It feels so grindy.

[schippie]

As for old school AV... Sorry man, but again, you are obviously talking out of your ass. Old school AV was two things: (A) a bunch of bots grinding wolves/rams (B) the rest of us fighting for 2 days in the middle of the map. Are you seriously comparing full blown siege warfare to AV?!?!?!? Thats like comparing a plane to a guy who rolls around in glue and feathers...

Depends what you like.. if you like epic 80 player battles all clumped up together in the middle of a map. With spell effect flying all around you. And that for hours and hours and hours long. Then wvwvw doesnt compare to av (old), if you want a more tactical play then wvwvw is better. Though they really should offer a better way of spawning.. or offer players the option when sticking to the roads (and not in combat) to move 200% faster.

[Remilia]

No more trinity based system
Traded faction wars for server wars
Quest system changed from a static one to a dynamic one
A skill system based on weapon used
Hybridization between an old school targetting system and an action oriented hack-and-slash gameplay.

Seriously, what are you looking for, a MMO that lets you shoot lazer beams by playing golf while falling through space? Revolution means its very different, it does not mean it suddently turns into a different genre.

It seemed like a decent game, but these 'revolutionary' things aren't really so. One of the few things that annoy me.

They replaced tank with support or in EQ2 / 1's case, just removed tank as there already is a support role.
However, the issue is, if you're melee... you have to build tanky. The game lends itself to be range friendly. The melee becomes a tank since the mob's AI are rather retarded.

Server wars was already at thought up thing, though this one is server 'invasion'.
http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/08...ndgame-conten/

Quest system came from Warhammer Online, and then later to Rift, and then now to GW2 with a brand new name.

Skill system based on weapon is something 'new' for an MMO, but hardly something revolutionary mind blowing awesomeness of awesome awesome. Just look at games like Dark Souls where the weapons drastically changes how your character attacks.

Hybridization is that of DCUO, where you have a mix of action and target system. It is not something new.

[KvanCetre]

Depends what you like.. if you like epic 80 player battles all clumped up together in the middle of a map. With spell effect flying all around you. And that for hours and hours and hours long. Then wvwvw doesnt compare to av (old), if you want a more tactical play then wvwvw is better. Though they really should offer a better way of spawning.. or offer players the option when sticking to the roads (and not in combat) to move 200% faster.

My server is doing pretty poorly in WvW right now, so my guild typically hits their supply posts while the enemy is focusing on keeping its towers/castles. There were also some areas the enemy could hold that would cause weather effects like lightning strikes - we made sure to knock those out. Tons of XP, karma, and gold this way. I could probably spend all day in WvW; it's the most fun I've had in pvp for a long time.

[Nikijih]

Depends what you like.. if you like epic 80 player battles all clumped up together in the middle of a map. With spell effect flying all around you. And that for hours and hours and hours long. Then wvwvw doesnt compare to av (old), if you want a more tactical play then wvwvw is better. Though they really should offer a better way of spawning.. or offer players the option when sticking to the roads (and not in combat) to move 200% faster.

Oh I agree, I never said WvWvW was the end all nor is it perfect. Im not even saying that its better, altho I do think it is, but I reallize that is my personnal preference. All I am saying is that it has absolutely nothing to do with AV other then the fact thats its a PvP map, and comparing both only shows one's complete lack of familiarity with either or both of these things, effectively crippling any kind of credibility that person could have.

[KvanCetre]

It seemed like a decent game, but these 'revolutionary' things aren't really so. One of the few things that annoy me.

They replaced tank with support or in EQ2 / 1's case, just removed tank as there already is a support role.
However, the issue is, if you're melee... you have to build tanky. The game lends itself to be range friendly. The melee becomes a tank since the mob's AI are rather retarded.

Server wars was already at thought up thing, though this one is server 'invasion'.
http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/08...ndgame-conten/

Quest system came from Warhammer Online, and then later to Rift, and then now to GW2 with a brand new name.

Skill system based on weapon is something 'new' for an MMO, but hardly something revolutionary mind blowing awesomeness of awesome awesome. Just look at games like Dark Souls where the weapons drastically changes how your character attacks.

Hybridization is that of DCUO, where you have a mix of action and target system. It is not something new.

Maybe I've missed something - why is everyone focused on whether or not the game is revolutionary instead of whether or not the game is fun?
All these games may have had these things, but very few of them were actually fun in the way they were implemented.

It seems like where most games people have many legitimate complaints, the internet is arguing over whether or not an actual revolution has occurred.

---------- Post added 2012-09-02 at 01:53 AM ----------

Oh I agree, I never said WvWvW was the end all nor is it perfect. Im not even saying that its better, altho I do think it is, but I reallize that is my personnal preference. All I am saying is that it has absolutely nothing to do with AV other then the fact thats its a PvP map, and comparing both only shows one's complete lack of familiarity with either or both of these things, effectively crippling any kind of credibility that person could have.

You could compare AV to some of the SPvP Maps with Guild Lords - it's a closer comparison, but still far off.

[schippie]

It seemed like a decent game, but these 'revolutionary' things aren't really so. One of the few things that annoy me.

Honestly i think this would make a good debate in general video games forums:

"Can you do anything revolutionary now a days in new videogames?"

I mean any mmo player in beta could see where all the ideas where comming from and while thats not a problem and all nobody can claim gw2 is revolutionary its simply not true. Like every MMORPG of late it combines ideas from the past 10 years of MMOs.

[Digglett]

And what will you do at 80?

There's an entire thread on end game, must I copy paste that here?

[Nikijih]

It seemed like a decent game, but these 'revolutionary' things aren't really so. One of the few things that annoy me.

They replaced tank with support or in EQ2 / 1's case, just removed tank as there already is a support role.
However, the issue is, if you're melee... you have to build tanky. The game lends itself to be range friendly. The melee becomes a tank since the mob's AI are rather retarded.

Server wars was already at thought up thing, though this one is server 'invasion'.
http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/08...ndgame-conten/

Quest system came from Warhammer Online, and then later to Rift, and then now to GW2 with a brand new name.

Skill system based on weapon is something 'new' for an MMO, but hardly something revolutionary mind blowing awesomeness of awesome awesome. Just look at games like Dark Souls where the weapons drastically changes how your character attacks.

Hybridization is that of DCUO, where you have a mix of action and target system. It is not something new.

There is a little known concept in psychology known as "brain type". There are three:
1) An imaginative mind
2) An imitative mind
3) An innovating mind.

We humans have a tendency to believe we are imaginative, that we can create great things from thought alone. That is false. The human mind is of the "innovative" type, which means we are 100% incapable of acutally inventing anything. What we can do is innovate, which means we take things we have already experienced, already seen or heard or been told about, and we can modify or combine these elements to create different concepts. That is why humanity evolved and keeps evolving in increments, not by leaping ahead but by slowly and gradualy edging foward.

Arena Net has done this wonderfully.

[yuca247]

There are certain things you have to admit are an improvement in design, such as what I described directly in that quote. I don't see how you can dislike it, or say you prefer the older, more tedious method.

Yes I do agree some things are an improvement but of course there are things I can and do dislike. It is a matter of preference I would say.

---------- Post added 2012-09-01 at 09:04 PM ----------

I never said it doesn't have grind.

I said devs and sensationalist fanboys, I don't think you're either one of those.

[Seolla]

its hardly evolutionary tho drake

the game is just the same as an MMO but you can only spec DPS and quests are auto accepted within a certain proximity of the giver.

oh, and its a bunch of fancy names.

WvWvW is a worse version of AV due to realm/server imbalances and SUPER poor thought out scoring systems and the standard PvP is subject to gearing despite what they said about an equal gearing base.

to make my opinion known:
i think the game is terrible, flawed in many aspects and im guessing its this way because it was shipped far earlier than A-NET wanted it to be. now, im still having fun because i get to play with my bf and that's the only reason i'm continuing to play it. the moment we hit 80 together im going to drop it, unless he asks to me to play with him more. im playing this game purely out of my love of spending time with the man i love

To quote myself from an earlier post in this thread:

"I feel a lot of people are misunderstanding the term "revolutionary". I do agree with you that most of the systems in GW2 aren't revolutionary. But being revolutionary doesn't necessarily have to be in the product itself; it can also be in the results that the product creates by how the product applies its features. Look at smart phones for example, nothing about the product itself is actually revolutionary; touch screen existed years before smart phones, so are most of the features found in older PDAs. But the fact that they were able to package these features and apply them in such a user friendly way for the general public that it made it revolutionary: it became the standards for phones moving forward.

And I feel GW2 is doing the same thing: most of its features aren't revolutionary. But like you mentioned, it combines the non-static branching of the public quest systems, with other things such as "open world laissez faire", along with other things like it's focus on exploration, and applied them nicely together so well that the result is a revolutionary experience that most people have never seen in an MMO

Now, does this mean that GW2 will be successful? Not necessarily. It could be like the first generation of smart phones (which isn't made by Apple or Samsung afaik), where they came up with the tip of the idea, showed it's potentials, but it was another company, like Apple, that came along and "perfected" it and made it so popular. But nonetheless, what GW2 did was it made the first big step towards the right direction of the next generation of MMO, at least in the social aspect of it, that hopefully, the up-coming MMOs will follow."

[Roggan]

I couldnt disagree more, I have almost 80 hours played and have yet to do the same quest, DE, dungeon or hell even been to some of the same zones more than once. The crafting system can be a grind since you seem to need quite a few more mats than you would otherwise gather while running around completing a zone.

If you are the one that triggered a DE then you would be well aware of whats going on, DEs arent meant to have some huge backstory all the time.

As far as stories, I have never been able to follow the lore of any game, if i wanted cut scenes and story I would rent a movie, I want to slay stuff...so to me there is too much story . It's all relative to your own tastes.

[melodramocracy]

The quests are 'generic' in a sense that yes, there's trouble of some sort, and yes, you're there to stop it. These de's that happen *can* fail, I have seen that occur a few times (and will probably see more of this as folks get higher in levels, and invariably leave lower level areas less populated.

As for arguments that these events aren't really world changing, well that's correct too. Save the princess, as it were, and that same chain of events will start over. And seeing that MMO's are games played by people all over, all at different levels, etc, it's rather illogical to expect otherwise... that content needs to exist for someone else to experience once you've moved on from it. Outside of a single player game, it's just not feasible.

FWIW, the starting areas don't give you a good feel for how the world events work in later areas. They seem simplified and stripped of consequences in about 2/3 of the starting areas at least.

This much is true, the higher zones definitely start giving you more engaging battles, I would assume this trend continues (I'm only 23, so....)

edit: im level 43 and i've managed to find just 3 daggers and 2 swords in all of the mobs i've killed + checking karma vendors. that's how terrible the looting system + arrangement of pre/suffix + stat allocations are. the weapons i have are crafted.

Odd, I'm less than half your level, and all my upgrades are from mobs or karma vendors. I can only assume that you aren't going back to the hearts once you finish them, or you're simply making things up.

Lastly, anyone complaining that this game is 'grindy' very clearly played no MMO's prior to Warcraft. It isn't.

[SirRobin]

It feels so grindy.

Grindy? That's possible. However, it feels the opposite to me. After Cataclysm, Dragon Age II, Mass Effect III, The Old Republic, and even The Secret World, I am so freaking tired of "story" centric games. Those freaking "stories" had become a grind to me. Its why I had so much fun in Skyrim, I could ignore the "story." Its also a big part of why I'm having so much fun in GW2. I think the "my story" quests are still back in the teens. I've spent the last twenty some levels just exploring the zones, finishing the hearts, running the events, and crafting. I had a lot of fun with WvW in the Beta events and I have not even started that yet.

I guess "grind" is in the eye of the grinder.

[Ashnazg]

How is it not evolutionary? You know what an evolution is, don't you?

In previous MMOs, you had to run up to a quest giver, say hello, and accept a quest into your quest log. It's so very formulaic and expected that people just kinda don't pay attention to it, and mechanically go through the steps over and over and over, thousands of times.
That step has been removed. Now you just get the quest showing up on your screen - don't even have a quest log.
That's very much an improvement, and makes the questing experience more smooth. Much less of a hassle.

You can still talk to the NPC if you want to get some random lore stuff, but you don't have to - There's tons of NPCs in the game you can talk to for lore things that have absolutely NO association with hearts or events. They're just fun lore.

That's definitely an evolution of the questing experience on its own. There's numerous other small evolutions in the game like this.

No quest log is d-evolutionary to me. Removing features is not always a good thing. I, for one, enjoyed reading quest text in WoW or other games no matter where in the world I was. Here, its not that simple. Also, it was fun having quests that sent you all around the world (as long as it wasn't a simple fedex quest), whereas GW2 "questing" is basically korean-style grind fest for meaningless stuff around the heart-giver.

Meh.

[Merendel]

I honestly dont see it as all that grindy unless I just stay in one small area for a long period of time. I like just leting my wanderlust lead the way. Hmm that cave looks intresting whats in there... ohh an underground pirate ship. Well not sure why that ships here but it wasnt what I was expecting.

Also as far as figureing out what the backstory of the DE's are yes if you wander into an event in progress you miss out on the RP that goes on more often than not. All you know is that a fights going on and you can jump in if you want. However there are things that tell you whats going on if you pay attention. For one the scouts give some backstory on whats going on if you talk to them. for another thing often you'll run accross NPC's that start talking about heading out ot do something and then run off, if you follow them many times a DE will start wherever it is they stop at. There are clues to tell you whats going on if your around when they happen, not sure why you expect to magicly know the backstory if you come in halfway through however.

[Selenti]

Stop comparing every game to WoW, and you'll be one step closer to enjoying life.

I see people making the same mistake over and over. Comparing every freaking game out there with WoW. WoW is WoW, other games aren't WoW. Rift tried to be WoW, SWTOR was buggy WoW in space. Aion was WoW with wings. GW2 is WoW with no mounts. Etc etc etc.

Know what? Lets call it: IT IS ALL FREAKING PACMAN WITH SWORDS. Happy now?

Seriously, did WoW spoil players so much they need to compare everything to it? Do you go around comparing every meal you eat to McDonalds as well? "Oh, the steak was great, but would be better if it was minced, in a bun, with cheese, lettuce, and large fries on the side!"

World of Warcraft didn't invent the trinity. It goes back to Everquest, and from there to Dungeons & Dragons. It's just a very nice model to build a game around--people who find a game that is purely about DPS unsatisfying aren't neccessarily pining after World of Warcraft, they're pining after more gameplay complexity. And no, the utility/healing "roles" in Guild Wars 2 aren't fleshed out enough to be an option, they're merely there as pause/stop-breaks to save you for 1s from the zerg. (And as far as healing goes, it's not going to save you from extra DPS, it's just enough to be a delay for one person.)

[Merendel]

World of Warcraft didn't invent the trinity. It goes back to Everquest, and from there to Dungeons & Dragons. It's just a very nice model to build a game around--people who find a game that is purely about DPS unsatisfying aren't neccessarily pining after World of Warcraft, they're pining after more gameplay complexity. And no, the utility/healing "roles" in Guild Wars 2 aren't fleshed out enough to be an option, they're merely there as pause/stop-breaks to save you for 1s from the zerg. (And as far as healing goes, it's not going to save you from extra DPS, it's just enough to be a delay for one person.)

I'm not sure I'd call the trinity model as "Complex gameplay" unless your refering to the logistical complexity it adds in ensuring you have enough tanks/heals to do whatever it is your attempting. The reason the grandady's of MMO's designed the trinity in the first place was because of the limited AI complexity of the time. It was an easy solution to let the players have a way to keep control of the fight with the limited design options avalible at the time. Every action has a value on a threat table(array) and mob attacks the guy at the top. Instead of forceing constant agro swaps to survive they made tanks to take the beating, those tanks needed healers to stay alive so we get dedicated healers and the rest is history. DnD did not create the trinity as it is in MMO's, you were very unlikely to have a character that all he did is spam heals at one person the whole fight.

[Selenti]

I'm not sure I'd call the trinity model as "Complex gameplay" unless your refering to the logistical complexity it adds in ensuring you have enough tanks/heals to do whatever it is your attempting. The reason the grandady's of MMO's designed the trinity in the first place was because of the limited AI complexity of the time. It was an easy solution to let the players have a way to keep control of the fight with the limited design options avalible at the time. Every action has a value on a threat table(array) and mob attacks the guy at the top. Instead of forceing constant agro swaps to survive they made tanks to take the beating, those tanks needed healers to stay alive so we get dedicated healers and the rest is history. DnD did not create the trinity as it is in MMO's, you were very unlikely to have a character that all he did is spam heals at one person the whole fight.

I think it's a matter of opinion. Personally, I feel like a well-executed trinity game is more complex and more fun, mostly because of the control available. To me, healing and tanking competently is more interesting than dodging attacks and raising dead people from down states every 2 seconds. I've played Tera as an example of an MMO that uses similar mechanics (as a side note, I actually like Tera's implementation better, since in my opinion the downed state really cheapens the whole dodging mechanic), and I just personally feel like if I wanted to play an action game, why not play Darksiders or God of War?

So far, I don't think the two types of gameplay (heavy stats, RPG mechanics, vs. dodging & real-time collision) have been married very well. As an aside, I do feel that the bigger problem with dungeons and PVE in general is the flat power level of items, there is very little reason to play the game beyond seeing the content once. They constructed a skinner box without walls--the predictable happened.

[Alilei32]

Every Single MMO ever made is nothing but a grind. Thats the only way they can retain subs. In a single player game once you beat the last boss its over and has no replay value. But a MMO must retain replay value or else it loses money. DAoC had realm ranks as its grind. Everquest had AA points as its grind. WoW has faction, honor, and valor points as its grind. Its impossible to make a game that doesnt have a grind or else it would end as is the case with console RPGs. The grind is what keeps everyone playing MMOs and without it the genre would die off.

[Schroedinger]

Greg Street, making kids dumber since 2008!