Radiea

Remember how fun it was getting a new eliteskill and trying to make a build around it?
The new skill system is incredibly boring. It's what really makes GW2 a repetitive game.

Ritter, on 07 September 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

I hate the imbalance issue because imbalance exists in all PvP games. Even DotA has a tier list that has many of the same heroes be picked over and over again to fulfill certain roles. The fact that the ones that ARE used in higher level play all serve certain needs and supply different elements to the team. I'll compare the two directly in how ANet has approached GW2.

If DotA 2 took the example of GW2, they would have made 10 heroes as opposed to over 100 and made them all function as an initiator role. No one wants to watch that, it would never thrive as an esport so instead they kept the over 100 heroes and made continual patches in attempt to balance them. Would they ever be fully balanced to the point where all of them were equally viable? Probably not. Did it give you more choice? Yes.

So the comparison between DotA and GW[1] exists to where that while not all builds are equally as viable, they're at least different and an option. People play every single one of the heroes, as people experiment with every single one of the builds in GW - just not as the highest level. It's a compromise, there's a tier list - sure. There's also acknowledging that only people who are competitive give a damn. You know Random Arena thrived, right?

Which moves me to another function of why DotA and GW were successful at PvP - the system of roles. They did away with this because they focused on every player being equally balanced for PvE - or well that's what they're trying for. That destroys the whole system of PvP and makes it a trivial zergfest full of 5 characters that function as the exact same role. As I said earlier, if DotA did this - it would have never become popular. It's not fun to watch and it's not fun to play. PvP in GW2 is a joke.

We can compromise by saying that GW2 is for PvE players and GW1 was marketed towards PvP players. Because if ANet is actually trying to make GW2 an esport in PvP they certainly aren't showing it. They didn't even bother implementing a guild ELO system on release. That was the main drawing point behind GW for many players and the fact it wasn't the first thing they brought in shows a drastic shift of priorities. PvP is just a gamemode to pass the time in GW2.

Dumbed down, but fun.

I have no valid opinion about GW2. Never played it, don't intend to play it any time soon, however there is a small glimmer of hope I may decide to try it out on my own.

What I can say is this: ArenaNet died back in 2010. This new, modern ArenaNet lost their imagination and intelligence and substituted it for a combination of candy, shiny diamonds and the lost art of beauty through poetry and wisdom.

GW1 is, truly, one of a kind. GW2 is nothing more than an attempt. If there's anything that changed the way we look at MMOs, it was GW1. I'd be damned if there is, or ever will be, something like it.

Exactly.

Better graphics.

Worse in every other regard. Although, WvW has a lot of potential.

Bunzaga, on 12 July 2012 - 07:05 PM, said:

Game needs to be successful first. E-sport stuff comes afterwards.

RabidusIncendia, on 13 July 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

Why is it that if someone takes the time to put together a well-reasoned article examining a subject it's a waste of time, but if they spew rabid mouth-foam all over a thread and amass the same quantity of words, one post at a time, it's suddenly acceptable? I'm not suggesting everyone should read the paper (34 pages may be a lot for people outside of academia), but I will simply because I've exchanged posts with the author and he has earned my time and interest. That's not something I can say for everyone on these or any other forums. People don't have to read it, but they shouldn't act like it's a ridiculous thing to do... we're all long past the point where we can point fingers and cry "Nerd!" How many posted

Note: this isn't a reference to you or anyone specifically, just a general observation. Also, I generally try to read every post in a thread I respond to because it's a matter of respect; how can I expect people to read what I write if I won't give them the same courtesy? I have regretted this policy on a number of occasions, most of which involve a certain very opinionated muppet.

Draconious, on 05 July 2012 - 03:41 AM, said:

Wouldn't that be something? But it would likely be called Elixir Chick From Total Recall.