314 replies to this topic

[XPhiler]

DuskWolf, on 09 November 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

I'm glad more and more people are recognising the zerging issue.

In my favourite games, like Guild Wars 1 (hard mode) and Champions Online (elite), you can't zerg. You actually have to have the right selection of powers (which you can change from a broad selection), and you have to account for enemy tactics. What bothers me about Guild Wars 2 is exactly what makes it zergy. And I'll try and sum it up again for future readers.

* The selection of abilities is painfully limited, not just in weapons but in utility skills, too. And mostly it's just reskins even then.
* Tactical movement isn't required in Guild Wars 2, you won't have a battle where a bunch of snipers move into position to heckle you.
* Mobs ignore friendlies. They don't heal, resurrect, or buff friendlies. They just do kamikaze-rush zerg-lines at the players. Mobs are idiots.
* I really have to stress this again: Mobs never stop to resurrect downed allies, thus adding a tactical layer. They just zerg on. Why?
* Condition adamage and conditions are useless, others have complained about this. Only flat damage has worth, especially against bosses.
* Most AoE heals are useless (engineer's healing turret is a good example). This lowers healing priority and encourages zergy-zerging.
* Any non-flat damage skills are astoundingly unfun and sterile (engineer's flamethrower), thus people just stick with flat damage as a basis.

Anyone, anyone, who has played Guild Wars 2 will know that all of the above is true. I'm not lying, damn it. You all know it's true. And these are the problems we face, these are the things we need ArenaNet to fix. Because whilst they remain as they are, it just results in zerging. So you switch to your flamethrower, your flamethrower does no crowd control (setting people on fire should) whatsoever, so you just ignore it and you use something that has a higher damage output. Do you see the problem? In Guild Wars 2, damage output is king. If you're not using the thing with the highest damage output, you're suboptimal.

And I hear this from dungeon runners, too. If you're specced for condition damage or crowd control then they just don't want you. This is how deep into the mire of zerg we are. We can stick our heads in the sand. We can make defensive attacks. And those who love to bald-faced lie like crazy sociopaths to the point where character assassination is a day to day activity can come after me all they like (you know who I'm talking about). But I won't stop pointing this out. This could be a great game, but right now everything in the game encourages and reinforces zerging as the way to play.

I'm just sad that we keep sticking our heads in the sand and ignoring this. There are other games out there which solve this problem; Champions Online and Guild Wars 1 being two great examples. I want Guild Wars 2 to not be a button-masher. It shouldn't be like WoW and Vindictus, but it is. The rule of Guild Wars 2 right now is faceroll 1-5 to victory. And everyone does that! You couldn't do that in Guild Wars 1 because there is no set 1-5. You couldn't do that in Champions Online because there is no set 1-5. Everything about how Guild Wars 2 is built right now encourages zerging.

And I am not happy about the zerging.

I just... I'd love to see more crowd control, for a start. Imagine how amazing it would be if the flamethrower had a CHANCE to apply the 'I AM ON FIRE!!!' condition. What would this do? It would cause enemies to run around randomly, flailing, for a short amount of time. This would be an amazing crowd control ability. It wouldn't have to happen with every strike, it could just be a proc after sustained damage, but what I've been told by some GW2 fanatics is that crowd control is bad, and that we should never have things like this. That the flamethrower shouldn't make people act as though they're actually on fire.

Because we have crazily zealous fanatics around here who'll try to shut down people like me who're constructively trying to make a better game for us all, ArenaNet will never actually know what's wrong with the game. But for me, it keeps coming back to the base point: The flamethrower is unfun. The flamethrower has the potential to be amazing. Why isn't it? The engineer has the potential to be amazing. Why isn't it? Here's another great example: Instead of the engineer's healing turret, why not give them a mobile spider-like drone which can be switched between healing or attack modes?

In healing mode it would try to get close to a player to inject them with something which is equivalent to a solo-player heal. But it can be destroyed by mobs (if they were smart enough to prioritise). And it could be switched into attack mode (raising the defensive and offensive capabilities of the drone) when not on healing duty to keep it alive. Tell me that's not an amazing idea. Instead, we get the piss poor healing turret which does absolutely no good at all. It's for reasons like this that sometimes I wish I'd been on their dev team, to help them get these things right.

And that isn't just egotism, because there are obvious things wrong with this game. Like I've just detailed. The engineer's healing turret is useless and unfun, the engineer's flamethrower is useless and unfun, so engineer players don't use these things. Instead they opt for flat damage and zerg. That's what I'm talking about. This is something that ArenaNet could fix, but I don't honestly know if they will. And until they do? There are other games out there which are more fun. The healing drone example I gave? Yeah. That's already in Champions Online. I'll be playing that.

I am sorry but not only I dont agree with your points I actually thing they're false for the most part!
let me go through them 1 by 1

* The selection of abilities is painfully limited, not just in weapons but in utility skills, too. And mostly it's just reskins even then.
Selection of abilities is painfully limited? on my necro I have exactly 97 different skills (counting downed state and aquatic skills as well) sure its like 1/4 of gw1 had but how many other MMOs you know that offer so many more skills that 97 skills becomes "painfully limited"? for most MMOs I played had much less then 97 skills you could use! And this is not even taking into consideration that each skills does multiple things! Mark of blood -> AOE damage, Heal Me, Heal Ally, Heal Pet, Heal Minion, AOE posion. In most other games, guild wars 1 included each of those would be a separate skills and not all part of the same skill!

* Tactical movement isn't required in Guild Wars 2, you won't have a battle where a bunch of snipers move into position to heckle you.
Tactical movement is essential. Stand still and you'll get damaged more, weapons are more effective abased on your positioning. Short bow does more damage up close, long bow does more damage the further you are, Necrotic Grasp (necro staff basic attack) goes through enemies damaging all those that it hits so with good positioning you hit multiple enemies and they will try to break formation to avoid that so you'll need to keep repositioning yourself!

* Mobs ignore friendlies. They don't heal, resurrect, or buff friendlies. They just do kamikaze-rush zerg-lines at the players. Mobs are idiots.
They dont ressurect, thats true, but they do heal and they dont just kamikaze rush at all, they call for friends, they dodge, they kite, they cripple you to buy themselves time and do much more then you imply. That  being said you're right in that they could do a lot more and there is room for improvement for sure there!

* I really have to stress this again: Mobs never stop to resurrect downed allies, thus adding a tactical layer. They just zerg on. Why?
to be honest I am happy about this, did you ever do dungeons? if they could resurrect each other dungeons would become impossible without perfect co-ordination. you're just 5 people and that means 5 or less interrupts in 40s give or take. Some times you're up against 5 mobs in a dungeon that take quite a while to kill. imaging as soon as you kill one you have two of the others trying to resurrect the one who died. You need to co-ordinate who will interrupt who and you cant afford to have 2 of your members interrupting at the same time because else you will run out of interrupts and they will succeed in resurrecting their ally. Also while interrupting you're not dealing any damage and you';re reviving damage from the others. It will drag the fight out A LOT! not to mention it will make it almost impossible for any group thats not on voice to co-ordinate who will interrupt when

* Condition adamage and conditions are useless, others have complained about this. Only flat damage has worth, especially against bosses.
Dont agree at all, I run a condition damage build / hybrid support. Most of the time I make through a dungeon without even being downed once and no one of my party dies. Sometimes we dont do so good and one of use dies once... dont see how that makes my build ineffective though !

* Most AoE heals are useless (engineer's healing turret is a good example). This lowers healing priority and encourages zergy-zerging.
They're not useless at all! sure they're no subsitute for a gw1 monk and by themselves they're not going to keep anyone alive indefinitely but thats not what you need to do, all you need to do is buy your ally time for they heal to come out of cooldown. The AOE heals are one tool you can use for that! Zergy-zerging might work in the open world where you can have big enough numbers to overwhelm the scaling, it will not work in dungeons. If you focus exclusively on DPS and ignore all else you're going to die, repeatedly! sure you can zerg back and ultimately finish the dungeon anyway but it will take you triple or even quadruple the time and you'll make a loss due to repairs where as some one who will not understimate the combat system and use his skills effectifly in the same amount of time it will take the zergy-zerging group to finish the dungeon will have completed 3 other paths making not a loss by 4 times the profit!

* Any non-flat damage skills are astoundingly unfun and sterile (engineer's flamethrower), thus people just stick with flat damage as a basis.
Weapons in guild wars 2 are tools that allow you to achieve a goal. the flamethrower allows gives access to short range AOEs and mostly support. on the other hand you're arguing that support is pointless which seems to me its something you dont really enjoy, so how do you expect to enjoy using a weapon thats 1/2 support?  based on what you said the grenade kit will probably be more your style

The only issue with the combat system right now (and yes there is an issue not arguing its perfect as it is by any strech of the imagination) is that the game is just too easy. outside of dungeons or group events in which you dont have the numbers you can ignore positioning, you can ignore supporting your allies and you can ignore interrupting your enemies and you'll still have an easy time succeeding! that doesnt mean that the game mechanics arent there,  they're definitely there!  Like wise because of its ease the game allows you to play in the most simplistic of fashions. You want to spam skills in dynamic event 1 - 5 and then every skills as it comes out of cool down. Go ahead you'll likely succeed in most cases but that doesnt mean thats all there is to it just cause you chose to make it that way!

The supposed sin you're accusing the game of is wide accessibility, the game tries to provide a little for everyone! you want a simple skill system you can have that and succeed. You want a complex skill system in which you can literally do anything you can dream of? (interrupt, help your friends(do more/ take less damage, survivability), help your pets/minions (do more/ take less damage, survivability), help yourself (do more/ take less damage, survivability), gives you skills to escape when in trouble, gives you skills to prevent others who are trying to escape. Whats more is all of this can be available to you in one single build you're playing! Tell you what give me one build form any game you chose including gw1 that gives you all this flexibility! one game where you're able to do all this to get an edge in combat! if like you say gw2 skill system is painfully limited it should be easy! cause in my view, its not painfully limited at all, one the contrary its the most flexible combat system I have every experienced no other MMO I played gave you all this power and such a diverse skill set one the battlefield, not one!

[Raveous]

Love it, have an 80 warrior and guardian fully exotic'd out.  Working on gettting my ranger and elementalist there as well.  WvW is always fun, as well as most of the dungeons.   Haven't even come close to tiring of this game.

[GODh]

Longasc, on 05 November 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Voted 7, could have voted 6 as well. GW1 is 8-9 for me.

GW2 is not what it could have been, seems despite the many years development they had to hurry in the end and the game has some serious issues and I doubt all of them can be improved or fixed.

I voted and feel the same...

[Arquenya]

XPhiler, on 10 November 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

Selection of abilities is painfully limited? on my necro I have exactly 97 different skills (counting downed state and aquatic skills as well) sure its like 1/4 of gw1 had but how many other MMOs you know that offer so many more skills that 97 skills becomes "painfully limited"? for most MMOs I played had much less then 97 skills you could use! And this is not even taking into consideration that each skills does multiple things! Mark of blood -> AOE damage, Heal Me, Heal Ally, Heal Pet, Heal Minion, AOE posion. In most other games, guild wars 1 included each of those would be a separate skills and not all part of the same skill!

Yes but that's the same as the following analogy:

There's 2 car dealers.
Car dealer 1 offers 4 cars:
A brown Jeep with 1) automatic transmission, 2) a gun turret 3) open roof, 4) mist lights
A black Honda with 1) climate control 2) extra armored doors 3) mp3 player 4) airbags
A white Audi with 1) airco 2) ABS 3) leather interior 4) eco mode
A blue Fiat with 1) cruise control 2) cup holders 3) hybrid transmission 4) power steering
Every of those cars automatically unlocks the doors when the car gets underwater.

Dealer 2 offers Jeeps, Audis, Honda as Fiats in any colour and any 4 options you like.

XPhiler: Look! Dealer 1 has more options!!

[Segraine]

XPhiler, on 09 November 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

Why cant you focus exclusively on support? Sure you will do some "accidental" damage to surrounding mobs while supporting your allies but is that really a problem? I personally play a hybrid support / dps with my necro but could go full on support even with my existant build. I could for example keep a perma regen, clean conditions off allies, do 2 blinds and 1 interrupt every 18 - 40 seconds, inflict a cripple every 20 seconds, cause vulnerability on my enemies. If I change my traits around I could also have more healing to spread around.

Didnt really try it but I am sure I could have enough support to do to focus excusively on that if I wanted to!

Support feels more incendental for me than something I can directly control. I run a support ranger; under the right conditions I can flood my screen with green numbers and combo notifications. I found I can even out-heal my Guardian in group situations. However, even with the Guardian I cannot set up a build that doesn't have some type of damage focus. Support feels tacked on to the damage and not the other way around.  Ideally I wanted to play a class much like a GW1 smite/protection monk or a ritualist restoration/channeling hybrid. I can't do that.

[XPhiler]

Arquenya, on 10 November 2012 - 01:21 PM, said:

Yes but that's the same as the following analogy:

There's 2 car dealers.
Car dealer 1 offers 4 cars:
A brown Jeep with 1) automatic transmission, 2) a gun turret 3) open roof, 4) mist lights
A black Honda with 1) climate control 2) extra armored doors 3) mp3 player 4) airbags
A white Audi with 1) airco 2) ABS 3) leather interior 4) eco mode
A blue Fiat with 1) cruise control 2) cup holders 3) hybrid transmission 4) power steering
Every of those cars automatically unlocks the doors when the car gets underwater.

Dealer 2 offers Jeeps, Audis, Honda as Fiats in any colour and any 4 options you like.

XPhiler: Look! Dealer 1 has more options!!

I am afraid you misunderstood me, In no way am I saying gw2 gives you more choice. I am saying gw2 gives you more flexibility which is different.  Gw1 gave you a lot of micromanagement thats obviously not there any more! But that micro management came at a price. Every skill you had available was really specialized and limited in scope and you could only chose 8! on the other hand micro management is gone in gw2 you only have macro management but in return the skills you get with that macro management are very generic allowing you to use them in a lot of different ways.

at the end of the day Gw1 offers very few actions that you cannot replicate in any way in gw2 in my experiance. You can have a build in gw2 that gives you all the flexiblity of any Gw1 build (excluding energy management of course) You're not limited on what your character can do In fact I would say its quite the opposite!

With the 8 skills you get to choose in gw1 that are highly specialized, like for example death nova, you have to cast it on an ally that ally has to die and it will inflict poison on the enemies around that ally. Thats all it does, it cannot be used for anything else. Or even skills like feast of the dead, it will destroy a minion and heal your other minions and your minions alone, it will not heal you, it will not heal you allies. On the other hand a single skill in gw2 can achieve the same result of several gw1 skills!

In my opinion changing your analogy to how I am seeing this
Dealer one offers 8 cars as where as dealer two offers 10 (though dealer 2 has been in business a lot more then dealer 1)

dealer 1 offers extras in the form of packages. You got audio package that includes a cd player with audio cassette and mp3 player, radio with RDS and taffic notification. they offer a luxury package, with leather seats that are heated and AC with climate control, electic windows, central locking and all the fluff, package 3 thats about performance, that will give you turbo, nitro, sport ECU, on screen performace display, on the fly performance tweaking and what not etc.. It also offers a few single extras such as decals, alloy wheels etc..

dealer 2 offers individual upgrades. Cd player, audio cassette, mp3 player, leader seats etc...

dealer 1 allows you to pick only 2 packages and extras , while dealer 2 only allows to pick any 8 extras you want.

both have their advantage and disadvantages
dealer 1 might have some packages that have what you really want and some stuff you might not really want. It can also be that all the stuff you want is spread in more then 2 packages and thus you're cut out from having all the features you want.

dealer 2 though gives you all the choice you want but in the end he will limit what you can have with those 8 extra especially since  in most cases 2 of those extra really need to tackle fuel consumption which dealer 1 cars dont even use fuel (miracles of technology )


Now whats happening in my view is people are just stopping on the fact that hey dealer one is only allowing you to pick 2 packages that I have no control over whats in them at all where as dealer 2 is giving like 800 items to choose form not realising that even though they're limited to those 2 package those 2 packages actually cover about 80% of the dealer 2 choices and they get to equipement them all in their car while dealer 2 will only allow them to mount 8 of them.

So to cut it short. Gw1 offered you a lot of choices but limited you on how many of those choices you could make
gw2 cut those choices down drastically but the few choices that it gave you covered 80% of what all the gw1 choices allowed you to do and more then that it lets you use them all at once.

hope you appreciate this post cause while typing it I was playing gw2, set in a corner someone messaged me asking if i was a bot, didnt is see it and reported me for boting even though I was just standing in a corner ! gesss

[XPhiler]

Segraine, on 10 November 2012 - 01:49 PM, said:

Support feels more incendental for me than something I can directly control. I run a support ranger; under the right conditions I can flood my screen with green numbers and combo notifications. I found I can even out-heal my Guardian in group situations. However, even with the Guardian I cannot set up a build that doesn't have some type of damage focus. Support feels tacked on to the damage and not the other way around.  Ideally I wanted to play a class much like a GW1 smite/protection monk or a ritualist restoration/channeling hybrid. I can't do that.

thats true but is it really a problem that while you're supporting you're also doing a little damage to the enemies?  Also what do you mean exactly but not having direct control?  I mean the only thing I can think of and please correct me if i am missing anything the only problem is unlike gw1 there is no casting bar so sometimes if there is too much going on it could be tricky to use an interrupt at the right time. But other then that you go control dont see why you wouldnt!

[Zybane]

Wow, a lot of you guys have some pretty low standards. This game is a 5 TOPS.

[blindude]

Zybane, on 10 November 2012 - 04:40 PM, said:

Wow, a lot of you guys have some pretty low standards. This game is a 5 TOPS.

wow some peoiple have invredible high standards.I guess an 9 for you offers the same experience as sex?(with another human being i mean)

[Zybane]

Nope, simply based off of other PvP MMORPG's I have played over the last decade, GW2 is a 5 TOPS.

[Lordkrall]

Zybane, on 10 November 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

Nope, simply based off of other PvP MMORPG's I have played over the last decade, GW2 is a 5 TOPS.

Rather weird to compare it to different kind of games though.

GW2 is not a PvP MMORPG. It is just as much PvE as PvP and has never been advertised as a PvP MMORPG.

[Zybane]

Any game that has PvP in it can be classified as a PvP game. If you mean what did they focus on, PvE, I would agree. Although I would not say the PvE is any good either.

[Lordkrall]

Zybane, on 10 November 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Any game that has PvP in it can be classified as a PvP game. If you mean what did they focus on, PvE, I would agree. Although I would not say the PvE is any good either.

Wouldn't that mean more or less every single MMORPG ever released was a PvP MMORPG?

[UssjTrunks]

I voted 8/10.

The PvE aspect of the game was a big letdown for me, but I thoroughly enjoyed the PvP side of things. And even though I didn't enjoy PvE, I still appreciate the effort that went into designing that game world.

[Millimidget]

I went with a 6; me and a friend have discussed at length how this is a great game, but there are some really serious flaws I'm finding increasingly difficult to tolerate. Chief amongst them would be culling; I can't take a game seriously where invisible enemies kill you before you even know you're there. I'm moving towards being unable to take a game seriously which includes player stealth in any sort of PvP, but culling is just so bad atm that removing it needs to be their number one priority.

You know, as opposed to ****ing SE; I'm actually insulted that they'd devote any resources to nerfing a perfectly reasonable dungeon when their game is so ****ing broken in so many ways.

[Raveous]

Zybane, on 10 November 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Any game that has PvP in it can be classified as a PvP game. If you mean what did they focus on, PvE, I would agree. Although I would not say the PvE is any good either.

Yes.  Because the game requires you to dodge and be more mobile, it stinks....LOL.   Good news for you, you didn't pay a sub to play it.  Now, please go back to runescape or whatever other crap you like to play.

[UssjTrunks]

raspberry jam, on 09 November 2012 - 04:49 PM, said:

Solid 7 out of 10. Which brings it head and shoulders over most MMOs, which are in the 2-3 score area, but not as high as GW1, which got a 9.8 from me.

Mostly, for me, it's a game that I play a little bit, and I'll probably stop pretty soon. Might look in again later on. Nothing to get overly excited about, but it's a solid title.
There is a tinge of sadness about that though, because it easily could get a 9 or above.

Compared to GW1, it really has been a letdown for me as well. The PvE can't even hold a candle to that game.

However, with that said, the gameplay is much improved in GW2. The action-oriented combat style is a lot more fun and engaging.

[RabidusIncendia]

I have to lol at the 3 people who chose "worst game ever!".  Clearly they've never played Superman for the N64

[Nam Otatop]

blindude, on 10 November 2012 - 04:52 PM, said:

wow some peoiple have invredible high standards.I guess an 9 for you offers the same experience as sex?(with another human being i mean)

Always amusing to see fanbois who forget 5 out of 10 is average and therefore not a bad score. Does it upset you someone doesn't like the game? Or do you just lash out because you have issues?

[RabidusIncendia]

That's like saying a C in college is average. They say it is, but it ain't true.  7/10 is average for all intents and purposes.

[Nam Otatop]

RabidusIncendia, on 10 November 2012 - 11:33 PM, said:

That's like saying a C in college is average. They say it is, but it ain't true.  7/10 is average for all intents and purposes.

If you're talking about average score given maybe. But if 0 if the worst and 10 is the best 5 is still the middle ground and therefore "Could be worse, could be better, not that special". If a game has to be rated 8 just to be better than average then something is seriously wrong since there are only 3 scores that could be better than average and one implies the game is next to flawless which isn't true for almost every game in the world so...

[blindude]

Nam Otatop, on 10 November 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

If you're talking about average score given maybe. But if 0 if the worst and 10 is the best 5 is still the middle ground and therefore "Could be worse, could be better, not that special". If a game has to be rated 8 just to be better than average then something is seriously wrong since there are only 3 scores that could be better than average and one implies the game is next to flawless which isn't true for almost every game in the world so...

well what you dont get is that i think gw2 is not an average mmo.If you do think its an average mmorpg then you surely must have not played many of them..In fact if every mmo out there is given an equal weight despite of production value and budget then ..well you get my point
(better be a fanboy than an idiot)

[Nam Otatop]

blindude, on 11 November 2012 - 02:54 AM, said:

well what you dont get is that i think gw2 is not an average mmo.If you do think its an average mmorpg then you surely must have not played many of them..In fact if every mmo out there is given an equal weight despite of production value and budget then ..well you get my point
(better be a fanboy than an idiot)

Good to see you still can't be objective or leave a message on here without personal attacks in it, n'aw.
So please tell me, what makes GW2 an average MMO? Since the social systems within the game are abysmal they've already failed to make the first hurdle when it comes to being an MMO. They only innovated 2 ideas, everything else has been done before and most of it has been done better which brings down GW2s standing compared to other MMOs. There is an astounding lack of content in PvE once you hit 80 and no going back and doing the other zones doesn't suffice. Grinding for legendaries is one of the poorest illusions of content i've ever seen. PvP is horribly unbalanced and packed with bugs that have been known since Beta, dev communication and priorites are awful, TPvP being made totally pointless by block bug is laughable.

If all this happened in SW:TOR it would have sunk even faster than it did. At the end of the day, would you still be playing this if you had to pay a monthly fee? I bet most of you wouldn't. That's GW2s saving grace, it has no sub fee, if it did it would have been a colossal flop.

[Arngrim Einheri]

Guild Wars 2:

- For some people it can be the best game ever because it meets all the conditions a 10/10 game must meet for them.

- For some people it can be an average game because they don't like some aspects of the game but they do like other features.

- For some people it can be a terrible game because they find little fun (or none) in the game.

For some people graphics have a great impact in the overall rating, for others is only another feature, although I agree that technical design can be the most objective feature in a game. All the other features? Subjective 100%.

[blindude]

Nam Otatop, on 11 November 2012 - 11:40 AM, said:

Good to see you still can't be objective or leave a message on here without personal attacks in it, n'aw.
So please tell me, what makes GW2 an average MMO? Since the social systems within the game are abysmal they've already failed to make the first hurdle when it comes to being an MMO. They only innovated 2 ideas, everything else has been done before and most of it has been done better which brings down GW2s standing compared to other MMOs. There is an astounding lack of content in PvE once you hit 80 and no going back and doing the other zones doesn't suffice. Grinding for legendaries is one of the poorest illusions of content i've ever seen. PvP is horribly unbalanced and packed with bugs that have been known since Beta, dev communication and priorites are awful, TPvP being made totally pointless by block bug is laughable.

If all this happened in SW:TOR it would have sunk even faster than it did. At the end of the day, would you still be playing this if you had to pay a monthly fee? I bet most of you wouldn't. That's GW2s saving grace, it has no sub fee, if it did it would have been a colossal flop.

Just so we understand each other i wouldnt rate a 5 swtor either. This is not a poll about rating gw2 s success at reaching god status in the genre,Neither is it a poll that you rate it based on your favourite game of all times i think so.
The rest is just your opinion and nothing more.Let me rate my 8-9 and i ll let you with your 4-5 ..but stop inflicting your opinions on the world.

[Ritualist]

Arngrim Einheri, on 11 November 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

Guild Wars 2:

- For some people it can be the best game ever because it meets all the conditions a 10/10 game must meet for them.

- For some people it can be an average game because they don't like some aspects of the game but they do like other features.

- For some people it can be a terrible game because they find little fun (or none) in the game.

For some people graphics have a great impact in the overall rating, for others is only another feature, although I agree that technical design can be the most objective feature in a game. All the other features? Subjective 100%.

Of course, and that's why folks mostly do not have a problem with some range in the grades other players give the game. The problem is that it's impossible to argue that it's JUST the subjective elements in GW2 that can be considered problematic, and, at the same time, it's also completely impossible to argue that it's JUST the subjective elements that make this game good.

[Arngrim Einheri]

Protoss, on 11 November 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

Of course, and that's why folks mostly do not have a problem with some range in the grades other players give the game. The problem is that it's impossible to argue that it's JUST the subjective elements in GW2 that can be considered problematic, and, at the same time, it's also completely impossible to argue that it's JUST the subjective elements that make this game good.

Totally agree.

[Zero_Soulreaver]

I think people are fishing too hard to find a "right" answer in something that has no right or wrong at all.

[VanderBeltLegacy]

Al Shamari, on 04 November 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

I give it a 6, personally. That isn't to say I don't love the game, but it is missing things.

- Alternate PvP modes.
- Cross server communication features, guesting, etc.
- Guild halls and better guild functions (calenders, alliances, etc).
- No larger team, elite areas (Underworld, Fissure of Woe, Sorrow's Furnace, The Deep, etc).
- Straying away from instanced game play, give us some more instances aside from dungeons.
- The quest system is overall rather silly.
- Dynamic events need to feel more "dynamic" and exciting, give me truly harder bosses that take real skill and team tactics, not higher health pools.

99% agree with this post.

- Dynamic events need to feel more "dynamic" and exciting,=they werent suppose to be like this IMO, ANET stated they didnt want it to be like quest "go here/kill this etc.", but that's exactly what it is: Quest ranamed.

also, i hated when first starting a character, and event that require level 6-10(before traits), have that stupidly OP boss that can 1 shot ya, and they "hold" agro on you, so 2 evades, then your 1 shoted. NOT a nice introduction for new players still learning mechanics so once they get hit without evading, there 1 shoted, 1 shot capability's are not a "challenge", there just like "rage" or "rage quit, uninstall"

give me truly harder bosses that take real skill and team tactics, not higher health pools=sadly theres only been 1 boss i liked(besides madking) and that was in TA storymode, 1 of the bosses(3rd or 4th) the team tactic=pull the exploding trash to the left side of the cave/alcove have them explode the poison that side, but evade as they explode(effortless timing though) and range smash the boss.

sadly, when i did CM storymode on my mes, all the bosses were to easy, heard it got a "buff" in storymode, did it the other day on my asuran, we had 2 lvl 80's, a lvl67, a lvl46 and me lvl40(now lvl 41), the 1st robot boss spawned, smashed every1 quick i hid behind the fountain, healed, kept running out, using confusion/poison/bleed/burn and evading back to my hiding spot...when i got hit, the damage was heaps, but he had high health+armor so it was a grindey battle because every 1 else was getting trashed in less then 15 seconds, the 2nd dungeon of the entire game, shouldn't have a boss with that damage capability being AoE(theres a recharge between heals, unless your an engineer who has crap self heals IMO)=thank god for elixers right?

[Segraine]

XPhiler, on 10 November 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

thats true but is it really a problem that while you're supporting you're also doing a little damage to the enemies?  Also what do you mean exactly but not having direct control?  I mean the only thing I can think of and please correct me if i am missing anything the only problem is unlike gw1 there is no casting bar so sometimes if there is too much going on it could be tricky to use an interrupt at the right time. But other then that you go control dont see why you wouldnt!

I don't have a problem with damage being added to support skills. It is when that is reversed and the support characteristics are not the focus of the skill that I dislike. The support ability isn't as strong as the damage numbers, essentially. I am the type of player who likes to augment my ally's abilities to kill or surivive more than kill myself. I am a bit of a pacifist

By direct control, I mean the ability to select and choose whom I want to use a skill upon. Part of the tactics of a battle is watching the field and choosing an ally a support skill will have the best effect. While you can do this to some degree with AOE selection, it feels like a sledgehammer to a scapel.  I deeply miss the ritualist weapon spells. I enjoyed casting a Weapon of Aggression on a warrior or an assassin just before they unloaded their spike or cast a Vital Weapon on an ally just before they received a spike from the enemy. In GW2, you simply can't do that. I don't even care about the lack of direct healing. What I miss are the scapel level tactics of combat and the ability to quietly shift the field of battle. That is why I gave GW2 a mid-range rate. It is fun, but all the damage and direct killing gets old for me. The combo system is okay, but a more strategic combo system for parties would be better.