such, including props that obstruct projectiles. Yes, it's somewhat buggy, i.e. you can use touch skills on someone straight above you on a bridge, but it is there. No, adding jumping would not be trivial to such a system, but the system can be revised and built upon.

But again, the question has to be asked, is it worth it? Is it worth having to fix every single glitchy spot where people get stuck when they get wedged between two surfaces too steep to walk on? Is it worth having to redo game mechanics, i.e. figuring out what happens when someone casts Gale on you in mid-air?

Like I said, it can almost be seen as a "feature" at this point, part of the already rather-streamlined gameplay mechanics. Lack of jumping is about as problematic at this point as the lack of skills that cost 20 energy.

That's because the engine only supports one layer of terrain and needs to use props for any other geometry. That's not what I'd call a glaring limitation, pretty much any heightfield terrain engine does that.

Yes, the game's props will block projectiles and seems to process 3d space. However, I feel the projectile blocking is purely the effect of collision system used by the props (which is also rather buggy).

The thing that really strikes me as against the arguement that the engine is how damage across multiple levels is handled. Bridges can only protect you from projectiles, but not meteors or firestorm. Traps can be triggered from any level. Melee works, provided you are next to your target. Skill activation across barriers (like sniping from atop a cliff) can be buggy.

Perhaps im just being paranoid. ive not seen the source code. Im just comparing the GW engine to the other engines ive seen and worked on.

To me, for all intents and purposes, the GW engine processes 2d information that we see in 3d.

birdfoot · Dec 19, 2006, 02:03 PM // 14:03

Quote:

Guild Wars does not need to retain its player base, merely gain new players to survive. You paid your $$$ for the game. Repeat customers are all and good, but its new customers that fuel this game. I want to stress this opinion.

I totally disagree with this statement, customer retention is important since prospective players may purchase 1 chapter of GW and never again; it's like a ticket used and can't be used again. I don't think it's possible for any businesses to stay if they had only relied on new customers. New customers are always an important factor since they relate directly to the growth of a business; however, to ensure constant revenue, a business is dependent on a satisfied customer base to keep going.

A more definite way of having newer releases getting a significantly high chance of getting purchased relies on the loyal player base. However, I feel that at this point of time, GW requires both the loyal players to continue buying future releases as well as new players picking up GW and becoming part of that loyal player base.

Just my point of view.

lyra_song · Dec 19, 2006, 02:33 PM // 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by birdfoot

I totally disagree with this statement, customer retention is important since prospective players may purchase 1 chapter of GW and never again; it's like a ticket used and can't be used again. I don't think it's possible for any businesses to stay if they had only relied on new customers. New customers are always an important factor since they relate directly to the growth of a business; however, to ensure constant revenue, a business is dependent on a satisfied customer base to keep going.

A more definite way of having newer releases getting a significantly high chance of getting purchased relies on the loyal player base. However, I feel that at this point of time, GW requires both the loyal players to continue buying future releases as well as new players picking up GW and becoming part of that loyal player base.

Just my point of view.

Well theres the puzzle really.

The more Anet attempts to cater the content toward its more experienced and loyal customers, the more it alienates the new players.

Look at the addition of Heroes to Elona. I feel that newer players have a harder time making friends and learning neccessary skills for the game because of the fact that heroes can substitute and provide a crutch for them.

Experienced players are more of the type to take full advantage of heroes since they have more skills unlocked and know more builds.

They also already have friends!

---
To cater to new players, I feel that content that is more newbie friendly is also content thats is easily burned through by veterans. Making them bored. And annoyed at their purchase.

birdfoot · Dec 19, 2006, 04:19 PM // 16:19

I think that's got more to do with how ANet implements future GW chapters. I do, however, fully agree with you on the part of heroes. It's not exactly friendly towards new players imo, but at the same time, I don't quite consider the addition of heroes a bad thing since I do feel that heroes do add to the playability of the game for some people. Frankly speaking, I have more gripes with the 'locked gates' issue which may put off veteran players. I feel that if ANet is unwilling to radically change/add to the core gameplay, at least they should try to leave as many options open so that whatever remains fun for various players can still exist for future chapters.

I agree with the 'puzzle'. I'm quite puzzled at the direction which ANet is taking GW, especially when later chapters seem to differ in the number of options with which the original could be played. I have this feeling that ANet is still trying out various ways and see which appeals to the community better; I gather this from seeing how Nightfall looks like a hybrid between Prophecies and Factions in its implementation of game progression. I prefer Prophecies' implementation due to the fact that there is more freedom in choosing how to progress as well as the existent of profession-specific quests that made creating a new character more interesting. Nightfall has different path branches but that does not in any way affect the results of the storyline; choosing to go with a different path is a matter of preference (in progression or choice of hero). Prophecies has no branches, but its implementation allows for a more 'open' gameplay; the path you can take to end the story may not always be the same (being able to do more or less of the missions/quests which is completely up to the player).

End of the day, I stand by my opinion that GW shall require its loyal playerbase to move on with new players being important as well. I also feel that Prophecies possesses the soul of GW, ANet could identify these elements of the gameplay in that chapter and retain them for future chapters while at the same time, adding more creative gameplay to attract new players and make it more interesting for old players.

dreamhunk · Dec 19, 2006, 04:34 PM // 16:34

yea know what I think gw is pretty much dead already. I really don't think it will even make top ten charts next year unless it is really slow in the gaming market.

there are better games out there that cater to rpg players way better.

Riotgear · Dec 19, 2006, 07:19 PM // 19:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flukie Lukie

The thing about the engine is.. graphics really couldnt be updated past the current requirements it said that gw nightfall was 64mb gfx requirements but they cant update it because the engine runs the first game and if that doesnt work for people with the card that was required in the first place A.net could be sewed

That's what "scalability" is all about. The graphics engine supports pixel shaders (take a look at the entire Jade Sea area), it does not REQUIRE them. More recently, as visible in the Nightfall intro screen and other parts of the campaign, it looks like they added bumpmapping support to props. They are upgrading it. Hardware can be detected, settings can be scaled, they don't have to make things look great on new hardware by killing compatibility with old hardware.

The Ernada · Dec 19, 2006, 08:17 PM // 20:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

yea know what I think gw is pretty much dead already. I really don't think it will even make top ten charts next year unless it is really slow in the gaming market.

there are better games out there that cater to rpg players way better.

You know, I can't take you seriously at all with the way you keep posting about how "GW is dead" when it's very much alive. At this point you're just trolling since you're just posting to repeat the same thing. Also, who can take a guy named "Dreamhunk" seriously?