Guild Wars 2: The One Thread

[ManiaCCC]

Thanks for answering my questions guys.
If the Shatterer is a level 40-45 boss, then I can't imagine what a level 80 event boss is like.

Well..actually ..bosses are pretty big from early levels..this is for example level 1 boss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ8uTPh0TEw#t=01m46s

[Mothhive]

Well..actually ..bosses are pretty big from early levels..this is for example level 1 boss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ8uTPh0TEw#t=01m46s

Here's a pretty epic level 15 boss. The Shadow Behemoth!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG7MpNXaEMo

[Deleted]

What a nice way to welcome me on the forums. I was just saying that the thread could be better organised, I don't give a damn who is doing the thread and I didn't even know there was more then 1 official thread for the game.

Also I was merely throwing suggestions because I really like the game and thought it could be better organised, don't take it personally.
I think someone linked the mmorpg.com thread about gw2,thats a good example.

-Phoenix-

[Trollsbane]

Welcome to the forums Pheonix. My apologies is I was wrong in my thought. It was simply convenient looking based in the the timeframe and the content, and the fact that you brought up the thought of getting rid of Ampd if he can't keep it updated when the thread is only 2 days old I suppose. I hope you enjoy the discussions that will will be happening and the continuously updated front page of this thread.

May the force be with you.

[jvbastel]

In response to trollsbane's Wall of Text

First of all, I totally agree on the cinematics, they are subpar and should not be released like that, I doubt they will be, since there was a lot of feedback about it on GW2guru (most of it negative ) and the developers responded, saying they would look into it, so we'll see if they put that feedback to use.

About the combat fluidity: A lot of players uploading videos basically, well ... They sucked. There were some videos of decent thief and guardian players from pax east, and the combat was a lot faster and more fluid than with random players at demo's. Also, a lot of gaming websites (massively/killtenrats) have commented on the fluidity and the overall feel of GW2 combat, saying it was fantastic.

On the trinity: First of all, GW1 didn't have any real tanks either (although there were some things that made you able to tank, like bodyblocking mobs in a corner, or picking up certain items) so throwing away the tank role is something they have experience with.
Having no dedicated healers is something else though...
If executed correctly, this could be an awesome system. Let's face it, the trinity is getting old, is completely illogical, and well, stupid
Let me compare to TOR. Let's say I'm a Jedi knight tank. While the class looks awesome, it makes no sense whatsoever. Why would a jedi just stand in the middle of the battlefield soaking bullets/lightsaber hits. The whole idea of combat is trying not to be hit. This is not TOR specific ofc.
Also, I am just tired of the same overused system Copy/pasted over and over again. If anet pulls it off, it will be awesome. This will require some whole new mechanics though. Look at some guardian control skills

About the animations: While TOR indeed has some cool combat animations, certainly not all of them are as good as the lightsaber/giant boulder animations. The gun animations were generic and "wooden" (if you know what I mean) and while they put so much effort into their animations, and hyped them up quite a lot, a guy getting hit by the huge boulder doesn't even flinch, (in the warzone pvp video, he even falls forward while being hit in the face by a giant boulder Oo). For GW, a lot of animations indeed look unfinished, but I really liked the elemental casting, and most animations felt fairly natural, nothing spectacular, but they felt right for this game.

On the models: I don't get how you say GW characters look like tera characters, must be me but I don't really see a lot of resemblance
The faces indeed look a bit expressionless atm, hope they work on that. Personally, I'm a bit bored with cartoony graphics like wow/TOR, so I'm happy Anet didn't go for that, which doesn't mean I won't play tor

Almost forgot:

On the single player/mmo:

I don't really get your reasoning. You say that during rifts, noone spoke, but those people were most likely just levelling solo anyway. In a game like wow or TOR, there are no dynamic events (afaik) to even try to get these people to play together. In GW2 however, you can run up to someone clearing a centaur base, and helping him will benefit both players.Without even grouping up. If you decide not to say hi and just hack away, sure, but that's you wanting to play a single player game, not the game being single player. Anet gives all the options to the player.

[MrSerious]

thanks for this thread. much appreciated! rated the thread - excellent.

Q: Is there stealth in Guild Wars 2 and if so, how does it work?
A: Yes, a Thief has several skills to allow them to stealth. Stealth has time limit so the Thief can't remain stealth forever and stealth fully breaks if the Thief uses a skill other than the "steal" skill. Also, a stealth Thief can be spotted if you pay attention to the environment, look for moving grass or bushes or water.

thank god for that!! I love this game already. I'm so glad they have done this I've always thought allowing rogues to stay stealthed for as long as they want and escape combat this way was complete bullshit. I'm glad intelligent game developers also share my opinion.

[Deleted]

Thank you for the kind reply Trollsbane really looking forward to gw2 cause gw1 was my first MMO and I have some really fond memories of it

Anyway nice to see all the info in 1 thread,keep up the good work guys

[Trollsbane]

Np Pheonix. =)

Thanks Jvbastel. When I get home from work, I'll throw some counter points out.

Btw, if I wasnt transparent enough for most people, let me explain the reason for that huge post.

1st, I wanted get the discussions rolling. =)
I wrote it in a way that mostly conveyed that it was my personal opinions on what I saw because of my own tastes. I was for the most part constructive, but still threw a little attitude in for flair effect.
GW2 fans, please use similar logic when talking about TOR in my thread. We are both passionate about the game we want to play. A good number of us want to play both. There's no reason to jump into the other games threads and say, "That looks like shit. GW2 will wipe it's ass with TOR.". Be constructive and at least a little respectful.
Like what someone said earlier about the music. It's so personal and subjective, that there is no clear cut way it should be. Remember this.

There is no reason in the world that our 2 communities can not coexist peacefully and want the other to be successful.

[Tackhisis]

Also, a stealth Thief can be spotted if you pay attention to the environment, look for moving grass or bushes or water.

And what if I have no grass or bushes? Epitome of idiocy in this design.

[Anthoren]

I find that i really like the graphical style it is a mesh of highly artistic coloring but also realistic elements and well all of the environments i have seen are beautiful. Now it is obvious as of now some races have more polish than others, (Charr look amazing at times dependent on design). So yeah like all my other points, I am highly optimistic

---------- Post added 2011-04-27 at 12:14 AM ----------

And what if I have no grass or bushes? Epitome of idiocy in this design.

i believe you can also just generally see stealth if you really pay attention to movement, like how you can see observers and kill them in sc2 if you are very observant. Also, there are no instant kill moves from being in stealth so yeah..not sure how it is an idiotic design.

[georgevonfranken]

And what if I have no grass or bushes? Epitome of idiocy in this design.

Tackhisis is there a mmo you dont troll?

[laji]

I would imagine you'd have to deposit your money into the AH when making such a bid, so the person that agrees to sell to you can get their money at the same time the item is sent to you, that way it prevents time wasters or scamming. But that's just my theory since they haven't specified the details yet.

[Mothhive]

I would imagine you'd have to deposit your money into the AH when making such a bid, so the person that agrees to sell to you can get their money at the same time the item is sent to you, that way it prevents time wasters or scamming. But that's just my theory since they haven't specified the details yet.

...wtf? Isn't this a direct copy paste from what I said on the first page?

[Biggiej]

thanks for this thread. much appreciated! rated the thread - excellent.



thank god for that!! I love this game already. I'm so glad they have done this I've always thought allowing rogues to stay stealthed for as long as they want and escape combat this way was complete bullshit. I'm glad intelligent game developers also share my opinion.

That sounds so cool that you can spot a thief by those kinds of things. I hated WoW duels and arenas, a rogue hides for 15 minutes waiting on CDs after every vanish SOO ANNOYING OMG![COLOR="red"]

[Average Neil]

When i first heard about GW2 I thought to myself: pshhh whatever, who cares etc, but now I can't wait for this game to come out. Everything about it, so far, sounds amazing imho. Not to mention I only need to pay for it once.

Sorry if there are any grammar mistakes.

[Haven]

And what if I have no grass or bushes? Epitome of idiocy in this design.

No, it's actually in your post.

[Trollsbane]

Ok, I'm gonna go through some of the points and answers I recieved, and throw a few more thoughts out there.

-Character models seem to be hit or miss and just overall very subjective and personal. Is there a place where there are some good screenshots to look at for this? i'm glad they see an issue in the blank stares and faces in general. It would be sad to create such a beautiful environment and allow those faces to overshadow it.

-Animations seems to be the exact same as character models, so I'll leave it at that. Personal choices.

-I'm glad they are looking into the class story dialogue popup box thing. It would be great to be more personal than that.

-Just like TOR, it's hard to guage combat since those were players who had no idea wtf they were doing.

Now to the debatables: Where biases will come out, and that's ok. =)

-No trinity system or a veil over the eyes. Hmm.. I don't know about this one tbh. They say they don't want you to "play a healer" cause you need to. Yet, they talk about people switching between aspects to use abilities that heal those around you. Now, obviously healing IS needed. People do get hit, and they do go to a fallen state, and then slip into unconciousness. Am I seeing offensive spells that have a secondary ability to heal those around you? Are you sure this is the way to take the game? Are you sure that's better than a trinity system? It makes the need for healing turn into an automatic thing. Like, you just play your dps game until you want to heal yourslef, and repeat times infinity. Without the need of a healer, the game surely will not make it overly hard to stay alive. Bosses don't focus on one target, but instead use aoe abilities. Everyone around takes damage. But, everyone can heal, and it looked that it was sometimes tied into their offensive skills, or it was simply, place your totem here. You don't heal your tank, you just heal all around you. That does NOT sound interesting, I'm sorry. It negates the need for the mechanic, which some of you see as a good thing. I feel it trivializes the whole combat system.

No trinity system: yes, everyone takes damage, but that doesn't mean one person stands back and heals everyone. Instead, everyone is responsible for their own healing, and for healing other people when they can. Similarly, while there are no tanks, it is possible to physically put yourself between an attacker and a weakened ally to protect them. I think whether you like this or not may come down to personal taste. I am looking forward to a more flexible grouping system, and to everyone having to take responsibility for their own survival. If done right, you shouldn't end up with people being able to get away with no CC/standing in the fire then qq'ing at the healer.

Everyone is responsible for healing themselves, and yes some skills do heal while you do damage, but nothing that will save you based on what I've seen. There are also some skills that will AoE heal party members, but this game has no friendly-targeting-to-heal mechanic and still applies to the whole "this won't save your life if you're being stupid" healing. They took this route so you don't have to bring that player you really don't want to, instead with this system you can bring just your friends and still go though all the content. This may or may not trivialize the combat system, I would really like to get my hands on the demo to test it out though.

That is your bias coming out. If you prefer the trinity that's fine but there are other ways to do things. Look at other games for inspiration besides just mmos.

On the trinity: First of all, GW1 didn't have any real tanks either (although there were some things that made you able to tank, like bodyblocking mobs in a corner, or picking up certain items) so throwing away the tank role is something they have experience with.
Having no dedicated healers is something else though...
If executed correctly, this could be an awesome system. Let's face it, the trinity is getting old, is completely illogical, and well, stupid
Let me compare to TOR. Let's say I'm a Jedi knight tank. While the class looks awesome, it makes no sense whatsoever. Why would a jedi just stand in the middle of the battlefield soaking bullets/lightsaber hits. The whole idea of combat is trying not to be hit. This is not TOR specific ofc.
Also, I am just tired of the same overused system Copy/pasted over and over again. If anet pulls it off, it will be awesome. This will require some whole new mechanics though. Look at some guardian control skills

So to sum up what you guys have said: There is more flexibility in this system. People are more responsible for keeping themself alive. People being stupid will die, because the aoe heals aren't designed to save them, but merely help. I can understand the design thought. No tanks means everyone gets hit by the big baddy. "Yell all you want, you won't hold my attentions you little warrior. I will crush you all" No healers means there is no need to take people just cause they heal, and it doesn't make people do something they don't want to do just to succeed in an encounter. Ok.

But doesn't this worry you that to compensate for the possibility that no one will be healing others, that the encounters will simply be too easy? The reason I say it may trivialize combat is, if it's not "needed", then why worry? By needed, I mean as a dedicated role. A powerful "I will keep you alive, Brother" kind of role. If everyone can just heal themself, then it turns into, don't be stupid and forget to heal yourself. Conscious, thoughtful players will use attacks that have am AOE healing effect, or drop the standards to heal others around them. But will that be the majority? I have to say that I doubt it. And my guess is that the devs also are thinking, "Many people won't do that. They want to pound the boss, not help heal another player that can heal themself." It seems to me that if you simply move out of the fire, and don't forget to heal after the boss's AOE hits you a couple times, then you really have nothing to worry about. You know what I mean?



-Single player, or MMO... Are you sure about that? "GW is a persistant world that defines what an MMO is all about" "I'm not saying this is the best way, but I think other developers should take note on what it really means to make a massive multiplayer experience" (those are parphrased from memory, and are not word for word quotes) Initially, I was captivated by the concept of players joing events and working together to get shit done. When I looked deeper into it, I saw many contradictions to this. They said, "We don't want you to feel like you have to talk to any other players" "We don't want a player to need to group with other players to play the game" What does this mean? Well, from what I can tell, it is exclusively a single player game through and through. "But Trolls, wtf are you talking about? There were 50 other people there fighting the same dude!?!" In the events and in the developers talking about them, the same thing kept coming up. No interaction at all with other players. There was no need to because you just hop in, it scales a bit, and you leave. (Much like rifts in Rift. You simply go there, join public group, kill bad guys, get loot. Go seperate ways. No talk.) There was no need because we don't feel like we should ever make you have to talk to the other players. I can fight these ogres by myself and still move on. Or, a player can come in, and we can both kill them and move on. Or, 50 players may come and we kill them, and move on. There is no difference at all, and you never once need to care AT ALL what the other players are doing. You simply do your thing, then move on.
The difference between this and other MMos is that this acts as your leveling system AND your endgame. You roam the world in search of dynamic scripted events that are taking place, you help the little NPC, and get your rewards, and move on. In other MMOS, you do your quests, and move on. You ultimately get to max level and get to play the end game. What is going to keep me playing GW2? More "leveling" events? More time not caring about what ANYONE else is doing? This just doesn't click with me. It doesn't seem to encourage working together at all. You have no need to whatsoever. Do it alone, or do it with 50. It's the same. Do it and move on. Am I really off the mark here?

The single player aspect: you're right that there is a lot of options to play single player. As well as being able to do a lot alone in the world, there is your personal story. But there is also the flip side of that, which is that you don't lose out if you're fighting something, other people turn up and help. There can be no kill-stealing. So spontaneous cooperation should be a LOT easier in GW2 than in wow. I think the idea is to give people the choice, rather than penalise someone for their preferred play style.
No endgame: developers have said the whole game is endgame. There is no need to rush to the level cap (though you can if you want). There are 5mans, pvp, dynamic events, personal story, and a whole world to explore. Gear plateaus so there is no pressure to be constantly upgrading. Personally, I am really looking forward to this approach: a focus on enjoying the world and the journey, rather than racing through it to then grind gear and finally raid and/or pvp. I do think it will take some effort to get used to the new mindset of GW2, but I think it could make for a more enjoyable game than wow (levelling alts at least would be a lot less boring!). At any rate, it seems worth giving it a try.

I am a bit worried about how this will play out in GW2, I did play the Rift beta and it was quite worrisome that people just split after Rifts, and hardly talked at all during them. However, I think GW2's setup is a bit better - the fact that there will ONLY be Dynamic Events in the open world (aside from Personal Story) may end up bringing people into parties for a great amount of time. Communication is going to be necessary for people to know whats going on and where, and I think this will help people stay in groups, and maybe eventually meet some new friends.

It deviates from the traditional system of grouping. The hope is to promote teamwork and community with the scaling and non tagging feature. What I mean by that is that in WoW, for example, you have two players out of group, one hits a mob first and all of the rewards of that mob (experience and loot) will go to him irregardless of how much help the other player does in that encounter. In GW2 this is not the case. Players won't have to be afraid to help out another player because they are scared of kill stealing or whatever. With the overall theme of events and such the goal here is for everyone to work together to complete the goal. Does it matter that they are in a "group" for it?

I don't really get your reasoning. You say that during rifts, noone spoke, but those people were most likely just levelling solo anyway. In a game like wow or TOR, there are no dynamic events (afaik) to even try to get these people to play together. In GW2 however, you can run up to someone clearing a centaur base, and helping him will benefit both players.Without even grouping up. If you decide not to say hi and just hack away, sure, but that's you wanting to play a single player game, not the game being single player. Anet gives all the options to the player.

Even though this negates tagging, and promotes players helping eachother, I still don't see how that makes them come together. Someone is doing a dynamic event, and you run in and help them. You are helping because you want the reward. It scales to how many people are there, and the scale doesn't matter if it is 1 person or 50. It is still doable. So, you run and helped that guy, and then you both run off with reward. No words were spoken. No happiness or bond formed between the 2 of you. You simply killed the same things in the same place at the same time, and left. The same can be said in a event where 50 people are there.
This is how you level. This is the end game. This is the entire game. I fail to see how this makes this game anymore of a MMO than a game with a traditional endgame like raiding. While the leveling in traditional games is largely a solo experience, that definately changes at end game. Teamwork is 100% needed in those games. And that is the draw. But where is it needed in GW? It's not. Because the devs don't want you to ever have to group or talk to anyone if you don't want to. That's not entirely different from traditional end game. You can solo quests or join pugs and never speak. What is my incentive to join a guild and run around doing events with them, when I can do it by myself or with randoms? Don't get me wrong. Guilds will add a community to the game. But where is the need to interact with others to do anything? And if there is no need, how can the devs claim that they have the answer on how to make it a true multiplayer experience. Just cause you can see 30 other people fighting the same dude as you does not mean you are interacting with them at all. You are simply in the same pace at the same time doing your own thing.

This IS the same as rifts. There is absolutely no difference. You either beat the enemy and move on, or they overwhelm you and they move on to mess more NPCs up. No one talks. No one cares about anyone else there. They get their rewards, and they leave. Perhaps 5 of those people are in a guild together and are purposely playing with eachother. but the other people there are nothing more than an NPC helping you kill mobs. There is no true multiplayer here when events scale, negating the difficulty and necessity of cooperation.

Traditional games do not push helping eachotehr or working together while leveling. This is left for endgame. But GW endgame is the same as leveling. That is the difference.

I don't see this system as having a lot of opportunities to solo content. I see it as having limited opportunites to work together and play multiplayer. If everyone is just there for themself, then multiplayer is not true. It is simply multiple players playing solo next to eachother. It's like saying I am not solo questing Hyjal. i'm multiplayer questing because there are 100 other people doing the same things I am doing.

Now, I understand that you can say hello to these players and decide to group and go do events together. But, how many people will really be that outgoing and willing to do that when there is no need to? most people think most other people playing are jackasses. If everything scales with numbers, but remains able to be solod or 2 manned, why bother with other people?

I think I lost my train of thought and am simply repeating now. So, engage in the thought process. How do you see these things happening and what am I missing, assuming, or just being biased about?

<3

[Anthoren]

So this is kind of going to be directed to Trollsbane, now no i am not invalidating your concerns but i just would like you to note that we have not seen many if at all types of mechanics for bosses, i believe the area boss dragon was not fully up to scratch down for obvious reasons. Also you need to take into account that i am almost positive that healing abilities have fairly long cool downs. So i sort of find your points a bit critical as i think the game is still either pre-alpha or early alpha as far as a I know. Now note this is just points about your concerns of combat and boss mechanics. maneuverability, shielding, and healing as an individual have been made a very high priority in GW2 so what you feel could come to pass, but I kind of doubt that it would get to that a point, I feel that they are trying very hard as a development team to get this game right because it does take or try to take many innovative steps for an MMO. So like all of my posts here i am at the stance that the game is not even in beta so being too critical is kind of pointless unless their are blatant and obvious flaws, so like always I'm staying positive.

[Valeron]

Is there a cliff notes version, trollbane?

Anyway, a note on the difficulty of encounters, I'm not worried at all. In the latest PAX demo there was an encounter with some bandits and pirates that wasn't made easier. People were dying left and right in that encounter and if you didn't move you would get two shot from the boss. What you have to do though is take what you know from other mmos like WoW and throw that knowledge out the window. If you have played some more active mmos like Vindictus or even an FPS then that will help you better understand how to approach the combat in GW2.

[Trollsbane]

Psh, cliff notes. Um... How does the removal of the trinity system really make this game more thana single player FPS game where you only nrely on yourself. And if the entire game (leveling and "endgame") is dynamic events, then how is it considered a multiplayer game since the events can be done solo or with 50 people who don't give a damn about anyone else there, because they don't mater in the scheme one bit. =D

I am a fan of long winded discussions as opposed to the classic, "NO SWIMMING! RAWR RAGE!" that take up 10 pages for no reason.

I know it's still Pre Alpha area, Anthoren. There's just so much released on it already that to start wondering is easy. (TOR on the other hand isn't releasing jack shit. lol)

That's cool to hear about the bandit/pirate thing, Doozer I didn't see that video. I hear what you mean mean by the FPS analogy, but that's kinda where my curiosity comes in. If it is all about you doing what you need to do and not relying on others, then why worry about others at all?