Astral Projections

raspberry jam, on 19 March 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

I can’t argue about the lack quality of historically seen in the MMO genre.   When games like UO and EQ are considered great successes it shows that the past MMO community has displayed an almost unhinged tolerance for buggy products.

This became accepted and the expectations for MMOs were shaped by it.  Until Blizzard did something different.    For all of its (many) flaws, WoW did progress the MMO genre so that now the MMO community no longer stomachs paying to beta-test bug-ridden pieces of junk that would have been tolerated in the past.  And I think that's a good thing.

Unfortunately, that may not seem worthwhile if you don’t enjoy the actual gameplay of WoW.    But I think that’s all we can really expect from the MMO genre - gradual steps. The MMO genre has years of inertia to fight and MMOs are expected to be more complex and offer a wider breath of content than any other type of game.  That makes them more expensive and that means less willingness to engage in risks.

That doesn’t mean improvements shouldn’t be pursued, but I just think that expecting truly significant changes is too much to ask from the MMO genre.   We are seeing the genre slowly pulling itself from the mire of its past but it will be a slow and painful process.   The multi-million dollar disasters we saw in the immediate post-WoW launch era left a trail of bodies and we are far from done, I think.     The evolution of MMOs will see more bloody catastrophes ahead.  

Quote

There’s the rub, isn’t it?   You are fairly sure but how much are you be willing to risk on it?

GW1 was lightning in a bottle.   It was a niche game that made it big.    We see stories of that happening in gaming because it always makes the news, but for every niche game that succeeds, literally thousands fail.   Even today, how many big coop-RPGs are there?   There are single player RPGs dabbling in online play but it's still a nebulous (and thus risky) area.  

If you were a small company with a couple of dozen employees, a new company making their very first game like ArenaNet was when they were working on GW1, maybe you would be willing to take a risk like that.

But ArenaNet grew up.  They had a lot more employees in 2007-8 when they started GW2.  Even their original employees probably had families with kids by then.   With those kinds of stakes, would you take the same risks you could back when you were a smaller company?

ArenaNet did take some risks with GW2.  They started development years before the non-sub model became so accepted for example.  They chose to move the behemoth of the MMO genre in a gradual step, just as Blizzard did.   Those kind of risks are a naturally different than the ones the ArenaNet of 2000 would take because ArenaNet is no longer that company.

Would I be wrong in judging from your previous posts that you are upset because ArenaNet is no longer that company from 2000?   The thing is it’s nearly impossible to stop a company from growing and evolving.    Companies either do that or they stagnate and fail.    

ArenaNet in 2008 needed to make a successful game.    They needed to keep paying the people who had helped the company grow over the years.   And from all accounts they have made a successful game to the point where there are even GW1 players who enjoy it.   Going back to you point about Mass Effect 3 and Simcity, gamer rage is pretty much universal across genres when it manifests.    There hasn't been the kind of upswell with GW2 compared to other MMOs that ended up real failures like FFXIV, WAR, SWG post-NGE etc.    

I don’t think ArenaNet could have or should have tried to make a co-RPG like GW1 again.   That kind of game really needs to come from a small company.    ArenaNet had become a larger player and they are making games to reflect that.   And I’m glad to see the game they ended up make is helping to push MMOs into a better place.

Stargate, on 18 March 2013 - 09:34 PM, said:

Where did I try to psychoanalyse people?
And ofcourse she is entitled to her opinion, but so am I, and I'm just wondering what she's doing on these forums if the game where these forums are all about is so bad in her opinion.

And are you familiar with the practive of over exaggeration to make a point?

They dieded.

It makes about as much sense as taking extra time driving around a parking lot looking for the closest spot, yet people still do it, because people generally don't make sense.

Hey everyone, the OP already posted a similar post in October:

http://www.guildwars...e/#entry2041465

Maybe he is just trying to troll the forums again.

Veurr, on 23 February 2013 - 03:49 AM, said:

I think 99% of people looked at the time and effort required to craft a legendary and that it was only a skin and said no thanks even without the ridiculous cost or lottery winning luck required to get a precursor which later became apparent. So no I don't think many care.

Legendaries are a confused illogical mess.

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

I'd have to agree and I don't have GW2 hate compared to GW1.  For me GW2 is better in almost every way than GW1. GW1 just had a fundamental PvP focus in design that forced Anet into innumerable small and large band-aid fixes to try to make the PvE world work and a new attempt with every expansion to get people to play PvP. In GW2 it's reversed, PvE systems got quite a bit of polish and consideration, while structured PvP is relatively light. If you're a player looking for expanded PvP from GW1 GW2 will come up short. I'm not a PvP-focused player so GW2 overall is a great improvement, but I understand where PvP players could be coming from. WvW isn't the be-all-end-all answer either, it has its own problems that make it unappealing to the hardcore PvP crowd.

Over time PvP will be expanded, but the clear answer from players was that PvP isn't what most people want.

TBH. I like them both a lot.

The main problem I have with GW2's combat system is the lack of skills, spamming "1-2-3-4-5-6-7!" of the same exact skills gets so boring and stale after a short while.

IF ArenaNet made weapon skills customizable(adding 10, 20, or 30 skills to each weapon) along with adding a lot more utility skills (50 maximum) I would have no problem with it at all. Right now it's too basic, it's too cookie cutter, there's no skill/strategy on your combat builds specifically.

I'm really diggin the old wood style finish. It really gives it an authentic sylvari look. Just my opinion though XD





Here's him in action in some town clothes.

Why, unlike GW1, is it impossible to make the death camera stop spinning around your corpse like a vulture for more than a couple of seconds? It would be nice to be able to comfortably watch what's going on around you when you have to wait more than a short time for a rez. Is there some good reason why the death camera was set up this way, continually snatching control of the view away from the player? I find this very annoying. Rude, even.

Which profession being inherently"better" at a role is, as you said, rather subjective.

Every profession has the tools to fulfill almost any role in the game, to varying efficiency.
It's not so much which is better but more of how skilled and knowledgeable the individual player of a profession is at the role he wants to play in.

In other words, the first question one should be asking isn't which prof is better at tanking etc. but which player, regardless of his chosen profession.

If he built his character for it and knows how to make it work, even a thief can "tank". He just won't be doing it the same way a guardian would.

Then we ask the second question: does he fit your group comp? Or rather, do you know how to fit him in?

If you have 3 group mates with heavy defense oriented builds, do you ask them to change their builds to fit your tactics or do you change your tactics to optimize the use of 3 tanky allies?

I prefer the latter way but slight build changes are usually inevitable, as long as it does not impact too much on each player's strengths.
I like the challenge of making any group makeup work.

Therefore it does not matter to me which is the best anything.
In GW2, I can afford to have it not matter.

Unfortunately, this type of challenge is also something a lot of players can't be bothered with.

Rezo, on 01 February 2013 - 12:23 AM, said:

Yeah I am aware that there are still bugs. 57 profession-related fixes in this last patch alone. My point is that A-Net is working through the bugs and I disagree with TGIFrisbie's claim of months of no bug fixes. Maybe the bugs he wants fixed aren't gone yet, but that is no reason to misrepresent reality.

I tend to avoid such childish topics but you're taking it too far. No bug fixes? Seriously? Last patch was mostly bug fixes and improvements. I've played since betas and and the amount that has been fixed is enormous. Bugs are expected in new games, but ANet is fixing them.

Go hide back under your bridge because I'm officially calling you a troll. And I'm going back to the altar of ANet to ritually sacrifice a holy animal because I'm a fanboy

TGIFrisbie, on 31 January 2013 - 11:54 PM, said:

So some vague references to weapon combinations and pets along with one specific bug is how you back up your claim of no bug fixes:

TGIFrisbie, on 31 January 2013 - 10:57 PM, said:

Here I expected a laundry-list of issues I wasn't aware of. I'm honestly tired of the haters who misrepresent the state of the game. Sure there are still bugs, but they are being eliminated one after another and the game is quickly improving.

Am I a 'fanboi'? Maybe so, the term is suggestive. But at least I'm having a heck of a lot more fun than the haters. And having fun is all I really care about.

TGIFrisbie, on 31 January 2013 - 10:57 PM, said:

Totally incorrect. I've been playing since headstart and the game now is much more polished than at launch. There used to be broken DEs and skill points everywhere in high level zones. Now it's semi-rare for me to find one that doesn't work. Yes there was a rocky period early on but recently A-Net has been nothing but great at fixing bugs and updating content. The fact that they are focused on improving the current game rather than dumping content into it is proof.

I would be curious to see a list of all the bugs that you seem to think are not being addressed.