On August 20 2011 02:12 Laids wrote: Really disappointed with the PvP shown,carbon copy of WoW : /
Everything else looks solid though.
The PvP looks a lot like the first game's, which was much more refined and balanced than WoW's. If anything, this is just taking their template for structured PvP from GW1 and expanding on it with the new features in GW2?
Also, how can it be a carbon copy of WoW if the combat system for both games is so drastically different?
Also, how can it be a carbon copy of WoW if the combat system for both games is so drastically different?
It's essentially Arathi Basin, in the short term no one will care, in the long term, once people have gotten used to the combat, people will get fed up with it. I never mentioned the combat system, which is why I said everything else is solid. I'm not saying that what they are doing is wrong or bad, I'm just fed up with that particular type of PvP having played WoW for 6 years.
Also, how can it be a carbon copy of WoW if the combat system for both games is so drastically different?
It's essentially Arathi Basin, in the short term no one will care, in the long term, once people have gotten used to the combat, people will get fed up with it. I never mentioned the combat system, which is why I said everything else is solid. I'm not saying that what they are doing is wrong or bad, I'm just fed up with that particular type of PvP having played WoW for 6 years.
What other type of PvP would you like to see? Besides the Capture the Flag, Control Points and Deathmatch styles already present in GW2?
Also, how can it be a carbon copy of WoW if the combat system for both games is so drastically different?
It's essentially Arathi Basin, in the short term no one will care, in the long term, once people have gotten used to the combat, people will get fed up with it. I never mentioned the combat system, which is why I said everything else is solid. I'm not saying that what they are doing is wrong or bad, I'm just fed up with that particular type of PvP having played WoW for 6 years.
By that logic, you might as well say that every point capture PvP is "essentially Arathi Basin". Sure, the fundamental game goals are similar, but even just based on what we've seen from the Gamescom showmatches, the Battle for Khylo has more ways to earn points (controlling capture points AND getting kills, vs. just controlling capture points), the method of capture is different (which team has more players in the area vs. one player able to channel the capture uninterrupted), and the team sizes are different (5v5 vs. 15v15).
These may not seem like earth-shattering differences, but they do combine to change the flow of the game quite a bit. For instance, the method of capture and points for kills make survival a much higher priority in Battle for Khylo than Arathi Basin. In the latter, it doesn't matter how many times you die, as long as you prevent the opposing team from completing their capture of the point you were defending. In the former, if you die, that's points for the opposing team AND they have an easier time capturing points due to your team having fewer players alive (which is a bigger deal when you have smaller teams). This places a higher priority on constant attacking and movement for both teams rather than one team being the aggressor and the other being the defender, which makes for much more dynamic gameplay.
So, don't be so quick to write it off just because it's another point capture game mode. It's got a lot of things going for it that set it apart from others like it.
On August 20 2011 02:12 Laids wrote: Really disappointed with the PvP shown,carbon copy of WoW : /
Everything else looks solid though.
The PvP looks a lot like the first game's, which was much more refined and balanced than WoW's. If anything, this is just taking their template for structured PvP from GW1 and expanding on it with the new features in GW2?
Also, how can it be a carbon copy of WoW if the combat system for both games is so drastically different?
It looks nothing like the first game's. Unless you're talking about Alliance Battles, then yes, it looks exactly like that, except 5v5. So essentially, it looks like GW1's AB, which is basically the same as WoW's AB.
There were many ways to go about winning/gaining a significant advantage in GvG: NPC advantage (when VoD existed, still to an extent), lord damage, wiping the enemy team, getting enemy DP high (playing a war of attrition), stand control etc.
In this conquest mode, I see only 2 forseeable ways to gain an advantage: Kill the enemy players, outposition the enemy. Sounds fun.
On August 20 2011 02:12 Laids wrote: Really disappointed with the PvP shown,carbon copy of WoW : /
Everything else looks solid though.
The PvP looks a lot like the first game's, which was much more refined and balanced than WoW's. If anything, this is just taking their template for structured PvP from GW1 and expanding on it with the new features in GW2?
Also, how can it be a carbon copy of WoW if the combat system for both games is so drastically different?
It looks nothing like the first game's. Unless you're talking about Alliance Battles, then yes, it looks exactly like that, except 5v5. So essentially, it looks like GW1's AB, which is basically the same as WoW's AB.
There were many ways to go about winning/gaining a significant advantage in GvG: NPC advantage (when VoD existed, still to an extent), lord damage, wiping the enemy team, getting enemy DP high (playing a war of attrition), stand control etc.
In this conquest mode, I see only 2 forseeable ways to gain an advantage: Kill the enemy players, outposition the enemy. Sounds fun.
True, it's not as complex as GvG, but it's still more complex than Arathi Basin (and Alliance Battles). They were literally nothing more than "go around, kill things, stand on points" with some power-ups sprinkled across the map. The trebuchet mechanic, while also seen in GW1 to a fairly small extent, looks to be incredibly crucial in this one. I'd say this is more like Fort Aspenwood or something - still casual, but with plenty of objectives to keep it entertaining.
Holy crap. Just watched the PvE video and I have to say I freaking love how they changed the skills to be 3-in-1 and so on. 1 = Sever Artery, 1 again = Gash, 1 yet again = Final Thrust. You get a staple sword warrior combo under just one button! And to boot it doesn't require adrenaline as you get other skills triggering off of that. If other classes have it similar it's going to be fantastic.
We just had one of our guild members send me an interview with the devs at Gamescom regarding questions the TL community gathered, as well as take over an hour of HD footage, mostly of GW2.
Good stuff, once i sort through it/upload I'll link here first.
As someone who played GW1 religiously for over five years, I'm not sure where this groundswell of overwhelming optimism over GW2 as some sort of MMO messiah is coming from. I'm sure GW2 will be a fine game, just as its predecessor was, but you might want to rein in your unbridled enthusiasm just a bit.
This is the same development crew who: 1) thought infinite invincibility (permanent Shadow Form) was a proper game mechanic, allowing normally 2-3 hour elite areas to be easily cleared in 10 minutes; 2) employed an overpowered gimmick elite skill (Ursan Blessing) which replaced all your skills with a preset bar and made classes/strategy/skill irrelevant simply to sell copies of its expansion, Eye of the North -- and never balanced it for an entire year for the purpose of milking this cash cow; 3) never implemented an in-game marketplace because they claimed coding it was "too difficult"; 4) took an entire five years to introduce anti-griefing features in PvP. There were a myriad of other problems (inability to balance skills leading to a confusing split between PvE/PvP versions of the exact same skills, inability to deliver on three out of the five divine realms they promised ever since the game was launched, etc.), but those are some of the most glaring ones.
Guild Wars 1 was still a fine game that I enjoyed (and still enjoy) very much, but it had/has some very obvious flaws which I excused simply because it was a subscription-less game. As a long-time veteran of the game, I therefore caution you to keep some of your hype in check, especially because as far as I know the game balancers (Isaiah "Izzy" Cartwright, I'm looking at you) are still the same.
On August 19 2011 00:55 Skilledblob wrote: ... What I saw was like Arathi zergfest, with some arbitrary objects but the main point was the zerging and from time to time you go around and capture a point super fast. Because everybody can do everything there is pretty much no incentive for random players to group up and do something together. The map they showed of was way too big for their desired 5vs5 GVG replacement. ...
It's not like AB with WoW pugs was any better for giving incentives on grouping up, beyond just strength in numbers. It's not like you needed a healer to be able to defend or attack a node (and also it would not be much better if it required a dedicated healer since you may be stuck in groups with no dedicated healers).
About GW2 PvP so far... about what I expected from the GvG stuff. The graphics look good, but it's still pretty uninteresting battles to me. I certainly don't think this game with take off as another e-sport ordeal. The PvP observing will continue to be interesting only to people deeply familiar with the intricacies involved.
On August 20 2011 20:14 EscPlan9 wrote: The PvP observing will continue to be interesting only to people deeply familiar with the intricacies involved.
Isn't that true for basically every game? While some may be easier to follow for laymans (mostly fighting games), you won't really understand what's going on if you're not familiar with the small details that make things epic but remain unknown/unseen for outsiders.
On August 20 2011 20:14 EscPlan9 wrote: The PvP observing will continue to be interesting only to people deeply familiar with the intricacies involved.
Isn't that true for basically every game? While some may be easier to follow for laymans (mostly fighting games), you won't really understand what's going on if you're not familiar with the small details that make things epic but remain unknown/unseen for outsiders.
Aye, I think this remains the case GW2 where there will be a divide between people "in the know" and those just being supportive. That's every sport however if you think about it.
On August 20 2011 20:09 pretensile wrote: As someone who played GW1 religiously for over five years, I'm not sure where this groundswell of overwhelming optimism over GW2 as some sort of MMO messiah is coming from. I'm sure GW2 will be a fine game, just as its predecessor was, but you might want to rein in your unbridled enthusiasm just a bit.
This is the same development crew who: 1) thought infinite invincibility (permanent Shadow Form) was a proper game mechanic, allowing normally 2-3 hour elite areas to be easily cleared in 10 minutes; 2) employed an overpowered gimmick elite skill (Ursan Blessing) which replaced all your skills with a preset bar and made classes/strategy/skill irrelevant simply to sell copies of its expansion, Eye of the North -- and never balanced it for an entire year for the purpose of milking this cash cow; 3) never implemented an in-game marketplace because they claimed coding it was "too difficult"; 4) took an entire five years to introduce anti-griefing features in PvP. There were a myriad of other problems (inability to balance skills leading to a confusing split between PvE/PvP versions of the exact same skills, inability to deliver on three out of the five divine realms they promised ever since the game was launched, etc.), but those are some of the most glaring ones.
Guild Wars 1 was still a fine game that I enjoyed (and still enjoy) very much, but it had/has some very obvious flaws which I excused simply because it was a subscription-less game. As a long-time veteran of the game, I therefore caution you to keep some of your hype in check, especially because as far as I know the game balancers (Isaiah "Izzy" Cartwright, I'm looking at you) are still the same.
Well, those are all PvE problems and i actually don't care about PvE and most of PvP. I played GvGs for 3 years with at least 3000 gamehours just for that and it was simply the best PvP i've ever seen in any MMO, requiring a lot of skill, communication and coordination. HoH, Random Arena, Alliance Battles or Team Arena are far worse, they are like SC2 4v4s, fun but don't require a lot of skill. This is why i was hoping that ANet would bring some sort of GvG back but it seems they prefer Alliance Battles with less players.
I might buy it just for the PvE, but they really messed up the PvP it seems.
On August 20 2011 20:09 pretensile wrote: As someone who played GW1 religiously for over five years, I'm not sure where this groundswell of overwhelming optimism over GW2 as some sort of MMO messiah is coming from. I'm sure GW2 will be a fine game, just as its predecessor was, but you might want to rein in your unbridled enthusiasm just a bit.
This is the same development crew who: 1) thought infinite invincibility (permanent Shadow Form) was a proper game mechanic, allowing normally 2-3 hour elite areas to be easily cleared in 10 minutes; 2) employed an overpowered gimmick elite skill (Ursan Blessing) which replaced all your skills with a preset bar and made classes/strategy/skill irrelevant simply to sell copies of its expansion, Eye of the North -- and never balanced it for an entire year for the purpose of milking this cash cow; 3) never implemented an in-game marketplace because they claimed coding it was "too difficult"; 4) took an entire five years to introduce anti-griefing features in PvP. There were a myriad of other problems (inability to balance skills leading to a confusing split between PvE/PvP versions of the exact same skills, inability to deliver on three out of the five divine realms they promised ever since the game was launched, etc.), but those are some of the most glaring ones.
Guild Wars 1 was still a fine game that I enjoyed (and still enjoy) very much, but it had/has some very obvious flaws which I excused simply because it was a subscription-less game. As a long-time veteran of the game, I therefore caution you to keep some of your hype in check, especially because as far as I know the game balancers (Isaiah "Izzy" Cartwright, I'm looking at you) are still the same.
Well, those are all PvE problems and i actually don't care about PvE and most of PvP. I played GvGs for 3 years with at least 3000 gamehours just for that and it was simply the best PvP i've ever seen in any MMO, requiring a lot of skill, communication and coordination. HoH, Random Arena, Alliance Battles or Team Arena are far worse, they are like SC2 4v4s, fun but don't require a lot of skill. This is why i was hoping that ANet would bring some sort of GvG back but it seems they prefer Alliance Battles with less players.
I might buy it just for the PvE, but they really messed up the PvP it seems.
That doesn't make them "far worse" at all. GvG is the pinnacle of MMORPG competitive PvP, so it sets the bar incredibly high. All the other gametypes are fun in their own right (and HoH actually did take a fair bit of skill). Just because what they've shown off at Gamescom doesn't have the tactical complexity of GvG doesn't mean it didn't look fun and engaging.
And it's already been confirmed numerous times that there are more PvP types they haven't announced yet. Since ANet seem to be targeting a whole group of people who never played the first game, it sort of makes sense that they'd showcase one of their more simplified PvP maps to begin with. They might save GvG for later, possibly PAX? At this point, we can't really hate on it too much without the full picture. I'll be incredibly disappointed if they don't include it, but it's too early to determine that. What they have shown, however, looks really good IMHO.
I will say it's important they reveal what kind of other guild features they include. We haven't really gotten much info on that. They'd better goddamn bring back Guild Halls, or then I'll finally have a true complaint for this game.
as soon as they said "we've got world vs world pvp" i was sold...
just hope its something similar to daoc's rvr, if they can meld what ive seen so far with some form of large scale pvp it could be epic...goodbye real world
EPT
