- Viewing Profile: Reputation: raspberry jam
raspberry jamMember Since 19 Jan 2010
Offline Last Active Jul 04 2016 07:43 AM
- Group Members
- Active Posts 4947
- Profile Views 16247
- Member Title Vigil Crusader
- Age 33 years old
- Birthday April 1, 1983
Posted Shayne Hawke on 07 March 2016 - 07:13 AM
Posted Hirsty on 02 December 2014 - 08:13 AM
Posted Zaishen on 01 December 2014 - 03:41 PM
guildwars2 has nothing to do with guildwars1, guildwars2 is totally diferent from guildwars1, i sold my guild wars 2 acc because not worth
a game like guildwars1 apears once in 30 years, just think that guildwars 1 have pvp for pros and pvp for noobs (easy pvp and hard pvp), im not going to talk much about the pvp because is to much to say, u had many pvp systems in this game, 4 vs 4 (Random Arenas and Team Arenas), 8 vs 8 heroes ascent (for pros and some pugs), and 8 vs 8 GvG clan versus clan (for pros), Alliance Battle for everyone (many girls liked to play AB in guildwars), farming in gw1 was amazing (rly nice pve), the ones who played this game some years ago know what im talking about
in all this years i didn't finded one, but one game wich can reach just the smoothesnes of character movment, camera, skill activation, and interaction of guild wars 1, i tested everything and all are epic fails, from aion to guildwars 2, tera and the "company", failed games with cheets, no endgame, no real pvp, failed pve, games wich stress u, point less stories, clueless, complicated games, made from wrong ideas
GuildWars was that kind things wich are made simple, good and with everything.
hmmm, a game made in 2003 (or around that times), rly profesional, i bet blizzard with his billions of dolars wanted this game dead, because of envy...
guildwars 2 ws not needed, they should continue deving guildwars1 same as world of warcraft, was the biggest mistake ever made, the fail of the decade, guildwars 2, they only have to improve graphs in gw1 and add some nicer features for example jump and some things and everything was ok
is not only you who not likes this sh*t with eyes! most of us, most of the gw1 players we never expected such fail, and the worse thing is that anet is paying to hide the ppl opinions, they flood the internet with counter opinions, paid opinion propaganda
gw2 is wrong from all aspects, it have nice graphs, but the other things are dry, races (why races ffs?! i dont like aliens), skills, game play, no end game, failed pvp, failed pve, ...
gold words, ther truth, the reality
Posted Konzacelt on 02 June 2015 - 05:41 PM
In GW2, exploration is based around going to the locations that ANet think you should go to. You have them on your map and they get filled in when you visit them. Now, sure, there are other things to see, things that are not on the map. But since there are things on the map, the rest gets kind of lost in the noise.
Really agree on that point.
The reason they made exploration a location "checklist" is for modern achievement-minded players who want to be rewarded for filling out said checklist. Any checklist will do really, I'm surprised they don't have one yet for walking across 10 bridges. It's game design based on handing out rewards for some of the most remedial and superfluous actions.
It works because ANet knows that humans, by nature, have a silly craving to finish lists. All ANet did was use some basic psychology to manipulate players into doing things that will make them stay in the game longer.
Right now I'd kill for a new zone with no vista's, skill points, and PoI's. And just one way point at the beginning.
And random spawns that follow random patrol routes.
And the ability to do it solo if I so wish.
Posted Miragee on 01 June 2015 - 04:22 PM
I think that I will buy the expansion as soon as I get a pc that can actually run it. But I'm going to do it only because I have all the previous games and I really enjoy coming back to them every now and then. However, it will not be because I can't wait for it and expect something new from the game. I know what to expect from ANet - a rather boring lore with some interesting game mechanics. And I know that I will enjoy the product nonetheless.
Maybe that's your problem. GW1 has amazing lore and a lot of it is in quest logs. If you only read 5 of them sure you wouldn't know... The thing about GW is: You have to go out and explore/read to find the lore. It doesn't just pop up wherever you go. GW2 has the problem that a lot of lore/dialouge is put into events or timed voice-overs. It's pretty annoying to catch it even if you try to. That's one reason why I'm not a fan of voice-overs for this kind of stuff. Text is great.
Another problem is probably that a lot of people do things differently in MMOs than they would in RPGs. In single player games you explore anyways because that's what the game is about and you have nobody around to pressure you. In MMOs however people are driven by success. They want to keep up with everyone else so they feel that they have to go out of their way to explore if they could instead grind dungeons, speed level etc.
Posted Miragee on 13 May 2015 - 07:25 PM
And here I thought Raspberry worked in the game development branch.
Posted Sans on 06 February 2013 - 01:08 PM
1 Laurel = 10000 gems
Limit, 1 laurel per month.
Posted Mordakai on 27 January 2015 - 06:04 PM
The key is that they just greatly expand on what they have. And if they attach masteries to defeating raid bosses, they will have effectively added raid progression without alienating players that choose not to participate in it (basically the same as fractals). Think of it more like you have to defeat Teq before you can do Wurm. Or that you need a particular utility skill to defeat Wurm that has no place elsewhere but requires killing Tequatl first to unlock it.
I really don't like gated content, period.
Example: I really want to do the latest LS with my brand new Sylvari character, but have to wait until level 80. I see no reason not to bump up characters for at least the instanced personal story bits (especially if I'm just going to be magically reduced in hit points or turned into Caithe anyway).
Posted Mordakai on 27 January 2015 - 05:25 PM
Okay, allow me to address why I still think you are only able to see things from the perspective of GW1, rather than how someone like me sees GW2.
GW2 is nothing but dps classes. That is a core philosophy of GW2. No trinity. Healers and tanks are part of that trinity, and asking to introduce healers is tantamount to asking to remove leveling, Hotkeys abilities, or gear. These are core principles the game was founded on, and while you may feel they are more conducive to a good MMO, they are simply not things Arena Net will ever do, nor is it what most of the playerbase wants.
GW2 is doing better than most other MMOs simply because it dares to be different than other MMOs, especially the nameless titan. Any back-stepping to introduce things contradictory to their core philosophy is going to be seen by the public as just copying them and giving up on an ideology that has actually served them well.
How is adding Greatswords with Necros not nearly equivalent to adding a new weapon entirely? You get brand new attacks, brand new skills, and a new playstyle just like you would with spears, or any other weapon. Whether it is packaged as a spear or a greatsword is irrelevant in my opinion. It isn't like they are limited in any way by the weapon. It just allows them to not add a large amount of art assets, allowing the team to focus on other expansion content.
For example, mesmers use greatswords as ranged weapons. It is awesome as hell from a visual perspective, and Arena Net can do the same with any weapons.
The same applies to the new class, only more so.
To you, the trinity is what engaging gameplay is. That was GW1, and other MMOs. That is not what GW2 at a design philosophy level, and it is simply not going to change.
Gah, DPS only was NOT intended! Anet has said multiple times they don't like it, they want each profession to have the ability to DPS, support, or control. Bad thing is: only DPS really matters, and apparently Anet has no idea how to fix that.
The ideal of GW 2 would be people switching roles to meet certain situations.
Posted Kymeric on 26 January 2015 - 08:52 PM
Posted Shayne Hawke on 26 January 2015 - 05:03 PM
This attitude is so quintessentially "I play-for-fun" that it makes my stomach turn.
You and your friends are so blinded by being entertained by shallow gameplay that you can't even see the contradictions in your own opening statement. It somehow isn't the fault of the developers that people find problems in the game, and yet you admit to/claim that
"content is so zergy and everything can be DPSed down in seconds... a lack of challenging content or defined player roles... someone is going to find the right place to stack to EXPLOIT AI pathing or targeting bugs, everyone is going to repair their zerker gear, and the whole server is going to break the game and then complain that its broken."
...which is all entirely the fault of ANet because it's the way they chose to make their game. ANet is (together with NCsoft) solely responsible for every decision they've made about how to build and present their game, and you somehow have the audacity to fault the playerbase when they call out ANet for having not designed the game in a manner which meets the studio's own touted goals and objectives. If ANet wants players to behave a certain way, and players end up behaving differently, it's because ANet, as the one in charge of all of the interactive bits and systems and laying everything out to manipulate player behavior, did not design a game that makes players behave that way, and that is their fault. Video games as a medium are all about shaping player interaction, and you are like someone who would blame clay for not turning itself into a vase rather than the potter that can't figure out how to work their wheel.
Again, there are all these things you point out that players have figured out and regularly do that demonstrate how poorly thought out and designed this game is, and if only players didn't do these things, they could see how great the game really is. You would rather blame the player for playing too efficiently than the designer for designing poorly, because it's not as though the designer could possibly have made the game in some other way that didn't allow for or encourage that behavior.
If playing like shit is the way you get through the game, then something else is shit - the game or your standards, or both. Bad games have bad solutions which are bad for any number of reasons (cheap, simple, lazy, easy, obvious, etc). Not caring that those bad solutions exist or that the developer should do anything about them is a bad standard.
Go cram your casual guild in some corner of the world and keep playing terribly with your thoughts to yourself. It's obvious that you don't care about the condition or quality of the game or about improving it, or you'd otherwise have some understanding about why and how the game is where it is and who to hold responsible. Stand down and let other people challenge ANet for a better game. You and your friends will find a way to gimp yourselves into finding it fun anyways.
Posted Miragee on 26 January 2015 - 05:20 PM
Buuuuuut mursaat are fleshy, solid creatures, or at least look like it. These guys are glowy. Margonites are glowy too and they were humans that were corrupted by Abaddon. Maybe these mursaat were transformed in a similar way.
Or it could be that this was their true form all along and they just looked fleshy in GW1 because reasons.
You have to remember that anet has to design for the majority of gw2's audience, which are in fact skritt.
Posted typographie on 26 January 2015 - 02:44 PM
The intent of the developers was to have an RPG combat system that makes healing and tanking optional at best. We could debate whether or not they foresaw the consequences of that, but I think it's obvious that if you can successfully complete dungeons with no healer, no tank, and no defensive stats, the variable you have left is how fast you can do it. While handicapping yourself can sometimes be fun to introduce a new challenge, you can't blame the players for generally wanting to take the easiest available route to their goals.
I think you're also ignoring the possibility that build optimization is a huge part of the enjoyment of this genre for a large number of people. Despite playing in a casual guild similar to yours where I could probably get away with running anything I want, I still usually choose direct DPS, and I still want to min/max it.
Posted Konzacelt on 26 January 2015 - 02:44 PM
Zodiac armor has the neato-silly skin change that has nothing to do with actual armor. I mean...it turns your body into blue jello. It's not supposed to represent anything real(in-game), I thought everyone assumed that.
Posted Baron von Scrufflebutt on 26 January 2015 - 10:51 AM
The fact that A.Net is selling the game's main progression currency in the cash shop is a design mistake. The fact that A.Net implements content in the shape of JPs or narrow passages, when the game's engine still (it has has this exact problem since GW1!) is unable to play well in those situations (think of CM basement or the Wayfarer frozen lake skill point) is a design mistake. The fact that the game places massive emphasis on levels (as a lvl 10 you are not going to be killing lvl 20 foes) and then introduces the main source of XP in the form of dynamic content (meaning the content is not available on demand, yet the game requires you to do it) is a design mistake. The fact that the game requires you to stand in a very small location to reap the benefits of a number of skills (boon sharing, condition removal, heals, ...) is a design mistake if stacking isn't desired.
Now, playing the game "wrong" mean that players simply stop focusing on the game's flaws. But that doesn't mean that those flaws do not exist; it just means you pretend that they do not exist. Now, I absolutely agree that players should play the game this way: if you are not having fun, it doesn't make sense to do something. But at the same time, this advice is completely and utterly useless on a discussion forum: because the "fun" of a discussion forum isn't in playing the game, it's in discussing it. Pretending that some issues don't exist is a good way to play the game, but a really shitty way to discuss it.