Jump to content

  • Curse Sites


Member Since 21 Aug 2009
Offline Last Active Jan 02 2014 12:45 AM

#1948929 I guess that's why it doesn't have a subscription.

Posted Zhaitan on 19 September 2012 - 06:50 PM

View PostShiftedgw2, on 19 September 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

It was a good run. It was definitely worth $60.00 just like I'd say Diablo III also was. It was definitely worth the 300+ hours or so that I got from it.

The game was officially released on August 28th. That's 542 hours 23 mins before the time of your post. You have played 300+ hours. That means you have spent more than 55% of the total available time in your life playing this game since launch. Hoping you had at least 6 hours of daily sleep, you ended up playing nearly 75% of the every waking hour of your life in last 3 weeks or so.

I think the game got bored of you and decided not to offer you any more fun till you take some rest and help yourself in the process.

I say that jokingly. But, in all honesty, the impact of sitting on your butt 75% of the day will take heavy toll on your body. It does not matter how old you are. You will have serious issues with your health if you don't take a break now.

#1766145 I LOVE the Thief, yes that's right.

Posted metalsazz on 19 August 2012 - 05:39 PM

View Postmrbig, on 19 August 2012 - 05:27 PM, said:

Melee builds are not viable for tourney play without venoms. The point is that melee builds with venoms are utterly ridicolous ( altough i didn0t try them in tourney, only in sPvP).

As i said, i don't like how they're balancing the thief.

I want to play my D/P-shortbow build AND BE VIABLE, without being eclipsed by venom sharing ( my build contains venoms, but not venom sharing/leeching).

I want a good Steal mechanic.
I don't want to be forced into venoms to make a good tourney build.

RIght now, those things are dreams.

well if you feel forced then i feel bad for you, i'm pretty sure there's lots of guilds out that won't force you to play any build you don't want to still have success in tourneys, remember it's about the people playing not the class ;)

#1750544 In Game Screen of Mistfire Wolf, Mini Rytlock & HoM Heritage Armor

Posted Shayne Hawke on 17 August 2012 - 04:50 AM

Oh my god, that medium armor.

Posted Image

#1740178 I LOVE the Thief, yes that's right.

Posted Hawkengrey on 15 August 2012 - 11:18 PM

I have to add this to counter all of the incredible childish QQ that's going on in this forum.  Most Thieves I've talked to in-game today loved the class also.  I think people have small issues, but nothing like what's represented in this forum.

I'm owning in 1v1.  I'm loving it in PvE.   In larger WvWvW we definitely fill a certain role (and that might not be everyone's desire, but it's a powerful role... picking off the fools who step out of the pack, etc).  

I think props to the designers, they've made a fun, interesting, and extremely challenging (but rewarding) class.

#1644461 Gem prices, acceptable or unacceptable?

Posted Killyox on 27 July 2012 - 09:35 PM

View PostDream Catcher, on 20 July 2012 - 06:21 PM, said:


Person thinking they are acceptable will buy them, the one who thinks opposite will not. That's how it works. Simple.

View PostGli, on 27 July 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

What argument? Did I make one? I only questioned someone else's argument. The comparison of the minimum income demanded by law in some countries does not make a good argument for the inflated price level of gems in a great many different countries.

I don't see the point of mentioning those averages when those averages don't even include any data from many of the countries that have to pay through the nose.

In fact, if we were to use the income level of some of the poorer european countries as the baseline and adjust the dollar price of gems, like some of you guys want us to see the dollar price as baseline and use 'our' income level to adjust the gem price, you'd be paying up to five times as much for gems. Perhaps even more, I can only take some countries into account that I've been to or otherwise have some knowledge of. But a factor of 5 seems radical enough to make my point, I see no reason to go look for a worse number.

So yeah, we don't live in a perfect world, no one needs to tell me that, I'm not stupid. But do me the favor and not insult my intelligence by claiming 'different income levels' warrant the price difference. It doesn't.

Yeah but why should they care? It's not their problem you know that some earn less than in other countries. You DON'T have to buy gems AT ALL to play and enjoy full game. And I am the one saying it, one from "those" countries where people get on average ~350€ worth a month on hand.

View PostSpecialz, on 27 July 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

What you said would be true in an "IF world", well unfortunately we live in the "real world". And in this real world the are people that will want to sell gems for ingame gold because they place a value on that gold and because they have no issues spending their money on gems.

I don't mind a discount, who would be against? I would love if it was 100% free, but I know that wont happen. And the argument that just because a few people cannot afford it means the price should drop is a silly and unrealistic argument to make. My whole arugment to the post you were replying to is: if you have multiple jobs and a student maybe you should reconsider your priorities and not get the gem if you cannot afford them.

Yeah. I mean, i cannot afford ferrari...clearly they should drop a price.... ;)

#1624383 Mobs dodging AoE's constantly

Posted Freelancer604 on 23 July 2012 - 09:33 PM

I cant believe people are complaining  about Ai that fights intelligently....

If they set a fire under your feet, youd move. If you set a fire under another players' feet, theyd move. Npcs should do the same. This is guild wars, your supposed to use your brain. Stun, knock down, slow enemies to force aoe damage on them.

#1602299 Does anybody else feel like Arenanet is too ambitious for the time?

Posted Syncline on 15 July 2012 - 07:42 PM

They're not rushing some features; they're refusing to release them until they're done. However, the game as it stands is a solid vanilla release.

When the rest of the stuff is done, they'll release it.

People need to be more patient. WTF with all the negativity in this forum these past few weeks, is it to try to turn new folks off or something?

#1581662 Why GW2 feels strange, unearthly and even just a little unreal…

Posted Flashman on 08 July 2012 - 07:21 AM

I’m not telling the world anything new when I say, a lot of MMOs fail.

Either they fail outright with next to no subscribers and close within a year, or they start off ‘OK’ but never quite get the numbers and become an ‘also-ran’ in the market. A very few might even get the numbers — initially — then start bleeding subscriptions after the first month or two as people get to the end-game, realise there is no end-game, and look for something new.

As someone who has sat out here, in the MMO community, since Ultima Online was the hot new game in town, I’ve constantly marveled at how many times the same mistakes are seemingly made again and again and again.

End-game, that I mentioned a moment ago, is one of the big ones. “The end-game has to be there… it has to be solid!” says the MMO community, “Yes, yes, we hear you! We agree!” say the developers of countless MMOs that have come and gone over the last 15 years. And yet, when it came down to it… when the rubber hit the road… the end-game wasn’t there.

Its not always the end-game, of course, that’s just one example. But it highlights that “everyone” seems to know what would make a great MMO, yet so far, few companies have been able to put the right ideas in motion.

Enter Guild Wars 2.

It’s perhaps telling that the original Guild Wars is a game I have gone back to, again and again, over the years since it first came out. Partly because of it’s free-to-play nature, yes, but also partly due to the fact that it was different to other MMOs. Indeed, it was so different, many people still have a hard time even calling it an MMO at all. The debate still rages on about that.

So as we sit here, on the verge of Guild Wars 2 coming out; a game that is better than the original Guild Wars in every single way by a factor of 1000, are we about to see the release of a game that not only gets these 15 year old questions right, but which also doesn’t charge a fee, to boot? I really don’t want to be cast in the ‘fanboi’ role, but I think we might be. Seriously.

From what I have played of Guild Wars 2 so far, via beta weekends and ‘stress tests’, I have found a game that is visually gorgeous, deep in lore and fun to play. It’s WvWvW also evokes (and surpasses) the legendary Dark Age of Camelot, which was a game released in 2001 that was still the benchmark for ‘Realm versus Realm’ combat, all these years later, until Guild Wars 2.

Even though I have played Guild Wars 2 and can report to anyone reading this blog that, yes, the game is real and, yes, it’s as good as all the reviewers say it is, it still feels strange, unearthly and even just a little unreal, to think that this game exists. This game goes beyond what any $15/month MMO is offering… and yet is doing it without ANY monthly fee. Incredible.

#1556536 Announcing the Guild Wars 2 Launch Date: August 28, 2012!

Posted Konig Des Todes on 28 June 2012 - 05:33 PM

View PostSafer Saviour, on 28 June 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

It's been six years since I first entered the world of Tyria
This post made me realize something.

Not only is the release date of the third book and Guild Wars 2 on my birthday, but the announcement of GW2's release date was on my sixth anniversary of playing Guild Wars.

Creepingly awesome with the coincidences, Anet...