Curse

Devil's Dictionary · Apr 29, 2005, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argent

Omg Its Death At The Door!

I Killed U In Pvp!

U Were Hiding In The Fort!

Woot!

When was that?

LeakingBlood · Apr 29, 2005, 06:28 PM // 18:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEATH AT THE DOOR

If you don't want to play, don't. Nobody forces you to.
If you don't like the game, don't play the game.
If you think WoW is better, play WoW.

That was rather harsh

Caelib · Apr 29, 2005, 07:04 PM // 19:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sipher Xe

I personally did not like the fact that when you enter the free world out there your all alone in your own world... I would personally love it if everyone was in the same world maybe add a switch like "exit alone" and "exit with others" what do you lot think? you like lvling and having your own world?

Try Dark Age of Camelot, EverQuest, or World of Warcraft ... right up yer alley

Crito · Apr 29, 2005, 08:11 PM // 20:11

Man,these threads get so controversial. DATD has a point but not the one i would have stressed first. With the instancing:
1) You can go of and do things on your own if you like
2)you can get a group which can be totaly awesome. the only downside to groups is that you have to make them. This game forces you to take initialive(like finding a good guild), sometimes you find a great group sometimes not but you won't find anything if you dont try.

CM

PS oh and to answer the original question, yes living my own world is great (i'm the king

)

Arsonide · Apr 29, 2005, 08:21 PM // 20:21

Well, many of you don't understand why they did it the way they did. Guild Wars is a networking masterpiece. The sharded design is purposeful. The master server only has to keep track of cities, and stream new content and patches to people, making the developers job as easy as possible. Most likely the missions are hosted by the leader of the party, or the person with the best network bandwidth. When they leave the host is passed off to someone else. This allows them to have a HUGE world without having to have massive servers to upkeep, therefore no monthly fee.

Besides that, I don't see why people are complaining, if you want a party get a party. Heck get a Guild, they are FUN to be in. This is certainly not an empty world, you just have to group up with some people instead of assuming they will be there for you.

Zai · Apr 30, 2005, 12:02 AM // 00:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arsonide

Well, many of you don't understand why they did it the way they did. Guild Wars is a networking masterpiece. The sharded design is purposeful. The master server only has to keep track of cities, and stream new content and patches to people, making the developers job as easy as possible. Most likely the missions are hosted by the leader of the party, or the person with the best network bandwidth. When they leave the host is passed off to someone else. This allows them to have a HUGE world without having to have massive servers to upkeep, therefore no monthly fee.

That is not how the game works. The server hosts each instance, even if you're alone. That's why right now (prime time), even if you are alone in an instance, you will be getting massive lag. If anything, the way they have done it increases the server load by a huge amount.

Apr 30, 2005, 12:05 AM // 00:05

being that none of you work for Arenanet and that even alpha testers dont have in-depth knowledge of the server infrastructure-why are you arguing over something so pointless?

Zai · Apr 30, 2005, 12:10 AM // 00:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackace

being that none of you work for Arenanet and that even alpha testers dont have in-depth knowledge of the server infrastructure-why are you arguing over something so pointless?

Because when it takes 20 seconds to cast a spell that should only take 3/4 a second, it's pretty obvious the instance is not being hosted by me.

Edit: I'll also point at that no MMORPG(or semi) should ever have content hosted by players. It would make it far too easy to hack/cheat.

ocoini · Apr 30, 2005, 12:47 AM // 00:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sipher Xe

I personally did not like the fact that when you enter the free world out there your all alone in your own world... I would personally love it if everyone was in the same world maybe add a switch like "exit alone" and "exit with others" what do you lot think? you like lvling and having your own world?

I SOO agree with Siper Xe !

This is the only thing putting me off GW really, but I dont know for sure.. Havent gotten the game yet. But haveing it "closed" like this sounds AWEFULL, and really I wouldnt mind "kill stealing" or anything of that...
Maybe in a future version when the world is even bigger developers will consider something like this.

Zai · Apr 30, 2005, 12:53 AM // 00:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocoini

Maybe in a future version when the world is even bigger developers will consider something like this.

Not going to happen. This game just wouldn't work like that. There are so many scripted events that players can set off, and changes to the regions they can make. There's simply no way they could change it.

Don't think of this game as a MMOG, think of it as a traditional "single player" RPG like Baldurs Gate with a cooperative play mode.

ocoini · Apr 30, 2005, 01:02 AM // 01:02

Mhm.. Well I havent played many Massive Online games befor, only one i tried a little was Anarchy Online, and that quickly grew boring.
I do love the persistant feel of some Neverwinter Nights modules though.
Oh well.. I'm crossing my fingers I will like Guild Wars however it is :)

mox_panda · Apr 30, 2005, 01:19 AM // 01:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argent

Omg Its Death At The Door!

I Killed U In Pvp!

U Were Hiding In The Fort!

Woot!

....how obnoxious....