Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
* * - - - 3 votes

Do you think comparing GW1 to GW2 makes sense?


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#1 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 01:09 PM

Why or why not?

Before you instantly say "Yes" or "No" consider that they are two different games with two different mission statements, systems, and almost two different genres; they are years apart and promote a different time with more capabilities and fewer technological restrictions to the latter.

I am not asking "which do you like more?"; I am asking if comparing the two is a sensible thing. To spin off I feel that GW2 is to GW1 as Diablo 3 is to Diablo 2; they are completely different games from completely different eras that work in completely different ways. People who were fans of D2 said D3 was ruined and were instantly falling over themselves in relation to gameplay ( albeit launch was terrible and there were many technical problems with the game, but let's not focus on that ) and core concept however people newer to the series or more open-minded did praise the game saying it was fun and fulfilled it's purpose, has a cool skill tree, was modular and highly customizable, etc.

Do you think that in part when the comparison between the two games cited above is just because the base system has drastically changed away from the previous edition?

Edited by gw2guruaccount, 24 January 2014 - 01:10 PM.


#2 Feathermoore

Feathermoore

    Underdog

  • Super Moderators
  • 3838 posts
  • Guild Tag:[AWWW]
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:19 PM

Yes. Just like it makes sense when I compare GW2 to EVE or TSW or even Gauntlet Legends if I want to (and have). Humans understand the world around them through comparison and part of a comparison is how the things being compared are different.

Yes there are times that a comparison really doesn't make sense, but it really isn't common for people to do this. Comparing the games as whole entities is difficult other than to show that they are very different games, but comparing mechanics, the goals themselves, and successes of various decisions or using systems as an example to make a point does make sense.

Early on I used to compare the social tools in EVE to the social tools in GW2 to show how lacking the GW2 system was. I expanded on the comparison to include the impact that these social tools have on a community as a whole and how these communities are what drives MMOs to survive. I have compared the combat in GW2 to that in Gauntlet Legends, mostly in hyperbole, but I used the similarities to make my point that GW2 is closer to a hack and slash than what I would consider active/visceral combat game. Are the two games really that similar? Heck no, but I can still make the comparison effectively to make a point.

GW1 and GW2 are often compared for a similar reason that GW2 and WoW get compared. WoW is the game most similar to GW2 that the majority of people know (TSW is way closer) and GW1 is the game that GW2 came from. You are going to compare a sequel to the original. If Anet didn't want them compared then they shouldn't have kept the brand name.


In short, yes. But only if doing so serves a purpose.

Little Mabel won't be able to be here it's our worst fear. She's busy working on her garden that she's growing up in space.


Why hello there forumite. Would you like me to review some moderation you did not agree with? Never fear! PM is here! Want to be a better poster? Check on this link! And this one!


#3 Kymeric

Kymeric

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1983 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:47 PM

You're showing a bias toward game system as the defining aspect of the game.

I suppose it has a lot to do with what you come to a game for.  I'm aware that a lot of people approach MMORPGs at a meta-game level, but there are many who approach them at a story-based, immersive level.  So, in addition to whether or not the game mechanics seem like an evolution from 1 to 2, rather than a complete rework, whether the world and story seems like an evolution from first to sequel also needs to be addressed.

Does Tyria still feel like Tyria, only in another incarnation?  Does the spirit of the stories told in GW1 feel present int he stories of GW2?

I didn't play GW1 in its prime... I picked it up a couple years before GW2 launch, so I will definitely have a different sense of it than those who knew it from the beginning.  I did play through all four stories, plus HotN and WiK, as well as get to 30/50 in the HoM.  I didn't do any PvP, though, and I'm aware that is probably the area GW2 feels so completely different from GW1.  From my perspective, I'd say at launch, GW2 could be called a legitimate successor to GW1.

Even with some of the big changes, I can see the GW2 skillbar as an evolution from GW1, for better or for worse.  I can see some of their focus on making the game "grief-proof" as an extension of the same desire that lead GW1 to be entirely instanced in the first place.  A lot of it feels like trying to find another design path to the same ends they were trying to reach with GW1.  They may not have been as successful, and found worse problems while trying to solve the problems they struggled with in the first game, but the spirit feels like it was there.

As far as story goes, I can see the personal story as a poor attempt at emulating the stories in GW2.  Themes of betrayal and loss are there, just not presented in a very sophisticated manner.  Even more so, the smaller stories and characters you encounter throughout the world are in keeping with how the GW1 stories felt to me.  And of course we have plenty of landmarks and recognizable bits of lore.

The place where it feels like they abandoned GW1 entirely is shortly after launch, and on both levels.  From a mechanic point of view, slowly introducing gear grind over the year was an about face from the beauty of GW1's power plateau.  From a story point of view, Scarlet and the LS seem like they abandoned cool graphic novel for saturday morning cartoon.

In the end, a sequel shouldn't be a carbon copy of the original.  It's supposed to be an evolution that keeps the spirit of the series but takes it to new places.  To go with Star Wars as an analogy, I feel like GW2 was Return of the Jedi to GW1's A New Hope.  Then ArenNet got seriously spooked a couple months after launch, and spent the rest of the year giving us the Anakin Prequels.

Edited by Kymeric, 24 January 2014 - 02:48 PM.


#4 El Duderino

El Duderino

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2258 posts
  • Location:Drowning in a White Russian listening to Creedence
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Guild Tag:[DuDE]
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:55 PM

I think it is fair because we already know the things that the same studio (or at least what's left of it) did well and didn't do well. We know what they accomplished and what their motivations and philosophies were for the most part. The trouble, for me, is that I think there are some very real examples where GW2 has potentially taken a step back from what it accomplished in it's previous game. Understanding why that may have happened is important, but it is also important to know that there is sometimes a clear step backwards from progress that was already made.

I don't really know many other MMO games as well as everyone else. The idea of trinities and things like that just aren't in my vocabulary the same way others look at MMOs because my only reference in the genre (yes, yes, I know the CORPG thing) is GW1.

I think it is perfectly fair to compare a game's predecessor from the same development team and wonder why certain things changed and challenge and criticize those changes if they appear to be poor additions or changes to the new game from the old.

#5 Beyond Freedom

Beyond Freedom

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 247 posts
  • Location:In your dreams.
  • Profession:Thief

Posted 24 January 2014 - 03:48 PM

It makes sense in that a significant proportion of the seed GW2 population was formed from an existing GW1 population who had been strung along for many years being told that GW2 was a spiritual successor to GW1 and would have all the best features from it and more.

#6 Alex Dimitri

Alex Dimitri

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1203 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:40 PM

No comparison here GW1 is so much better than GW2 (gameplay wise,story.......) GW2 just looks pretty, graphics are amazing.
Give me GW1 with GW2 graphics i would go play again in a heartbeat !!!

#7 Kymeric

Kymeric

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1983 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 04:42 PM

View PostBeyond Freedom, on 24 January 2014 - 03:48 PM, said:

It makes sense in that a significant proportion of the seed GW2 population was formed from an existing GW1 population who had been strung along for many years being told that GW2 was a spiritual successor to GW1 and would have all the best features from it and more.

Yes.  As much as some keep trying to dismiss what they said before launch with "that's old information" and "things change", you can't just sweep all those blog posts, vision statements, and reassurances to the GW1 community under the rug and pretend they never existed.

#8 Cutthroat

Cutthroat

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Finland

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:12 PM

I think it does make sense to compare the best game ever (GW1, imo) to what was supposed to become better.. but yeah...

View Postgw2guruaccount, on 24 January 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

To spin off I feel that GW2 is to GW1 as Diablo 3 is to Diablo 2; they are completely different games from completely different eras that work in completely different ways.
Agreed. I'm actually looking forward to playing Reaper of Souls. I liked D3's PvE more than GW2's anyway. Heroes of the Storm looks promising as well. I kinda wish ArenaNet could be more like Blizzard. At least Blizzard can deliver expansions and have multiple games alive.

#9 Datenshi92

Datenshi92

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2391 posts
  • Location:Somewhere
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 24 January 2014 - 05:14 PM

"Do you think comparing GW1 to GW2 makes sense?"
I do not, however if you were to ask if it makes sense comparing GW2 to GW1, because it came first, then maybe. :P

All in seriousness, I would be hard pressed to draw a comparison between the two games. The only thing they share is the lore and that alone ins't enough for me. I think GW1 catered to a very special kind of community because of its uniqueness - the way it progressed and treated levels, the story, the gameplay, events, etc, it was more akin to a single-player game with a multiplayer option and we all know that single-players have statistically better stories and gameplay that most MMOs (let's not forget it also had expansion packs enriching its plot and lore), while GW2 is more like your every other ordinary MMO that has been recently released with specially little gimmicks here and there. We're all going mention GW1 somewhere down the history of GW2, because its its spiritual predecessor, but we actually lack bases on which to compare both games.

Unless ANet starts adding other elements that were unique to the first game and expand them in the second, my answer is going to be "no".

Edited by Datenshi92, 24 January 2014 - 05:23 PM.


#10 Alex Dimitri

Alex Dimitri

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1203 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:18 PM

@Datenshi92

".....while GW2 is more like your every other ordinary MMO that has been recently released"

But this is the biggest problem of GW2. it is not like any other ordinary MMO.Anet tried to "force" originality instead of broadening the horizon they had with GW1.And the end result is standing in minefield deep in the nowhere land !!!

#11 credokun

credokun

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:23 PM

Only thing these two games have in common is the title.

#12 Krazzar

Krazzar

    Legend of the Norn

  • Members
  • 7989 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:29 PM

You can compare any two things across equivalent categories.  The problem comes in when two categories that are not equivalent are compared.  The most common ill-fated comparison is the way each game makes someone feel in relation to specific features, content, ect.  Then you just have two people comparing completely different and subjective things and then justifying it with logical points.

When you have years to get into a specific niche with a game the next one in the series may be somewhat of a shock, especially when the new game has a different niche or doesn’t really cater perfectly to your niche the way the old game did.  That leads to more poor comparisons because it’s still subjective as to which features and implementations one person likes better.

Most people don’t compare things that can be objectively compared, like in-game land area, so most comparisons are technically invalid.

Edited by Krazzar, 24 January 2014 - 08:32 PM.


#13 Feathermoore

Feathermoore

    Underdog

  • Super Moderators
  • 3838 posts
  • Guild Tag:[AWWW]
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:54 PM

View PostKrazzar, on 24 January 2014 - 08:29 PM, said:

snip

Subjective observations are valid comparisons still. There is always a reason behind a subjective opinion. Nirvana isn't my favorite band "just because it is." There are objective reasons behind my subjective conclusion. Subjective conclusions are valid to talk about and defend anyways. If a person is comparing two games to explain why they feel the way they do, then it is a comparison that makes sense. If a person is just comparing the difference between how two games make them feel, then they are not comparing the two games at all and that isn't really what is being asked here.

You can't sweep away opinions with "that is just your opinion." That is a worthless argument that is blatantly false as almost every opinion (other than questions of taste) can be objectively discussed. Not that that is what you are saying, it just can be misconstrued from your remarks as a possible conclusion.

Little Mabel won't be able to be here it's our worst fear. She's busy working on her garden that she's growing up in space.


Why hello there forumite. Would you like me to review some moderation you did not agree with? Never fear! PM is here! Want to be a better poster? Check on this link! And this one!


#14 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 10:28 PM

View PostFeathermoore, on 24 January 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

Nirvana isn't my favorite band "just because it is." There are objective reasons behind my subjective conclusion.
This is why I asked this question; there are no "objective reasons" behind your "subjective conclusion" because those words do not work that way. First and foremost your reasons are subjective, they are subject to change and will change based on your experiences and perhaps your exposures to other things ( keep in mind that one thing people often forget is that if an opinion becomes more reinforced it has also changed. Just because I use the word "change" does not mean I am referring to a weakening or redirection of opinion ). To say that you have an objective reason would be equivalent to saying "I was fated to like this son, this band, and this genre." In an ironic twist your conclusion is actually not "subjective" but "objective" as it is a statement of fact; "You" like "Something" is not subject to argument and is as objective as you can get. Who can tell you otherwise? Who can prove otherwise?

There's reason I picked this sentence. GW2 is a spiritual successor. It's not meant to be the same game. Turns out it really isn't. It shares a very thin thread but very few of the comparisons made, as Krazzar mentioned, are actually objective. In turn just from a logical standpoint you could, when arguing feelings, compare this game to the nostalgia of Sonic the Hedgehog and say something similar to "I wish the instances were timed, timed zones made sure that you were forced to figure out the path which made the game enjoyable to me. Time challenges are just fun." While that seems far-reaching it's a clear example of how talking about elements not in the game subjectively with an object bent doesn't work. "I liked hexes. Hexes are not in this game therefore this game is not as good." is not an argument it's a statement of opinion, an explanation, whichever you prefer but it's not a "Conclusion".  

Quote

You can't sweep away opinions with "that is just your opinion." That is a worthless argument that is blatantly false as almost every opinion (other than questions of taste) can be objectively discussed. Not that that is what you are saying, it just can be misconstrued from your remarks as a possible conclusion.
This is also not true at all. You cannot "objectively" discuss a subjective opinion with an expectation to find an objective truth. A clear example is "If GW2 had Hexes it would be a better game." Well you have a claim, and it can be backed by logical proposition, and explained, but is it objective? No. It's no different than saying "If GW2 had llamas it would be a better game."

Mind you this is only from a logical standpoint; it's pure academia at work here so it's not my opinion so much as it is just how humans decided we work when we assess a message and it's value. If I had never taken that logic class I'd agree with you up-and-down.

Edited by gw2guruaccount, 24 January 2014 - 10:29 PM.


#15 Featherman

Featherman

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1028 posts
  • Location:Frolicking in Kalos

Posted 24 January 2014 - 11:04 PM

There are game design concepts consistent throughout genres. This is the basis for why some people can call out certain games for not being actual games because they lack of those qualities. Games with nothing but QTEs and cutscenes for instance lack qualities that make Mario, WoW or Call of Duty veritable games.

To avoid the risk of digging deeper into that can of worms, it's best focus on what a good comparisons can do regardless of the subjects being compared. When writing a comparison any good writer will list out as many relevant differences and similarities as possible. The differences the writer finds helps the reader to understand what makes those two things different, the reason or purpose for those differences, the difference goals and what might work for one and not the other. Any similarities found help to raise helpful criticisms like why two difference things have the same goal, what do those things do to achieve their goal, which one is able to pull it off better, and how one can better reach its goal learning from the other.

If you compare an apple to an orange, you'll at least reinforce your understanding of why an apple is an apple and why the orange is an orange. If you dig deep enough you'll find out that they're both fruit born with the similar goal of long-range seed dispersal, but with different target carriers. If you can't at the very least do that, then you're simply not paying enough attention. The information given can only be conducive to further the discussion of apples and oranges.

Edited by Featherman, 25 January 2014 - 01:09 AM.


#16 Feathermoore

Feathermoore

    Underdog

  • Super Moderators
  • 3838 posts
  • Guild Tag:[AWWW]
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 25 January 2014 - 12:16 AM

View Postgw2guruaccount, on 24 January 2014 - 10:28 PM, said:

snip

If you have taken a logic class, why are you arguing the example and semantics instead of arguing the point? That doesn't really contribute anything to a discussion. Sure the example is iffy since it is a statement of taste. Apologies if my post ended up written in a way that misrepresented what I was actually saying. Hastily written messages have that quality.

Opinions can be used in a discussion and discussed in an objective fashion. The reasons behind an opinion can be dissected  reasoned, and refuted in order to strengthen or weaken the apparent position. You can not dismiss a statement as an opinion wily nilly. It is not a valid discussion strategy. Especially when you aren't in an academic environment where you can assume everyone has the same grasp of debate skills, and therefore can not hold others to fully evoking their opinions in a complete, concise manner that fully presents their view in its entirety. Christ, now I have written an abomination of a sentence. You are also misrepresenting typical comparisons in order to make them seem absurd.

The idea that I can't take my past experiences, combine those with my current observations, and make an argument based upon that is silly. The idea that subjective experiences can not be compared in a way that results in an objective finding is poppy♥♥♥♥  Or if it isn't you should go talk to those thousands of people that work in the so called "soft sciences" and let them know that everything they do is a lie. There is an entire science based around trying to figure out what makes certain things fun. When we are talking about games, which the actual underlying point of all games is fun, the subjective is always relevant. The degree of the relevancy to a specific discussion may vary.

You can't take GW2 in a vacuum. Even if you wanted to, it is impossible for anyone to talk about it in a vacuum  As I said, everything we perceive we perceive through comparison. Without it.... nothing (even the subjective). You are oversimplifying and arguing ad absurdum.

Unless you are misunderstanding me and I am misunderstanding you and we are aruging in circles. Then we should go invest in a maypole.

Edited by Feathermoore, 25 January 2014 - 12:23 AM.

Little Mabel won't be able to be here it's our worst fear. She's busy working on her garden that she's growing up in space.


Why hello there forumite. Would you like me to review some moderation you did not agree with? Never fear! PM is here! Want to be a better poster? Check on this link! And this one!


#17 Cube

Cube

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 565 posts
  • Location:A Web of Lies
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Server:Ring of Fire

Posted 25 January 2014 - 12:22 AM

Of course you can compare the games. Even if those two games are significantly different they are still supposed to be the same in some shape or form. They are still Guild Wars. Well, except GW2 is not anything like GW except for some lore. You often compare something to make a point, if it makes the point then it is a valid comparison. If they wanted no comparing perhaps they shouldn't have made a sequel...

#18 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 02:00 AM

View PostFeathermoore, on 25 January 2014 - 12:16 AM, said:

If you have taken a logic class, why are you arguing the example and semantics instead of arguing the point?
Logic at it's core is the study of language. Logic is semantics. Reason is what you're referring to, but that's a whole new unit.

Quote

That doesn't really contribute anything to a discussion. Sure the example is iffy since it is a statement of taste. Apologies if my post ended up written in a way that misrepresented what I was actually saying. Hastily written messages have that quality.
It isn't that it wasn't understood. The reason I picked on this is because it's not that it was poorly written but instead you had to read "beyond" what was written to understand it. In short it's an insider's thing.

Think of it as Appealing to Emotion. People who enjoyed the niche game GW1 will not enjoy the game GW2 for a myriad of reasons but one of the cores is that the niche has shifted almost completely. Most of the comparisons are based on subjective memories ( nostalgia ) which is usually the worst thing to remember; people fail to remember all the problems in a system or don't mention, esp. with dissent, anything that another product or arc or whatever is doing better than it's predecessor. You never really get an actual comparison that lays out the two systems side-by-side; you do tend to get "This sucks". Nothing objective.

Quote

Opinions can be used in a discussion and discussed in an objective fashion. The reasons behind an opinion can be dissected  reasoned, and refuted in order to strengthen or weaken the apparent position. You can not dismiss a statement as an opinion wily nilly. It is not a valid discussion strategy. Especially when you aren't in an academic environment where you can assume everyone has the same grasp of debate skills, and therefore can not hold others to fully evoking their opinions in a complete, concise manner that fully presents their view in its entirety. Christ, now I have written an abomination of a sentence. You are also misrepresenting typical comparisons in order to make them seem absurd.

The idea that I can't take my past experiences, combine those with my current observations, and make an argument based upon that is silly. The idea that subjective experiences can not be compared in a way that results in an objective finding is poppy♥♥♥♥  Or if it isn't you should go talk to those thousands of people that work in the so called "soft sciences" and let them know that everything they do is a lie. There is an entire science based around trying to figure out what makes certain things fun. When we are talking about games, which the actual underlying point of all games is fun, the subjective is always relevant. The degree of the relevancy to a specific discussion may vary.

You can't take GW2 in a vacuum. Even if you wanted to, it is impossible for anyone to talk about it in a vacuum  As I said, everything we perceive we perceive through comparison. Without it.... nothing (even the subjective). You are oversimplifying and arguing ad absurdum.

Unless you are misunderstanding me and I am misunderstanding you and we are aruging in circles. Then we should go invest in a maypole.

Opinions themselves produce claims which can never be used to argue for ambiguous ( subjective ) truths. How much someone loves or hates something for instance or what would make something better or worse overall are examples. You can back an opinion with your reasons but they don't work the same as evidences in a rhetorical sense.

Basically I think you have every right to pass your opinion and judgment and you can definitely discuss this. I just don't think that the subjective patternwork behind that is strong enough to consider it more than conjecture. An objective comparison between the two games shows that the mechanics in one probably wouldn't work in it's "cousin" if you will.

I'm also going to avoid using latin terms. Though I know what absurdium is you misused it.XD

View PostCube, on 25 January 2014 - 12:22 AM, said:

Of course you can compare the games. Even if those two games are significantly different they are still supposed to be the same in some shape or form. They are still Guild Wars. Well, except GW2 is not anything like GW except for some lore. You often compare something to make a point, if it makes the point then it is a valid comparison. If they wanted no comparing perhaps they shouldn't have made a sequel...
That's a good point, it shouldn't share the name, and it is true that they used the name as a marketing ploy. I admit I am not happy with the company for that.

#19 Featherman

Featherman

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1028 posts
  • Location:Frolicking in Kalos

Posted 25 January 2014 - 03:01 AM

View Postgw2guruaccount, on 25 January 2014 - 02:00 AM, said:

Think of it as Appealing to Emotion. People who enjoyed the niche game GW1 will not enjoy the game GW2 for a myriad of reasons but one of the cores is that the niche has shifted almost completely. Most of the comparisons are based on subjective memories ( nostalgia ) which is usually the worst thing to remember; people fail to remember all the problems in a system or don't mention, esp. with dissent, anything that another product or arc or whatever is doing better than it's predecessor. You never really get an actual comparison that lays out the two systems side-by-side; you do tend to get "This sucks". Nothing objective.
You're appealing to the consequences and confusing rhetoric with content. Side by side comparisons between games are difficult because of the many nuances  and quirks unique to each systems, but they're most definitely not impossible nor are they by any means lacking in value. The common "this sucks" post, the "GW2 is great and you're wrong post," and the ones that respond in superlatives that occur in comparison threads are all rhetoric and no content; they have little to no value other to gauge opinion. But just because you've read a lot shitposts in response comparison threads doesn't mean discussion can't or doesn't happen in spite of it either. But there's little that can be done other than to grow some thick skin maintaining a logical perspective; you don't punish everyone else by closing off an avenue of discussion because you don't like seeing.

Furthermore are the objectives comparisons, or at the very least the attempts at them, that do occur on the forums so insignificant that you'd completely glaze over and disregard them? It seems rather dubious seeing as how there are quite a few threads that pull off comparative analysis to a reasonable degree.

#20 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 03:15 AM

View PostFeatherman, on 25 January 2014 - 03:01 AM, said:

You're appealing to the consequences and confusing rhetoric with content. Side by side comparisons between games are difficult because of the many nuances  and quirks unique to each systems, but they're most definitely not impossible nor are they by any means lacking in value. The common "this sucks" post, the "GW2 is great and you're wrong post," and the ones that respond in superlatives that occur in comparison threads are all rhetoric and no content; they have little to no value other to gauge opinion. But just because you've read a lot shitposts in response comparison threads doesn't mean discussion can't or doesn't happen in spite of it either. But there's little that can be done other than to grow some thick skin maintaining a logical perspective; you don't punish everyone else by closing off an avenue of discussion because you don't like seeing.

Furthermore are the objectives comparisons, or at the very least the attempts at them, that do occur on the forums so insignificant that you'd completely glaze over and disregard them? It seems rather dubious seeing as how there are quite a few threads that pull off comparative analysis to a reasonable degree.
I agree with you on keeping an open mind. Some things are easily compared because they are in the same genre, take FPS A and B and you can compare them with great ease because they are just A and B. You can compare dungeon crawlers or rouges and rouge-types and so forth and so on because they have a strong base for doing so; as long as it's in the same genre you'll have an easier time. GW1 and 2 are in, dare I say, different genres altogether. It isn't "minor nuances" but almost an ocean of intentions and vision that separate the two.

Also I want to make clear that I am not saying that there cannot be objective comparisons nor am I ignoring them but rather I want to explore how useful it is to truly go from this A to that B; what actually develops from comparing 1 to 2?

Edited by gw2guruaccount, 25 January 2014 - 03:15 AM.


#21 Robsy128

Robsy128

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2920 posts
  • Location:Rata Sum
  • Profession:Ranger
  • Server:Yak’s Bend

Posted 26 January 2014 - 08:27 PM

It's like comparing a golden flapjack to a roast beef dinner. They're both types of food and have to be cooked a certain way - the results and tastes are just the difference.

... Now I'm hungry.

#22 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 569 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 26 January 2014 - 09:13 PM

View PostKymeric, on 24 January 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

In the end, a sequel shouldn't be a carbon copy of the original.  It's supposed to be an evolution that keeps the spirit of the series but takes it to new places.  To go with Star Wars as an analogy, I feel like GW2 was Return of the Jedi to GW1's A New Hope.  Then ArenNet got seriously spooked a couple months after launch, and spent the rest of the year giving us the Anakin Prequels.

Good post, this last part I can relate to.  I heard a similar analogy once:

GW1 was like the first modern Batman movie with Micheal Keaton and Jack Nicholson: fun, a little dark, great acting and story.  When GW2 was announced, everyone was expecting this epic redux...something like what Batman Begins was with Nolan behind the camera.  Instead, we get this visually stunning, yet hollow Batman & Robin circus-act with endless Arnie one-liners. :D

Edited by Konzacelt, 26 January 2014 - 09:18 PM.


#23 Gilles VI

Gilles VI

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3314 posts
  • Location:Belgium
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[ICE]
  • Server:Far Shiverpeaks

Posted 26 January 2014 - 09:15 PM

View PostCutthroat, on 24 January 2014 - 05:12 PM, said:

I think it does make sense to compare the best game ever (GW1, imo) to what was supposed to become better.. but yeah...


Agreed. I'm actually looking forward to playing Reaper of Souls. I liked D3's PvE more than GW2's anyway. Heroes of the Storm looks promising as well. I kinda wish ArenaNet could be more like Blizzard. At least Blizzard can deliver expansions and have multiple games alive.

It's easy to only see the positive things from developpers. Here we look at Blizzard and are amazed at the amount of content and players they have. At blizzard forums threads about constant DRM, the trading post in D3, and the beta forums about hots aren't very pretty either...

#24 Cutthroat

Cutthroat

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Finland

Posted 27 January 2014 - 12:24 AM

Probably. I'll give Blizzard a fair chance this year (till Anet can deliver an expansion). I've been playing Hearthstone, and most of the time it feels more like GW1 than GW2 does. But that's because:

Quote

Gw1 was inspired by mtg, gw2 is inspired by wow. If you loved gw1 for that reason, gw2 is probably not the game for you.
It could have been an awesome game, had it followed in it’s precedessors footsteps, but sadly it has become just another generic themepark mmo with a parade every 2 weeks.

https://forum-en.gui...c-the-Gathering

Funny thread. (Because the replies are true?)

It seems Blizzard are doing fun things with Diablo. https://twitter.com/...632332570902528 That's very cool! (RoS - deadmau5 ammy!)

#25 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 27 January 2014 - 12:40 AM

GW1 was a niche game. The world over did not think it was that great selling at 6.5 million copies over it's lifetime with most of those copies being in Germany and Europe. GW2 as of Jan. 2013 has sold close to half the same number of accounts ( 3m ) and it's revenues are up, not down. From a business perspective it is profitable. From a generic vantage point ( most gamers ) it's enjoyable. From anyone who played the previous game though it is traitorous.

Whatever the case the game isn't losing anything.

#26 Fantasy Trope

Fantasy Trope

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 136 posts
  • Location:Sto-vo-kor
  • Profession:Elementalist
  • Guild Tag:[EZ]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 27 January 2014 - 01:27 AM

View Postgw2guruaccount, on 24 January 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

Why or why not?

Before you instantly say "Yes" or "No" consider that they are two different games with two different mission statements, systems, and almost two different genres; they are years apart and promote a different time with more capabilities and fewer technological restrictions to the latter.

I am not asking "which do you like more?"; I am asking if comparing the two is a sensible thing.

ArenaNet invited the comparison when Mike O'Brien claimed that "Guild Wars 2 takes everything you love about Guild Wars 1 and puts it into a persistent world that's got more active combat, a fully-branching, personalized storyline, a new event system to get people playing together, and still no monthly fees."

There is no way to entertain O'Brien's statement without comparing the two games.

#27 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 27 January 2014 - 02:46 AM

View PostFantasy Trope, on 27 January 2014 - 01:27 AM, said:

ArenaNet invited the comparison when Mike O'Brien claimed that "Guild Wars 2 takes everything you love about Guild Wars 1 and puts it into a persistent world that's got more active combat, a fully-branching, personalized storyline, a new event system to get people playing together, and still no monthly fees."

There is no way to entertain O'Brien's statement without comparing the two games.
Well said!

You win.

#28 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 569 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 27 January 2014 - 03:04 AM

Hmm, I'd have to say no.  Simply because you used the wording "make sense".

Had you asked this question at launch I'd have a resounding "yes".  But over the course of a year and a half it's become apparent what GW2 really is.  It has very little to do with its predecessor in almost every category(including lore).  So, no, it doesn't "make sense" to compare the two.

However, if you had asked "is it fair" or "does it matter" to compare the two games...I'd say yes.

#29 Jentari

Jentari

    Vanguard Scout

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 250 posts
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 27 January 2014 - 03:56 AM

While I know that GW2 is not GW1, I think it is fair to compare them.

Normally a sequal has at least a fair amount that has carried over.  Most of what carried over from 1 to 2 is only a drop in the bucket.  Sad for GW1 fans but it is what it is.

They might have been better off calling this something else other then GW2.

#30 nerfandderf

nerfandderf

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 278 posts

Posted 27 January 2014 - 12:51 PM

If they name wasnt then no it wouldnt be fair but they named it and added all the marketing ect from Gw1 to GW2.

Had they had a separate name for it then it wouldnt be fair - but the devs destain for the original is amazing in context with GW2.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users