Martin Kerstein Interview (German) | TowerTalk

[Gigashadow]

I'm pretty sure that even though the number of skills will be smaller, they will create new skills and swap skills in and out of rotation, otherwise the skill system will get stagnant.

[Thalador Doomspeaker]

Originally Posted by Default

Perhaps April shall be the start of GW 1.5, where we uh, fight Dragons on the Continent of Kryta?

Lol, man! That made my day!

[Desert Rose]

Originally Posted by Shoyon456

Exactly what I was saying, but when have the evidenced that they could improve the usefulness of skills?

The usefulness of a skill isn't an absolute value, it depends on comparison to other skillls. The number of skills doesn't limit the number of useful skills, it's the number of different skill functions that counts.

For example if you have only one skill slot and the only two skill functions in the game would be dealing damage and healing the number of useful damage skills would be one because there's no reason to use the second best damage skill. It's the same with the healing skills, there will be only one useful healing skill. Any increasment of the number of total skills won't change the fact that only one damage skill and one healing skill will be the best possible choice and therefor the only "useful" skills at a given time.

[Epoch]

I'm really going to like this game, but I'm not going to really follow it closely until they start ramping up the info.

Glad to see they're taking my HoM seriously though.

[Fox]

"The number of skills in GW2 will be reduced because many players were crushed by the sheer number of skills and possible builds."

This is complete BS! Any retard can manage 8 skill with one hand. Why don't they just say, "We're to lazy to design and balance skills, so we're not going to let you use as many."

They're dumbing down the strategy.

[DarkRazzie]

Originally Posted by Fox

"The number of skills in GW2 will be reduced because many players were crushed by the sheer number of skills and possible builds."

This is complete BS! Any retard can manage 8 skill with one hand. Why don't they just say, "We're to lazy to design and balance skills, so we're not going to let you use as many."

They're dumbing down the strategy.

I don't think they're talking about the number of skills you carry out into battle, but rather, how many skills ALL total in the game.

[Fox]

oh... ok I can live with that!

There's many skills that I would never touch with a 10 foot pole in GW1. Regardless, new skill introduction will sell more copies in expansions and I'd be willing to beat that in the long run we'll eventually have a lot of potentially good builds.


P.S. - I want to note that people being "crushed by the sheer amount of skills" was actually a good thing for pve. One play the game longer by collecting more skills (hey pokemon was a hit) and one can also create a character that fits her playstyle. I still think the PR rep is spinning us fluff to make it sound like they're improving the game rather than cutting cost.

[Sirius]

I'm inclined to agree with Martin myself. Balancing becomes exponentially harder the more variables you throw into the mix. I'd be more interested in seeing new game elements than have them create > 1,000 largely redundant skills.

[pumpkin pie]

i wander if monsters in GW2 uses different skills from players?

[Joiry]

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

i wander if monsters in GW2 uses different skills from players?

I hope not. I love(d) the fact mobs used skillbars like players, and used the skills players had. I don't mind a few major enemies having special monster skills, but it seemed like the frequency of monster-only skills got a bit out of hand. Of course, you could argue the player PvE-only skills also got a bit out of hand.

On the birthday timing, I was thinking, Anet might use the 6th birthday as a sort of prelaunch publicity/pep rally type event. Maybe then launch in May, assuming that's a good date for the various other factors as well. I could see this birthday (5th) start a small series of things that add some connections between the games, capped off with whatever they do for the 6th birthday.

[Corsair]

I also liked that they used the same skills as us, and I didn't mind the monster skills, I found them fitting and rarely overpowered.

As for the reduced skill amount, by how much? Bring them back to Proph only? or reduced beyond that?

[Konig Des Todes]

Originally Posted by Joiry

I hope not. I love(d) the fact mobs used skillbars like players, and used the skills players had. I don't mind a few major enemies having special monster skills, but it seemed like the frequency of monster-only skills got a bit out of hand. Of course, you could argue the player PvE-only skills also got a bit out of hand.

I would disagree. While, true, it may seem like there were a lot but if you look at it, all enemies which had monster-only skills were either special enemies (Shiro, Glint, Abaddon, etc.) or they were end-game/elite area enemies (Mursaat, Titans, Torment Demons). The exception being EN (but that was designed as a post-end-game expansion, so that wasn't terrible) and Margonites, which were put in well as it made sense that Margonites would have powers granted by Abaddon.

As long as monster skills are limited to end-game/elite area enemies (with good variety and more purpose than giving them a harder skill) or special enemies, I'm fine with monster skills. But they should always fit with the enemy, like Spectral Agony and the Mantid's ability to respawn after death did - skills like Gloat used by the Charr didn't really fit with them, anyone can Gloat...

[Joiry]

As I said, I don't mind some use of monster only skills. So, one extra ability on a skillbar like with Mursaat and Destroyers is fine. I mainly dislike when bosses have an entire bar of special abilities. I'd rather they just have a few, but really high attributes to power some of their other skills.

Also, if there are monster only skills, even staying monster only, I'd like to see them fit into whatever the game system is better. For example, maybe Zhaitan's minions have a special necro type ability, but it would still be tied into the GW2 equivalent of attributes. So, in gw1 terms, if they had a special minion spell, it wasn't just set at some power level, but tied into death magic.

I thought the Slaver's Exiles stone summit where a good example of making mobs more challenging than before, without the need to resort to special monster skills. I think giving mobs very high attributes or say a third profession is a lot less straying from the game design than to just make up a lot of special rules.

[Martin Kerstein]

Interesting to see that the interview made it here, you guys really scan the web

Translation is mostly correct, if I have time on monday, I try if I can transcribe myself

[Corsair]

Yes please, and thank you!

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

I would disagree. While, true, it may seem like there were a lot but if you look at it, all enemies which had monster-only skills were either special enemies (Shiro, Glint, Abaddon, etc.) or they were end-game/elite area enemies (Mursaat, Titans, Torment Demons). The exception being EN (but that was designed as a post-end-game expansion, so that wasn't terrible) and Margonites, which were put in well as it made sense that Margonites would have powers granted by Abaddon.

As long as monster skills are limited to end-game/elite area enemies (with good variety and more purpose than giving them a harder skill) or special enemies, I'm fine with monster skills. But they should always fit with the enemy, like Spectral Agony and the Mantid's ability to respawn after death did - skills like Gloat used by the Charr didn't really fit with them, anyone can Gloat...

There are many monsters with monster only skills. You said special enemies, but there are a large number of special enemies that have individual monster only skills, and they are spread out over many areas. All 3 chapters and EotN have many foes, even in starter areas, that use them.

[Geikamir]

Originally Posted by Martin Kerstein

Interesting to see that the interview made it here, you guys really scan the web

Translation is mostly correct, if I have time on monday, I try if I can transcribe myself

Do you see what the wait for this game does to us?!?


Throw us a bone with some really meaty game mechanics.... please!

[TriggerSad]

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

I would disagree. While, true, it may seem like there were a lot but if you look at it, all enemies which had monster-only skills were either special enemies (Shiro, Glint, Abaddon, etc.) or they were end-game/elite area enemies (Mursaat, Titans, Torment Demons). The exception being EN (but that was designed as a post-end-game expansion, so that wasn't terrible) and Margonites, which were put in well as it made sense that Margonites would have powers granted by Abaddon.

As long as monster skills are limited to end-game/elite area enemies (with good variety and more purpose than giving them a harder skill) or special enemies, I'm fine with monster skills. But they should always fit with the enemy, like Spectral Agony and the Mantid's ability to respawn after death did - skills like Gloat used by the Charr didn't really fit with them, anyone can Gloat...

Wait, but what about the Kappa in Shing Jea Island? Don't they have a Monster Skill of their own?

[pumpkin pie]

Originally Posted by Martin Kerstein

Interesting to see that the interview made it here, you guys really scan the web

Translation is mostly correct, if I have time on monday, I try if I can transcribe myself

What are you doing here on a Saturday!? go have some fun Mr Martin K.

Thanks for the transcribe in advance!

[sandor]

Ok why did she want to know if Martin was a Pepsi or Cola person