Curse

Martin Alvito · Apr 27, 2010, 11:23 PM // 23:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by athariel

Now worlds can compete against each other, through the mists that separate them, for scarce resources that benefit an entire world. Joining this PvP competition is completely optional, just like it was in the original GW, but if you do compete you’re now going to find that your world welcomes you with open arms. You don’t have to join a party to join the fight. All you have to do is get out there and start helping. Everyone has the same objective, and if your world can get 501 people working for the same goal, that’s only going to be more helpful than 500 people.

You can't interpret that in any way other than ANet abandoning the core PvP audience of GW. What made GW PvP truly unique was the concept of eight players bringing completely different toolkits working together to accomplish an objective. That is clearly gone. The nice thing about the original GW model was that complexity coupled with manageable team sizes produced both the ability and the need to innovate.

When your marginal contribution is small, there isn't much incentive to learn to suck less.

Riot Narita · Apr 27, 2010, 11:35 PM // 23:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by rick1027

interesting id say i like some of what i see but a few points still make me womder esp the WvW what happens if the world your in stinks and loses all the time. the other world get an advantage or am i wrong in that

It might be just like when there was no travel between the American/European/Asian districts, and you could only access UW and FoW when your region won favor through winning at PvP (HoH).

There was a time when it was rare for Europe to win favor... there was perhaps a short window between America going to sleep and Korea waking up. Everybody packed into ToA and cheered when it looked like a Euro team was going to hold out for the required number of wins. But later... Europe seemed to dominate.

Did it suck when your region hardly ever had favor? I dunno... maybe... but then again - the rarer it was, the sweeter it seemed, when you were able to enter UW or FoW.

Turbo Ginsu · Apr 27, 2010, 11:36 PM // 23:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke

The return of Water Trident, with knockback.

This. This is good.

I beg to differ. Anything with knockback I won't be going anywhere near...Remeber how annoying it was in the Diablo games? In fact, if a weapon came with KB, I used to throw it straight in the shitcan. Nothing more annoying than knocking an enemy out of your reach. I'm sure that you could counter that an ele doesn't want anything in it's reach, sure, but Ele's aren't really supposed to be frontliners, as such, I doubt you'd be setting them up as that..

Just my thoughts. KB=bad.

FoxBat · Apr 27, 2010, 11:36 PM // 23:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

You can't interpret that in any way other than ANet abandoning the core PvP audience of GW..

"completely" is too far, because there will still be smaller team combat modes, some organized tournament-based and others more akin to FPS pubs with hot-joining. The 500 vs 500 thing is only the RvR aka JQ/FA/AB replacement where everyone sucked anyway.

"Largely" would be a fair comment, but that's what happens when you are 10%. With this "jump around, dodge stuff, push people around" type combat I'm not expecting "organized" play to have much more merit than WoW or Fury did. (Before the fanboys jump on me, we know little and there's still the remote possibility it could not suck, but I'm not betting on it.)

BlackSephir · Apr 27, 2010, 11:38 PM // 23:38

Great, more hype and swallowing people.
I'll believe it when I see it. The gaming industry is so full of bs you'd have to be p naive to do otherwise.

Synles Chyld · Apr 27, 2010, 11:46 PM // 23:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyperventilate

WTB Pre-order.
Quote:
If you’re fighting an Oakheart with an axe and you manage to hack off a branch, pick up the branch and try using it as a weapon.

I want this to work in reverse, too. If you're fighting a centaur, he should be able to hack off your leg and beat you to death with it.

roflmfao Hellz to the Yeahz thats the stuff i like to hear tis all serious with a bit of dark humor...(and this is 100% "need to know" info)

Turbo Ginsu · Apr 27, 2010, 11:52 PM // 23:52

There's something that'd be nice indeed. Blood. Gore. Maiming. All the things you'd expect to see when you whack someone with a whoppin' great edged weapon. You know, all the stuff they omitted from GW1 to get a lower age rating?

aNet: Take a leaf from Nintendo. They saw the light and realized that their "family oriented, anti-gore/violence" stance was counter-productive, and dropped it like the dirty ass that it was. Who are we to argue with what the big-N see's as logical>not like they're struggling for sales these days, is it?

Does anyone even take notice of age ratings? Anyone?

I thought not.

The Scorpion Knight · Apr 28, 2010, 12:06 AM // 00:06

This is going to be really nice.

snaek · Apr 28, 2010, 12:13 AM // 00:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

Great, more hype and swallowing people.
I'll believe it when I see it. The gaming industry is so full of bs you'd have to be p naive to do otherwise.

this.

perhaps its just me being pessimistic, but look at what was 'planned' for gw1 and what we actually 'got'. all talk, no action.

asb · Apr 28, 2010, 12:30 AM // 00:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

Are they removing the weapon drop idea completely, or just modifying it?

I would speculate they will go for the secret of mana type of weapon system, with a bit GW1's system.

Instead of sword pommels, bow strings and inscriptions you will have to craft these things from rare objects monsters drop. With 15 Iboga petals and some common materials you could craft a bowgrip of plantslaying.

Another way to upgrade a weapon would be to recycle the infusion mechanic in such a way that you would have to kill a specific boss at the end of dungeon x, the weapon you were holding as it died will be drenched in its blood and enhanced with y.

Casually teaming up with other players to reach a common goal, or just out of helpfulness sounds exciting. It kind of reminds me of the "free-roam" game mode in GTAIV.

The Ele-utility spells sound like there are going to be a lot of possible combination, which probably makes up for the decrease in the amount of different skills. I can imagine giving my Ele frozen hands, with which he touches the weapons of his allies to make them more effective against head based enemies.

G4ymBoy · Apr 28, 2010, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

this.

perhaps its just me being pessimistic, but look at what was 'planned' for gw1 and what we actually 'got'. all talk, no action.

-.- and i thought I was a jaded vet >.>

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo Ginsu

KB=bad.

KB=Sexy but probably not as effective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

You can't interpret that in any way other than ANet abandoning the core PvP audience of GW. What made GW PvP truly unique was the concept of eight players bringing completely different toolkits working together to accomplish an objective. That is clearly gone. The nice thing about the original GW model was that complexity coupled with manageable team sizes produced both the ability and the need to innovate.

When your marginal contribution is small, there isn't much incentive to learn to suck less.

*cough* the combat article is next...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart444

for those who haven't seen it, screenshot:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/arenane...40121/sizes/o/

regina posted it on twitter

The man reminds me of a ranger. Her dress is pretty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyy High

Here.
HELL YES!

Fantastic read. I really like the part about combination skills between classes. And environmental advantages/disadvantages. And meeting and playing with randoms. And a Z-Axis. And NOT losing all of the instancing(please). And I need to stop. Cant wait to here about my ranger. >.>

P.S. Please make traps a useful mechanic. (especially for rangers), And gun specialty(duh)

Edit:

Quote:

Originally Posted by asb

I can imagine giving my Ele frozen hands, with which he touches the weapons of his allies to make them more effective against head based enemies.

For that matter you cant just give them a gun...

Martin Kerstein · Apr 28, 2010, 12:36 AM // 00:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

You can't interpret that in any way other than ANet abandoning the core PvP audience of GW. What made GW PvP truly unique was the concept of eight players bringing completely different toolkits working together to accomplish an objective. That is clearly gone. The nice thing about the original GW model was that complexity coupled with manageable team sizes produced both the ability and the need to innovate.

When your marginal contribution is small, there isn't much incentive to learn to suck less.

We stated many times before that there will be competitive PvP with an even playing field and WvW PvP - the manifesto describes WvW. We will talk about competitive PvP at a later date.

Turbo Ginsu · Apr 28, 2010, 12:44 AM // 00:44

Personally, I prefer the idea of WvW (Albeit with a decent level of involvement req'd) over normal PvP. Really does remind me of CTF and Last Man Standing brawls in Neverwinter, which were glorious, pointless and insane fun. For sure, keep the more popular of the current formats, but definitely add more all-in's.

And Martin, I know you're there, gore please.

Doesn't have to be MK-series OT stupidity, i.e. multiple skulls and ribcages, all from one corpse, but there was always a certain sense of satisfaction in Neverwinter from hitting a lower lvl enemy, getting a crit, and watching it explode in a bloody spray, sort of like you'd imagine would happen if a Derringer-wielding perp(Low lvl) went up against someone with a tactical nuke(High lvl).

shoyon456 · Apr 28, 2010, 12:52 AM // 00:52

As much as I like the truely interactive environment and skills, I still don't see myself just randomly going out and killing stuff without any objective. I'm sure there will be some objective, but there are too many MMO's that don't offer an objective or offer a very simple, grindy one.

And if it's an objective I'm hell bent on completing (say farming) then screw the town. I'll let it burn as long as I get the loot I'm searching for.

Finally, I'm really disappointed to see the blog refer to the spellcaster class as the exact same thing from GW1, the Elementalist. Hell, they went so far as to make skills with the EXACT same names in GW2. I thought they wanted to make a new game, not GW 1.5. Watch the Dervish get completely cut out of GW2 while other classes are called the exact same thing with identical skills that only behave slightly differently. You want to see a Firestorm? Wait till I find this to be the case...

Coraline Jones · Apr 28, 2010, 01:26 AM // 01:26

How can ArenaNet seriously say that Guild Wars 1 has "optional" grind?

Tell me what I was supposed to be doing these last five years if it wasn't doing the same action over and over again, running like a rat on a wheel, for some of the titles or items?

What do you call the entire Zaishen quest system? Wasn't it implemented because people weren't playing the regular game anymore, so you had to basically bribe fans with Zaishen coins to grind through quests that they don't otherwise want to do?

Why does the Hall of Monuments seems totally obsessed about your Kind of a Big Deal rank if grindy titles aren't some key component in the game?

But you know what, I don't even care about those answers. Here's what I want to know: Are we going to have more titles which will have skills associated with them in Guild Wars 2? If so, then am I going to need to do the same thing 10,000 times in a row to max out those titles? My gut tells me that the answer to both of these questions is YES.

Skyy High · Apr 28, 2010, 01:41 AM // 01:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

You can't interpret that in any way other than ANet abandoning the core PvP audience of GW. What made GW PvP truly unique was the concept of eight players bringing completely different toolkits working together to accomplish an objective. That is clearly gone. The nice thing about the original GW model was that complexity coupled with manageable team sizes produced both the ability and the need to innovate.

When your marginal contribution is small, there isn't much incentive to learn to suck less.

Did you forget that they've already said that PvP focused around small, organized teams will be a major part of GW2? This WvW thing is in addition to other competitive modes.

Oh hey, Martin answered this one already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

perhaps its just me being pessimistic, but look at what was 'planned' for gw1 and what we actually 'got'. all talk, no action.

Ok...apparently you've just been completely disappointed with GW from start to finish. What the heck are you doing here then? I mean, seriously, "all talk, no action"? You haven't enjoyed anything while playing this game?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coraline Jones

Tell me what I was supposed to be doing these last five years if it wasn't doing the same action over and over again, running like a rat on a wheel, for some of the titles or items?

Well, uh, the campaigns. The dungeons, and elite areas. PvP too, that's a big one...and uh, if you ever got bored and/or finished all of what you wanted to do, you were supposed to stop playing. Titles were added because people wanted something else to work on instead of putting the game down, or going on to PvP. Their existence does not make them mandatory.

If you roll a new character in GW, you can be as effective as a 5 year old character in, what, 40 hours maybe? Make it 60 if you want to get to a decent middle level in some PvE titles for specific skills (no, not max, you don't need to max any titles to use PvE skills at effectively full power). And, if you want to swap builds, it takes all of 10 seconds in town, it's free, and you can go back at any time. Can that be said of any other MMO out there? Hell no, and that's why they can say that there's no mandatory grind in the game.

rick1027 · Apr 28, 2010, 02:44 AM // 02:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot Narita

It might be just like when there was no travel between the American/European/Asian districts, and you could only access UW and FoW when your region won favor through winning at PvP (HoH).

There was a time when it was rare for Europe to win favor... there was perhaps a short window between America going to sleep and Korea waking up. Everybody packed into ToA and cheered when it looked like a Euro team was going to hold out for the required number of wins. But later... Europe seemed to dominate.

Did it suck when your region hardly ever had favor? I dunno... maybe... but then again - the rarer it was, the sweeter it seemed, when you were able to enter UW or FoW.

i remember that quite well and i liked it so much when it got changed hate to have gw2 return to such a system as that seems like they would have learned there lesson the first time around

IrishX · Apr 28, 2010, 03:31 AM // 03:31

Quote:

And now you can build up and select traits for your character which give you new intrinsic abilities, such as the Elementalist’s Stone Boots trait, which keeps his feet firmly planted on the ground even when an attack or skill effect would normally toss him through the air.

This scares me. Primary attributes already forced some normally balanced skills to become overpowered, and this just seems like more of the same.

Shriketalon · Apr 28, 2010, 04:58 AM // 04:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoyon456

Finally, I'm really disappointed to see the blog refer to the spellcaster class as the exact same thing from GW1, the Elementalist. Hell, they went so far as to make skills with the EXACT same names in GW2. I thought they wanted to make a new game, not GW 1.5. Watch the Dervish get completely cut out of GW2 while other classes are called the exact same thing with identical skills that only behave slightly differently. You want to see a Firestorm? Wait till I find this to be the case...

Funny, I'm excited to see them retain the elementalist, and I do hope they keep the core six, and only the core six, because they were absolutely brilliant.

I'm also hoping that the Dervish, Paragon, Assassin, and Ritualist get absorbed into the core six, either as expanded attributes (rit summons through blood sacrifice, paragon as tactical maneuvers), or dual-class skills for an expansion (Dervish as W/Mo skills, Rit as Mo/N, with other nifty possibilities like a Dread Knight W/N, or Supreme Mage E/Me).

KZaske · Apr 28, 2010, 05:06 AM // 05:06

I really enjoyed reading the blog, which is exactly what they were intending. I am very much looking forward to the combat system article. Is it posted yet?