Jump to content

  • Curse Sites

Bryant Again

Member Since 20 Aug 2009
Offline Last Active Apr 10 2015 01:35 PM

#2351419 Revenant Worries; GW2 Worries: The Good and the Bad

Posted Miragee on 20 February 2015 - 02:36 PM

View PostI post stuff, on 20 February 2015 - 01:45 PM, said:

No this isn't a bit exaggerated. It's completely exaggerated, glass half empty thinking.

Support, control and positioning play a vital role. It's not just pull then DPS. But then again, explaining this to forumites is like talking to a brick wall.

But like I said, they'll try to "fix" combat and we'll end up with the most idiotic combat system ever before the game dies.

If traditional MMO combat is tank & spank then GW2 combat is spank. I don't care if you insult me just because I responded to a post that contained this simplified description in a simplified way. But you can't seriously tell everyone that support, control and positioning is important in GW2 while in other MMOs it isn't. And that's just what I was talking about: a simple comparison of descriptors.

#2351338 I’ve been playing GW2 wrong, and loving it.

Posted Nikephoros on 19 February 2015 - 09:10 PM

View PostArkham Creed, on 19 February 2015 - 06:04 PM, said:

And whose fault is that? I seem to recall a very huge percentage of the community (most notably those with the "efficiency" and "speed clear" mentality) screaming their heads off and demanding nerfs in the first weeks or months of the game because they couldn't make it past AC Story.

"This game is too HARD! Nerf it!"

*reluctant nerf followed by mass Foo Strategy adoption*

"This game is too easy! Arena Net sucks!"

You don't want to muck around with stats, fine. In that case maybe we should be advocating Arena Net undo those first nerfs and see how fast the zerker meta implodes. And you know what? My guild could finish those dungeons. My guild actually figured the game out. You know how to play the zerker meta; I know how to play Guild Wars 2, and if Arena Net would take off the training wheels they slapped on for all you crybabies we might see some changes to the meta.

Actually, it was my guild who figured the game out.  Never heard of you.

#2348714 I’ve been playing GW2 wrong, and loving it.

Posted Baron von Scrufflebutt on 29 January 2015 - 12:14 PM

"Fun" is a subjective term. Being "effective" is an objective one. Not just that, but to some people, being effective IS fun.

Now, what's being repeated over and over again is that people should really play the game for "whatever their definition of fun is". You are wasting time with a game, hopefully you are having fun with it. But if you are going to push your playstyle onto others, then the reason for that push will hopefully be something other than "I like it". Because this "I like it" really doesn't make for the best of discussions. People can agree AND disagree with you and both groups are correct.

That's why these discussions try to get pushed onto something that one can argue about. Sure, we had these discussion before and they usually end with the exact same result, but at least they are discussions, rather than blog posts.

#2348699 I’ve been playing GW2 wrong, and loving it.

Posted Baron von Scrufflebutt on 29 January 2015 - 09:06 AM

View PostArkham Creed, on 29 January 2015 - 05:56 AM, said:

As I said; there is a difference between wanting fixes for what's actually wrong with it, and demanding complete overhauls to core systems and design philosophies for no other reason than your own archaic preferences.

I've said the exact same thing the last time we had a similar discussion and I am going to say it again: stop it, Serena ChaCha. Point out shitty arguments and respond to them. Or move on. But making blanket statements about how folks are throwing shit around achieves absolutely nothing; there's nothing to discuss here. The folks here have been making some pretty reasonable statements and you keep "countering" them by not responding to what folks are saying and are instead resorting to "but someone, somewhere is saying shit about GW2".

If you want to argue that folks are "demanding complete overhauls to core systems and design philosophies for no other reason than [their] own archaic preferences", quote those elements from this thread. Or continue this discussion in threads where that is taking place.

#2344485 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted raspberry jam on 15 December 2014 - 01:32 PM

View PostI post stuff, on 15 December 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

It did in context of the discussion I had with that other user. I think that both GW and GW2 were a success in terms of bringing something fresh to the genre, setting records and the critical acclaim they got for it.

GW is an odd blend of MOBA and sandbox RPG genres, while GW2 is basically Soviet Russia of MMORPG world. That's fine by me.

What I would like to discuss is why they failed to establish a genre with GW or at least cement themselves in a kind of niche like CCP did with EVE. I don't think the answer "They wanted WoW" cuts it.
Different agents make different decisions. GW did create a niche of the same sort as CCP. However certain design decisions (likely driven by business motive) made the original game untenable to continue to develop in the same manner. Also, in growing, ANet changed, its original creativity diluted. I'm not saying that GW2 isn't creative, but it is a creativity of design of stuff that is in the game, which is completely different from creativity of design of the game itself. Therefore, when they set out to create a GW2, they chose not to make a GW1 part 2 (since taking the original design and just avoiding the pitfalls with it would take not only creativity of game design but also understanding of said original design, neither of which existed within the studio at that point), but they chose to make a game that was - in their own words - "a real MMO".

Now what is "a real MMO"? Before you reply: the answer doesn't matter in the least, since design decisions are always driven by business decisions. If your business wants to make a four-wheel general-purpose vehicle for private consumers, your design is going to design a car because that's the sort of vehicle that fulfills the business goals. The only thing that is percieved as a "real" MMO (and is not on the lines of Runescape or Maple Story) and is also widely successful, is WoW. Now it doesn't strictly matter that WoW's game design is basically an online sandbox version of a JRPG, because it's good business and that's all that really matters.

But I agree: they didn't want WoW. But they made WoW anyway because they didn't have any choice: anything else would require both creativity (of game design) and freedom of business decision, and they didn't have either of those two.

Also, yes. They said that they wanted to make a better GW, without the flaws of the original design. But that's not true, is it? Because if that's what they wanted, they would have kept things that worked just fine, such as massive instancing and the (old) conditions system. But they changed those things, clearly indicating that they didn't want to build on the old genre. Instead, they wanted a brand new thing. Unfortunately, due to lack of creativity, that brand new thing turned out to be an old thing.

The Soviet Russia meme is quite well known, I don't know why you linked to it. I also don't know how you can be fine with GW2 being the Soviet Russia of the MMO world though. It's an awful situation.

#2343935 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted MazingerZ on 08 December 2014 - 05:11 AM

View PostI post stuff, on 06 December 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

The problem is that GW2 was overhyped to such an extent that many people expected it to be the new big thing across the board even though MMORPG genre in general was declining.

Nah, it's not.  We're being bombarded regularly with new product every year.  Archage.  WildStar.  EverQuest Next.

What you're seeing is the equivalent of Comcast and Time Warner.  The barrier to entry at the moment is so high (meeting and exceeding the precendence WoW sets) that no western developer will throw the appropriate level of money at it to compete.

The Korean market is very different.  They have a ton of MMOs coming out of varying quality (and grindiness) that just get ported over to here.

What you're observing is one king that has little reason to compete against any other similar products and a bunch of sub-standard products cropping up to grab the consumers that fall on the floor.

#2343597 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted El Duderino on 29 November 2014 - 03:41 PM

Yup, GW2Guru is definitely pretty dead. Not surprising really, it was the only forum that tried to allow balance between those that defended the game and those that were disappointed with the game. The other forums either run you out of town with down votes (reddit) or ban you completely for dissent (GW2 Forums). Other than the people that still play, not too many people care about the game anymore and it has most definitely taken it's place alongside other MMO's that, while aren't dead, certainly aren't shaping the industry or considered overall successes any more. A look at the recent financials has it doing as well as Aion, Blade and Soul and other games that most people have long since forgotten. It's not that unexpected either, as the game never strayed far enough away from the generic MMO mold that simply can't outperform the King (WoW) using their same basic formula.

#2337678 Thoughts on the September Feature Pack?

Posted Phineas Poe on 31 August 2014 - 01:23 PM

View Postdavadude, on 31 August 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

I agree with you, but considering their team size is still 300, plus or minus five, and 20 people do LS, 20ish people do Feature packs, I cannot help but think some larger content is being worked on.  SAB came out of nowhere, Fractals came out of nowhere, Southsun came out of nowhere.

One of the developers on Reddit (I think?), claimed something as simple as a party votekick number change (in other words, kicking requires three or four players instead of two), was a big deal and was being worked on for the end of this year or 2015.  With that in mind, the engine may be a bit more difficult to use than we think.

I used to believe in the "there's 300 people at ArenaNet" response. But after seeing two Living Story breaks in six months, after seeing nothing but new armor for PvP and some new traps/masteries for WvW, I genuinely think that whatever number of employees they have are mired in mismanagement both in time and in funding. I am sure they're working on stuff, but they're clearly all a bunch of small projects that coalesce into a whole that is less than the sum of its parts. We came into the LS2 thinking we'd get a new region. Two months in we have one new zone and are parading around Timberline Falls, Kessex Hills, and watching NPCs talk to one another in towns. While I acknowledge that some of our requests have been made, they're making obvious short cuts in design time by making us fight in areas we have already been before. Why can't the LS2 be like GW1 campaigns where you progressed onward throughout a region and into the next? I thought that was the path we were going with Dry Top unlocking a little bit at a time, but then it all came crashing to a halt and went in full reverse.

Certainly that is work that has been done, and I know some players asked for more personal story instances in the CDI threads, but we also asked for new dungeons, raid bosses, and regions. They're clearly tackling the easiest of these requests, just as they are in WvW and PvP. We asked for new game types, unique armor, and new maps for PvP. So they made the unique armor and left it at that.

One of the WvW guys a while back on a live stream said it took them an entire year to make Edge of the Mists. Either their projects are hilariously understaffed or underfunded or something needs to change about their development process. And with such a nebulous guy at the helm like Colin Johanson that can't confirm or deny anything concrete, who writes up manifestos and doesn't hold up to them, who signs off on CDIs and takes none of the input from them, I can't help but think that, looking from the outside, the culture of their company is well within question.

Also: I genuinely think fractals were something that were worked on before launch and just didn't make it to final release. I do think that ascended gear was something created after the fact, however. The fact that fractal weapon drops were all exotic on launch, including the weapon skins, says that enough.

#2331857 GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

Posted Alleji on 13 July 2014 - 05:24 PM

GW2 will always have a content issue because of the way it is designed.

Game has no replayability, so whatever content they put out is going to be played through quickly and left behind and it's impossible to produce content faster than players will go through it if there's no replayability. The worst part is that the content they already produced in the past isn't even there anymore for new players or players who took a break.

I don't think it's even possible to create content with high replayability value ("endless grind" doesn't qualify) in GW2 without overhauling the core of the game. It just wasn't designed that way and changing it now seems way too late. It needed to happen in 2012.

#2329556 Is guild wars 2 worth playing today?

Posted Feathermoore on 26 June 2014 - 07:28 PM

This isn't going to turn into a discussion debating opinions on game regions. If you have an opinion on whether the game is worth playing, state so and why. Just don't run off into debates.

Mod mode over.

While it depends on what you are looking for, yes GW2 is worth the buy if what you have seen so far interested you. I remember how leveling my first character was a blast. I got maybe 60 hours out of that character before I even started an alt. I got the second character leveled and through the game and that one really became my main. I haven't been able to get a single other character above 40 since then though. The leveling experience is great, the first or second time around. The third time I wanted to smash my head on my keyboard since there was literally nothing new to do. So, if you are an altaholic, step with care. I know tons of people have many more 80s than me, but I can 100% say I will never have more than 3 unless a massive expansion comes out that I can level a new character from 0-80 in.

I won't harp on PvP. If you want sPvP, don't bother. The game is 2 years old, the PvP won't suddenly start. As for WvW, some people love it and some people hate it. I personally can't stand it, which was unexpected as it was one of the big features I was excited for. I come from DAoC whose RvR system is what WvW is obviously based off of. If you played that, step carefully. If you consider something like EVE to be the pinnacle of large scale PvP, step even more carefully.

Base PvE? Simplistic and not really challenging, but most MMO players aren't actually looking for a complex combat system. They often complain about features that increase depth if they also increase difficulty. But the PvE experience is worth the $40. If I look at GW2 as a single player RPG I would be satisfied with the amount of content and time I got out of my purchase. If you like single player RPGs? Play GW2. If you don't, and you like MMOs, don't play GW2. It is weird, GW2 is mechanically an MMO unlike GW1. Yet GW1 somehow feels more like an MMO than GW2 for me.

If you do play, research the classes before hand. It can take up to level 40 or 50 to realize you really just can't stand this class. I hit 80 with my elementalist and was dumbstruck at how I wasn't having fun anymore. Leveled the necro to 80 and haven't touched the elementalist since. Which annoys me since the elementalist has the name I use for my character in every MMO ever.

#2329490 The Gates of Maguuma

Posted Baron von Scrufflebutt on 26 June 2014 - 07:45 AM

View PostAzure Skye, on 26 June 2014 - 12:17 AM, said:

Posted Image

I have to wonder if the engine will be able to handle such locations; it looks stunning, but as soon as one doesn't have massive, open fields the camera in both GW1 and GW2 has consistently gone berserk. Walls need to become see-through, or they simply need to stop making content that takes place in corridors.

#2329421 Unlocking traits.

Posted Kuldebar on 25 June 2014 - 10:22 PM

The new trait throttling-content gating system has ruined the game for me (at least in regards to brand new characters).

GW2 was already a bit "dry" -meaning not rich or deep when it came to character development; now it's a virtual desert. The plodding unremarkable leveling of a new character is intolerable.

Level 30 before your first trait?

Forcing unpopular content on players is ANet's idea of a good thing?

TBH, I knew ANet was going wrong as a norm when the instant level 20 scrolls came out. Yes, I didn't appreciate the Ascended Gear mess, but ANet keeps the hammer hits on the coffin lid coming on a regular basis.

#2328680 Would you pay?

Posted Kymeric on 19 June 2014 - 12:45 AM

Just started Neil Stephenson's novel Reamde.  Started it and about fell out of my chair.

Published in 2011, it revolves around an MMORPG.  This MMORPG was designed first, and primarily, as an economic engine, around which a world was built, finally wrapped up in a story and game.  The core of it is the virtual economy that is designed to make actual currency, and the game is just there to give people a reason to engage in the economy.

Suddenly GW2 and several other recent games make so much more sense.  This is why GW2 has a resident economist cutting down people on the forums who are trying to say the economy isn't making the game fun.  The only reply you'll get in the BLTC forum is that the economy is stable and functioning well.  Which, to someone complaining about it not being fun, doesn't seem like an answer at all.  But it is.  The answer is that the game serves the economy, not the other way around.

Which is why they don't even need a sub.  A subscription model assumes that the game is an entertainment service provided in exchange for pay.  It's antique.  The new MMORPG is a virtual economy with an entertainment wrapper.

#2328719 Would you pay?

Posted Feathermoore on 19 June 2014 - 01:24 PM

View Postsegadomcast, on 19 June 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:



Careful with that "always" statement. Neither EVE or TSW have a grind system above the level of the grind in GW2.

EVE has the skill system which can be seen as that, but I don't care how good you are at games in general; you will not be able to jump in EVE and understand how to fly higher level ships without losing them instantaneously. That is ignoring that you would have no way to afford them as a new player anyways. It takes a good part of a year to learn the game's systems and by that time your skill tree is well beyond what your typical resources/ship interests are. Unless you want to fly a capital ship, but that is generally limited by the player base even more than the skill base. A lone capital ship is a dead capital ship and you have to be trusted to be added to a capital fleet.

TSW is 95% casual friendly. Even more so than GW2 is. It also manages to be 70% ish hard core friendly with the nightmare raids and lairs that really don't interest the casual players. The SP/AP system does cap your ability to learn quicker if you pick the game up. But unless you are just looking up builds online with no thought of your own, the timing matches up with the average learning curve. People who learn faster feel constrained in almost every game really. No, it doesn't have a sub anymore, but it did and the base game design had that in mind.

The point is, a sub isn't inherently evil and it doesn't inherently impact game design any more than a cash shop does/could (also isn't going to inherently change game design). At the end of the day, the company's goal is to make profit and they will design their product in the way that will deliver the most profit. A big company, with a big huge hitting MMO may think the sub will work best. Another company may think no sub will make more profit. Either way, the game will be developed in a manner that will result in the most profit from their business model. Some sub games have used the "subs are just the way it is" model but tried to pull in a different niche by reducing grind (Tabula Rasa was another example of this). Some cash shop games have many, many times more grind than the average sub game and then sell things that reduce that time by massive amounts. Some games mix the two, allowing you to pick and choose what month to sub for (TSW).

So, while voting with your money is 100% correct (it is how capitalism works after all), just looking at the payment model isn't enough. You have to look at the whole business model. If you don't, Runes of Magic becomes the perfect MMO with it being free to play. Yet it is one of the grindiest games I have ever encountered. Taking an example from outside MMOs (I don't generally use MMO cash shops just because there usually isn't anything I want in them), I have spent a similar amount money on LoL to what I did on the subscription cost to EVE over the 3 years I played just because I like the game, like the company, and I actually have stuff to buy that I want to buy. The game is also built to push you to buying RP with the slow gain of IP. But the IP cost of champions gives you targets to shoot for. What champion do I want to buy next? Yes! I have Ahri now! Let's go pwn.

View PostDarthbaz, on 19 June 2014 - 10:46 AM, said:

Theres a phrase for the kids to learn lol next week kids we will be discussing Roosevelts New Deal  :-) :-P

Can I give a lecture specifically on the Alphabet Soup agencies?

#2328623 Would you pay?

Posted Feathermoore on 18 June 2014 - 03:24 PM

View PostTrei, on 17 June 2014 - 06:32 AM, said:

What makes you think a sub would entitle you to any of those things, OP?

I'm glad here's a game that does not make me 'pay' for things I do not need, or want to buy.

The OP doesn't think any of these would be entitled with a sub. The OP asks what sort of perks you would need to pay a sub and gave them as examples.

Kind of along these lines, I actually am favoring the TSW approach more and more lately. Sure it was initially a sub, but I like their current model.

You can subscribe to the game (monthly fee) which is basically a pledge to the cash shop as you get some of that money "back" to use in the shop. It also gives you access to new content a little early and some other things I think. They have the cash shop which has some clothing skins and exp boosts. Stats and armor are 100% separate in TSW. Clothing does not drop in the world, stats do. You buy clothes in the department stores or the cash shop. Cash shop clothes are fancy, but don't really fit the game world (aren't realistic like the in game clothes). But the game's main cash flow is from the "issues" which are basically content expansions. The story is advance through issues to a degree and more side quests are added (and are generally really high quality). You can choose to buy an issue or not. So the system is expansion based, but it doesn't have most of the downsides the typical expansions do. Subscribers get enough of their subscription back to get the issues included in their sub.

The issues don't include a new tier of gear. Though the Tokyo issue did actually introduce two completely new systems. The two new systems are active without the issue though you can't get the components without the issue (you may be able to trade for it). But that doesn't matter because the Aegis system (new system) only has any relevance in Tokyo itself, which you can't enter without the issue.

TSW subscription comes with perks. I have a friend that likes those perks and subscribes. I don't feel I benefit from them and buy issues as they come out instead. It is an example of a game that uses both systems in a non-annoying way for those that don't subscribe. Your play is not effected if you don't subscribe at all.