|
On June 05 2011 22:41 irninja wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2011 16:28 Hakker wrote:
The way GW1 made money was because they released new expansions every few months. Iirc they didn't add the cash shop in until halfway through factions.
I'm fucking ridiculously excited for this game. With the way free games have been trending lately I honestly think this could be the next big thing in MMOs.
Not only that, but gw1 also had a fairly decent proscene for a time. Maybe it canbe the first mmo type game to really break in to an esport. I think they will be adding the cash shop from day 1 in this one, but I could be wrong. The big limitation for any mmo is the fact that players could not reach other to other players around the world to organize a larger event, due to server limitation/transfer limitation. If the system in GW2 works as promised you will freely (within reason) be able to transfer your character between realms. It will not be unlimited, but the option will be there.
Did you play Guild Wars? PvP between regions was possible and fine, online anyway. There were no server issues in that regard. Seems counter productive to take that away in the sequel but it's not like this sort of thing hasn't happened before...
|
There are no realms, ninja. They stated before that they will stick to something like the districts they did in GW1, allowing for a switch at any time. At least that's what I had gathered from interviews.
Also, there were never any problems cross-region in GW1. GvG/RA/Codex/TA/HB/HoH were all cross-regional, with teams from every district playing against each other.
The only things holding GW1 back from breaking into E-sports was:
1) Lack of a polished interface. such as the one WoW has
2) Lack of observer features
3) Being overshadowed by WoW =(
|
I've never really been in a guild before but this seems pretty interesting and fun. I'll keep on eye on this and maybe apply at a later time.
|
I was using realms as a median term used in MMO's to distinguish "worlds/servers/districts/etc". Some people here may have not played GW1 to know what districts are or how they work.
No biggie.
And I really hope the interface has the ability to be tweaked/customized, for a lot of people that's a big deal. Others just hope the interface provides what they need out of the box.
|
|
|
I'm getting sort of interested in GW2 but from what I can tell the PvP will be a let down. Now I may be wrong on this but there are 2 modes of PvP: one similar to WoW arena and another which is like a 3-way server vs server vs server battleground. Now that's fine, but no where do I see anything about world PvP. World PvP has always been my favorite part of any MMO I've played and I would be pretty disappointed if it's not in GW2. Can someone with more information clarify this for me?
|
On June 13 2011 14:07 sleeepy wrote:
I'm getting sort of interested in GW2 but from what I can tell the PvP will be a let down. Now I may be wrong on this but there are 2 modes of PvP: one similar to WoW arena and another which is like a 3-way server vs server vs server battleground. Now that's fine, but no where do I see anything about world PvP. World PvP has always been my favorite part of any MMO I've played and I would be pretty disappointed if it's not in GW2. Can someone with more information clarify this for me?
I would assume you haven't taken the time to read the interviews and watch videos yet. That's fine.
What we know right now is the World PvP you seek will not be specifically battles that take place on your server, but actually a battle that takes place "inbetween" 3 different servers.
Picture a triangle, on each point a server representing a castle. There is a constant struggle between the 3 corners, with many points of interest in between, such as keeps, farms, etc.
That's going to be the "world pvp" as you are looking for. Aside from arena-type pvp, there so far has not been any announced world pvp between your own server's players.
|
If the system in GW2 works as promised you will freely (within reason) be able to transfer your character between realms How is it supposed to work in GW2? Are you still gonna be able to play with friends of other servers like in GW1? One of the shittiest things about WoW is that you meet someone IRL who also plays the game, but you cannot play with him because he's on a different server. Will GW2 be like GW1 or like WoW?
On June 13 2011 14:07 sleeepy wrote:
I'm getting sort of interested in GW2 but from what I can tell the PvP will be a let down. Now I may be wrong on this but there are 2 modes of PvP: one similar to WoW arena and another which is like a 3-way server vs server vs server battleground. Now that's fine, but no where do I see anything about world PvP. World PvP has always been my favorite part of any MMO I've played and I would be pretty disappointed if it's not in GW2. Can someone with more information clarify this for me? The "battleground" PvP mode in GW2 is called "world pvp", so there you go  But seriously outdoor PvP sucks and no one really enjoys it. You only think you do because you haven't done much of it. Since the concept of open pvp is so stupid and imba, that it gets old really quick. Open PvP is for carebears who wants to show off as PvP'ers every once in a while. I did enjoy killing random people questing in WoW, but it gets old really fast. So I couldn't care less if it isn't in GW2.
|
The reason I like open PvP/PK is to deal with bots. Of course the best way to implement open PvP to deal with bots would be to have bots drop some of the inventory when they die — newbies don't have much in their inventory and would not be worth killing. Obviously it would still have problems but in my opinion worth it than dealing with the alternative.
That said, I'm quite sure Guild Wars 2 would not have open PvP/PK, since I understand the type of game it is supposed to be.
|
Open pvp would, I think, be pretty tough to implement in a game that is built around ad hoc cooperation the way GW2 is. Everything Anet has done has revolved around the idea that it's never a bad thing when other people show up where you are. By the design of the reward system, they don't steal xp or drops. By the design of the events (and the skills, I suppose), they can't grief you or impede your progress. Ante never want you to worry that somebody else is going to make your experience in the game worse (well, aside from unpleasant chat, I suppose). When they're trying to set up expectations like those (which, it's worth noting, mean that the only negative effect on the game that bots can have is on the economy, which hasn't been fatal in GW1 yet), I think open pvp is just not feasible.
|
Pretty sure there were problems with cross regional play. Nothing as extreme as seen often in other games, but trying to play mesmer/ranger/monk or even anything at a high competitive level gets pretty frustrating with latency above 100. It was always one team ending up on the bad side of things, which of course was quite difficult to do anything about but also pretty frustrating when that game changing dshot on a skill came a fraction of a second too late.
I know this is much less relevant for GW2 with less emphasis on the twitch reflexes, but you can't say there were no problems associated with cross regional play. It was just less apparent and faded more and more out due to koreans/japanese/taiwanese players all quitting.
|
On June 13 2011 03:14 Disciple7 wrote:
The only things holding GW1 back from breaking into E-sports was:
1) Lack of a polished interface. such as the one WoW has
2) Lack of observer features
3) Being overshadowed by WoW =(
Nothing was wrong with GW's interface. It was customizable in many different ways, and was much simpler than WoWs.
Not sure what you mean by lack of observer features
WoW wasn't much of a competitive PvP game. While WoW may have overpowered it, it's probably just because people are stupid.
Reminds me of how Nox was under-popular due to diablo, or diablo 2 perhaps, even though diablo 2 wasn't released until 6 months later and was a terribly non-competitive game.
|
On June 14 2011 04:52 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2011 03:14 Disciple7 wrote:
The only things holding GW1 back from breaking into E-sports was:
1) Lack of a polished interface. such as the one WoW has
2) Lack of observer features
3) Being overshadowed by WoW =( Nothing was wrong with GW's interface. It was customizable in many different ways, and was much simpler than WoWs. Not sure what you mean by lack of observer features WoW wasn't much of a competitive PvP game. While WoW may have overpowered it, it's probably just because people are stupid. Reminds me of how Nox was under-popular due to diablo, or diablo 2 perhaps, even though diablo 2 wasn't released until 6 months later and was a terribly non-competitive game.
1) Ever try playing ranger at top level? TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB 4 TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB TAB 3
2) SC2 has alot of observer features that make it easy to see what is going on. GW doesn't, I don't really know how to explain it =/
3) I wasn't saying WoW was a competitive PvP game. It just overshadowed GW in population and popularity.
|
On June 14 2011 04:52 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2011 03:14 Disciple7 wrote:
The only things holding GW1 back from breaking into E-sports was:
1) Lack of a polished interface. such as the one WoW has
2) Lack of observer features
3) Being overshadowed by WoW =( Nothing was wrong with GW's interface. It was customizable in many different ways, and was much simpler than WoWs. Not sure what you mean by lack of observer features I think he means in GW it's hard to watch a game and be perfectly clear of what's going on. A good spectator sport needs to be easy to understand for the observer. The interface can help making that easy, but the GW interface doesn't really do much to help.
I had a friend who never played BW to watch a MSL match and he found it awesomely entertaining and started watching vods on his own. I doubt you'll get someone who isn't good at GW to watch a game and understand wtf is going on.
|
The "battleground" PvP mode in GW2 is called "world pvp", so there you go But seriously outdoor PvP sucks and no one really enjoys it. You only think you do because you haven't done much of it. Since the concept of open pvp is so stupid and imba, that it gets old really quick. Open PvP is for carebears who wants to show off as PvP'ers every once in a while. I did enjoy killing random people questing in WoW, but it gets old really fast. So I couldn't care less if it isn't in GW2.
"Open PvP is for carebears" What? How does that make any sense. Carebears hate anything that interrupts their structured play experience, especially when they get killed in PvP. Open PvP is for someone who likes uncertainty in their games, something that GW2 seems like it wants to promote with the dynamic events and such. Open PvP is by far the most exciting element of an MMO for me because you never know what to expect and you can pull off some amazing stuff. For example, in RIFT (lol) beta, my guild completely took over a mid-level zone for about 20 minutes until the other faction started getting their guilds rallied to the zone to fight us. What happened next were several hours of 40+ vs 40+ battles in every corner of the zone. Even in that horribly unbalanced game it was still a lot of fun. Yeah several lowbies got caught in the crossfire but hey, if you don't want open PvP go on your PvE server.
Now yes the cross-server battlegrounds will provide a similar experience, but it will be watered down because of repetition. Open PvP is a guaranteed new experience every time, whether its 1v1 or 40v40. Battlegrounds will eventually be solved, the best locations to hold and best attack routes will be discovered and while they will still be fun, they definitely lose some of the charm of the open world. Also they're completely separate from the game world; conquering something in a battleground is meaningless, conquering a zone in the world gives the other faction real incentive to work together and push you out.
Open pvp would, I think, be pretty tough to implement in a game that is built around ad hoc cooperation the way GW2 is. Everything Anet has done has revolved around the idea that it's never a bad thing when other people show up where you are. By the design of the reward system, they don't steal xp or drops. By the design of the events (and the skills, I suppose), they can't grief you or impede your progress. Ante never want you to worry that somebody else is going to make your experience in the game worse (well, aside from unpleasant chat, I suppose). When they're trying to set up expectations like those (which, it's worth noting, mean that the only negative effect on the game that bots can have is on the economy, which hasn't been fatal in GW1 yet), I think open pvp is just not feasible.
I'm wondering then why they even have different races if everyone is supposed to work together. Just make all players human in that case. In the races trailer it looks like none of them are too close to each other, but in game they all cooperate? Doesn't make much sense to me. At least there should be a server type where you're allied with members of your race but everyone else is a potential enemy.
|
On June 14 2011 10:17 sleeepy wrote:Show nested quote +The "battleground" PvP mode in GW2 is called "world pvp", so there you go But seriously outdoor PvP sucks and no one really enjoys it. You only think you do because you haven't done much of it. Since the concept of open pvp is so stupid and imba, that it gets old really quick. Open PvP is for carebears who wants to show off as PvP'ers every once in a while. I did enjoy killing random people questing in WoW, but it gets old really fast. So I couldn't care less if it isn't in GW2. "Open PvP is for carebears" What? How does that make any sense. Carebears hate anything that interrupts their structured play experience, especially when they get killed in PvP. Open PvP is for someone who likes uncertainty in their games, something that GW2 seems like it wants to promote with the dynamic events and such. Open PvP is by far the most exciting element of an MMO for me because you never know what to expect and you can pull off some amazing stuff. For example, in RIFT (lol) beta, my guild completely took over a mid-level zone for about 20 minutes until the other faction started getting their guilds rallied to the zone to fight us. What happened next were several hours of 40+ vs 40+ battles in every corner of the zone. Even in that horribly unbalanced game it was still a lot of fun. Yeah several lowbies got caught in the crossfire but hey, if you don't want open PvP go on your PvE server. Now yes the cross-server battlegrounds will provide a similar experience, but it will be watered down because of repetition. Open PvP is a guaranteed new experience every time, whether its 1v1 or 40v40. Battlegrounds will eventually be solved, the best locations to hold and best attack routes will be discovered and while they will still be fun, they definitely lose some of the charm of the open world. Also they're completely separate from the game world; conquering something in a battleground is meaningless, conquering a zone in the world gives the other faction real incentive to work together and push you out.
I was under the impression that World PvP was supposed to be exactly like what you called "open PvP." If you don't like/want to deal with that you just play on PvE servers, but you had the option of moving between the two whenever you wanted...
If I'm wrong please let me know...
|
On June 13 2011 02:59 AlphaWhale wrote:
Did you play Guild Wars? PvP between regions was possible and fine, online anyway. There were no server issues in that regard.
Except mad lag when playing koreans and japanese.
On June 13 2011 14:07 sleeepy wrote:
I'm getting sort of interested in GW2 but from what I can tell the PvP will be a let down.
How can you tell if it's gonna be a let down when we still know next to nothing about it? ^^
On June 13 2011 14:07 sleeepy wrote:
Now I may be wrong on this but there are 2 modes of PvP: one similar to WoW arena
The competitive pvp mode won't be similar to WoW arena, actually. The main guy behind the game's pvp said that WoW's arena is what he doesn't want GW2's competitive mode to be.
On June 13 2011 14:07 sleeepy wrote:
World PvP has always been my favorite part of any MMO I've played and I would be pretty disappointed if it's not in GW2. Can someone with more information clarify this for me?
If by world pvp you mean people being able to attack each other on the pve world, no, it's not gonna be there. The game's structure doesn't allow for it.
On June 14 2011 10:17 sleeepy wrote:
Also they're completely separate from the game world; conquering something in a battleground is meaningless, conquering a zone in the world gives the other faction real incentive to work together and push you out.
Well, doing well in world vs world will give players on the pve maps advantages, so it's not completely meaningless. But I guess that's not what you mean.
|
On June 14 2011 10:17 sleeepy wrote:
I'm wondering then why they even have different races if everyone is supposed to work together. Just make all players human in that case. In the races trailer it looks like none of them are too close to each other, but in game they all cooperate? Doesn't make much sense to me. At least there should be a server type where you're allied with members of your race but everyone else is a potential enemy.
Hooooly shit wall of text, sorry.
From a gameplay and in-game experience perspective, the races play a little differently, even though every race can be every profession. Each race has a (smallish) pool of racial skills that will be available to you in addition to your profession skills. Also, the main story arc, what Anet are calling your "personal story," will change depending on your race (and character creation choices). Of course, we don't know how significantly it will change. They've said in interviews that it's enough of a new experience to add substantial replayability, but that's the sort of thing that varies greatly from player to player, so we'll just have to wait and see how it turns out.
From a lore standpoint, although racism and bigotry certainly exist in the world, and you'll certainly be fighting members of each race as aggressive NPCs (because not everyone is good), the dragons (not just big, flying, fire-breathing lizards; there are only a handful of them, and the latest one to wake up is 1000' long) have just woken up and they're the big threat and everyone needs to band together to stop them from killing everyone and that's where all the players come in. And then again, as with open pvp, Anet made the design decision to not give players the choice of morality paths or anything like that, and again that was because one of their main design goals was to never let more people showing up be a bad thing. You can't very well do that if some people will be rewarded for undermining your current objectives by choosing a different morality path! (And then, since they don't need to allow for other choices, they can also freely block every possible way to undermine those objectives, which they aim to do in order to prevent griefing.)
This doesn't mean there are no choices throughout the game. There are some, at least. There are, for instance, different organizations that take different approaches to fighting the dragons, and you join up with one partway through the personal story. It's just that they're not fighting with each other; their methods are different but not mutually exclusive.
Summary: Different skills, different personal story, and from a lore standpoint we're all heroes preparing to fight primal forces of nature that threaten to destroy life as we know it. I imagine it's also a big plus for the roleplayers.
I think part of the problem here is the content and reward system in GW2. You don't get rewarded for completing quests that you have on your own (because quests don't exist in the game), or doing stuff in instances (well, except for some dungeons, but they're not the main content). You get rewarded for participating in so-called dynamic events that are always taking place in the world. If you come across one and help complete the objectives, then you get rewards (along with everyone else who participated). (If the objectives are not completed, then the world might change to reflect that so that different events start happening, or the event might be one that gets repeated every so often.) This means that being able to fight someone in the open is kind of like being able to stop someone from completing any quests in other games, which would, I think, have pretty drastic consequences. I also think it goes beyond open pvp in the majority of games (though not all).
I'm sure they could have built the game with this sort of player interaction in mind. You could build a game where, like, there are a bunch of protected dynamic events to level up a bit on, but after that you have to go out into the world and do dynamic events with different objectives for different races or something. But I don't think you could just tack on a separate server or a pvp flag or something like that and make the game work.
Also, just as a general observation (and I really don't mean to imply anything by this!), I think it's really interesting that you thought that the different races should be at odds with each other. I guess that's been pretty well established in some MMOs? But I'd think of the choice of race in GW2 more like the choice of race in Dragon Age: Origins, but more substantial. It changes how you get to the later stages of the game and can influence things that happen throughout the game (plus, again, more skills, which didn't happen in DAO).
Edit: I don't know anything about WoW or its arena, so I can't say whether GW2 pvp will be anything like it. From what I've read about WoW arena, it's pretty much ass, while GW1 gvg is pretty much awesome, but unfortunately the gvg community is pretty small these days, so I don't know if you could pick it up and see what it's like now.
|
On June 14 2011 05:33 Disciple7 wrote:
stuff
1) You would have been forced to do so in wow aswell, no focus frame=playing healer takes skill, playing anything else takes serious game awareness.
2) You apparently have no map awareness whatsoever. The one thing that GW doesn't show is people's energy, but you can perfectly tell anyone's mana by their weapon sets, by the "status" tab in the observer window and by the way they play.
3) WoW arena teams only consisted of 3 people. No game franchise after GW enforced 8v8 play simply because it's too much of a hassle for guilds and clans to keep a steady 8 man roster. And WoW was more popular because it was WoW.
|
On June 15 2011 01:38 r33k wrote:2) You apparently have no map awareness whatsoever. The one thing that GW doesn't show is people's energy, but you can perfectly tell anyone's mana by their weapon sets, by the "status" tab in the observer window and by the way they play.
While this is true, I thought Disciple7 was talking about casual observers here, and requiring the general public to keep close track of weapon swaps and skill usage and positioning and stuff is asking a bit much, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
