Guild Wars 2

Vayne.8563:

In a writing class I taught, I used an example from Shakespeare…“Romeo, Romeo, wherefore are thou, Romeo” and asked the class what it meant.

100% of most classes said she was asking where Romeo was. They were all wrong.

This is semantics. We were talking about interpretation.

I really doubt your teaching skills then.

I would have liked the story to be more focused on you as you struggle to become the hero, better immersive story and impactfull decisions and missions, more focus on grouping (like missions in GW1), in-game cinematics or live theatre (no cinematics at all, focus more on body language and the area surrounding you) better immersion.

Vayne.8563:

Sorry but if people interpret the manifesto wrong, it’s their problem. I’ve pointed out numerous times how a single line taken out of context changes the definition of what’s being said.

The manifesto was a piece of marketing. It was promising things that weren’t actually realised. Interpret all you want, but for a lot of people who were playing GW1 and were looking forward to GW2, there were a lot of developer comments along the way that certainly supported that interpretation of the manifesto. So I will kindly disagree with you on this point. There was context that I would suspect most current players aren’t even aware of that caused a lot of people to be upset when the game came out. Lots of people did stop playing because of exactly that.

Having said that though, this is normal for any MMO. The big difference I think is that more people were willing to believe Anet this time around because of how they handled GW1.

But, this is all in the past now to be fair. The manifesto was marketing spin and what’s happened has happened. The best thing for anybody to do is the disregard the name of the game and judge it on its own merits. GW2 seems very different than other MMOs but it’s not as different as people think. Hearts are just area quests, delivered in a different way with a bit more freedom on the activities. It’s still a matter of collect this, kill that and escort this person or defend this location. Same goes for the events.

The advantage is that you don’t have a quest log full of quests, the disadvantage is constantly running around trying to find events without much direction. It’s different and for some it’s great for others not so much. But as someone once said “Toto, I’ve a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore.”, the only conclusion for me was that with GW2 we’re not in Guild Wars anymore. What that means to you as a gamer, depends on you. Some love it, some hate it. This is simply the way of things.

Vayne.8563:

In a writing class I taught, I used an example from Shakespeare…“Romeo, Romeo, wherefore are thou, Romeo” and asked the class what it meant.

100% of most classes said she was asking where Romeo was. They were all wrong.

Anet clearly defined in the manifesto what they meant by grind, then referred to that grind two lines later. The only thing really up for discussion here is the standards of school education in different countries.

If you claim to be an educator and are going to quote Shakespeare, then at least do it right: “O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?”

I will trust you can find the rather unfortunate spelling mistake yourself.

For ‘tis the sport to have the enginer
Hoist with his own petar’

(sic)

moving on..

Great post Gehenna. From the Manifesto to launch, enough information leaked to kill the notion that GW2 was going to be “everything” loved about GW1. Anyone that expected that just wasn’t keeping up.

Still, knowing that, the magnitude of what did not make it from GW1 to GW2 was a bit staggering at beta and launch. Because of that, I didn’t buy the game and didn’t plan to, but my son decided to gift it to me as an early Christmas in November. I do post far too many “but but but GW1!” threads, but honestly, my time in EQ2 showed me that Developers do read those and sometimes.. things happen.

At one time, Beastlord was a filtered word on the EQ2 forums. It was a popular class in EQ, Sony got sick of people asking for it in EQ2 to the point of filtering the very word, and yet, Lo and behold, Beastlord is now an EQ2 class. You never know.

In the years I have spent gaming I’ve seen “never” become “perhaps” and then “upcoming feature” more than a few times.

It’s the way it goes.

I’m sad about the whiteknighting.

Vayne has been furiously debating all sorts of meaningless things, when the point of the thread is discussing how GW2 is worlds apart from the game ANet set out to make.

One of the most important facts, was that ANet said they wanted GW2 to take everything we loved from GW1 and put it into a persistent world.

To be honest, I have to say that the ONLY things that remain from GW1 are:
- Lore
- Nomenclature for Professions, Skills, etc
- Waypoints

Everything else about Guild Wars 1 was replaced with features that resemble any other MMO, except Guild Wars 1.

Another super important fact, was how they actually point out how meaningless and inconsequential everything you do in most MMOs is.
And yet, almost everything rotates or resets every 15-60 minutes in GW2.

They mentioned how you don’t feel like a Hero because everything is doing what you do, etc.
And that’s exactly what happens in GW2.

They have lost alot of VISION.
I would like them to get it back.

^^^ ++++
Indeed.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Vayne Quote for the day.

" The only thing really up for discussion here is the standards of school education in different countries"

Nice new tangent Vayne, if someone does not share your interpretation, they must be poorly educated.

You are so entertaining. :P

There is one possible way, and ONLY one way to intepret something that defines itself. In other words, Colin in his statement defined it. You’re not arguing with me, you’re arguing with the definition Colin give in the piece itself. This is basic English. Period. End of story. You can take the second mention of grind out of context, but it’s actually 100% clear and backed up by stuff that was said after the manifesto was released

They’re talking about what you have in most other games, this annoying grind to get to the fun stuff.

I don’t know how anyone in their right mind can think he’s talking about gear. Particularly when the last line of the paragraph states “we want to change the way people view combat”.

What Colin is talking about (and what he talked about after confirming it) is the leveling up you have to do in other games, to get to the fun stuff. He says this directly in the manifesto.

Everyone has agendas. Everyone wants to take the one line out of the piece and try to define the word grind differently and true, that word CAN be defined differently…unless it’s defined in the document itself.

I’m an editor by trade. I turn off my agenda when reading something. Most people can’t do this.

Vayne.8563:

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Vayne Quote for the day.

" The only thing really up for discussion here is the standards of school education in different countries"

Nice new tangent Vayne, if someone does not share your interpretation, they must be poorly educated.

You are so entertaining. :P

There is one possible way, and ONLY one way to intepret something that defines itself. In other words, Colin in his statement defined it. You’re not arguing with me, you’re arguing with the definition Colin give in the piece itself. This is basic English. Period. End of story. You can take the second mention of grind out of context, but it’s actually 100% clear and backed up by stuff that was said after the manifesto was released

They’re talking about what you have in most other games, this annoying grind to get to the fun stuff.

I don’t know how anyone in their right mind can think he’s talking about gear. Particularly when the last line of the paragraph states “we want to change the way people view combat”.

What Colin is talking about (and what he talked about after confirming it) is the leveling up you have to do in other games, to get to the fun stuff. He says this directly in the manifesto.

Everyone has agendas. Everyone wants to take the one line out of the piece and try to define the word grind differently and true, that word CAN be defined differently…unless it’s defined in the document itself.

I’m an editor by trade. I turn off my agenda when reading something. Most people can’t do this.

Actually, Vayne, I was talking about your tendency, that anyone can see in your post history, of adding an un-needed “zinger” or parting shot to almost every post discussing the two games. Usually an offhand or oblique reference to education, intelligence, or some other disparaging comment or reference.

They never help your point, your message could be made without them, and they only ramp up the aggro, so to speak. Just like the last sentence above, implying you have an ability that whoever you responded to does not. What did that add?

You say you are an editor.. so, you are aware of it, I assume, and so I wonder even more, why do it?

Its like two hypothetical statement from an IT guy to a comp user.

1. You can’t just turn the power off. You have to shutdown Windows.
or
2. You can’t just turn the power off. You have to shutdown Windows. Any 6th grader would know this.

Which statement ramps up aggro, insults, and degrades the advice by doing so? Second statement, true or not, is insulting and adds personal issues to an otherwise straightforward communication.

So, which is it. Are you ignoring “editing” your own posts.. or are you a very masterful troll?

I haven’t decided yet.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Vayne.8563:

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Vayne Quote for the day.

" The only thing really up for discussion here is the standards of school education in different countries"

Nice new tangent Vayne, if someone does not share your interpretation, they must be poorly educated.

You are so entertaining. :P

There is one possible way, and ONLY one way to intepret something that defines itself. In other words, Colin in his statement defined it. You’re not arguing with me, you’re arguing with the definition Colin give in the piece itself. This is basic English. Period. End of story. You can take the second mention of grind out of context, but it’s actually 100% clear and backed up by stuff that was said after the manifesto was released

They’re talking about what you have in most other games, this annoying grind to get to the fun stuff.

I don’t know how anyone in their right mind can think he’s talking about gear. Particularly when the last line of the paragraph states “we want to change the way people view combat”.

What Colin is talking about (and what he talked about after confirming it) is the leveling up you have to do in other games, to get to the fun stuff. He says this directly in the manifesto.

Everyone has agendas. Everyone wants to take the one line out of the piece and try to define the word grind differently and true, that word CAN be defined differently…unless it’s defined in the document itself.

I’m an editor by trade. I turn off my agenda when reading something. Most people can’t do this.

Actually, Vayne, I was talking about your tendency, that anyone can see in your post history, of adding an un-needed “zinger” or parting shot to almost every post discussing the two games. Usually an offhand or oblique reference to education, intelligence, or some other disparaging comment or reference.

They never help your point, your message could be made without them, and they only ramp up the aggro, so to speak. Just like the last sentence above, implying you have an ability that whoever you responded to does not. What did that add?

You say you are an editor.. so, you are aware of it, I assume, and so I wonder even more, why do it?

Its like two hypothetical statement from an IT guy to a comp user.

1. You can’t just turn the power off. You have to shutdown Windows.
or
2. You can’t just turn the power off. You have to shutdown Windows. Any 6th grader would know this.

Which statement ramps up aggro, insults, and degrades the advice by doing so? Second statement, true or not, is insulting and adds personal issues to an otherwise straightforward communication.

So, which is it. Are you ignoring “editing” your own posts.. or are you a very masterful troll?

I haven’t decided yet.

In a vacuum you’d be right…but this is not a vacuum. I’ve pointed out this information countless times and people simply say I’m wrong. It’s obvious I’m not. I doubled checked with other editors even, in case I was.

At that point, there’s esculation. You look at my posts and ignore the attacks on my posts. Sorry to say, but that’s just biased.

And no, most of my posts don’t end that one, only a few, and usually only in response to people who are arguing something that has no basis at all…such as the intrepretion of the words in the manifesto. There really is only one way to intepret it. It’s backed up by other things that came after…but of course, I’ve said all this before.

Repeating it every time someone brings it up would bring out the bear in anyone.

Honestly when they mentioned a “home instance” I thought that the whole game was sort of instanced. As I take my character through the zones and completing events, those events had a persistent impact on the game world for my character. Others can see it by joining my party and then go to those areas.

Sadly the home instance is just a little pocket that nobody makes use of which is why they introduced the new node that goes there. For gear that can only be obtained for your character by crafting since it is crafted bound.

I think the customization people are talking about from GW1 would be more than just cosmetic. You could customize and change both the prefix and suffix of a weapon in GW1 but in GW2 we only effect the suffix through the use of jewels, runes, sigils, etc. The prefix is actually predetermined. They don’t even cover all possible combinations as far as those three stats go.

Power
Precision
Toughness
Vitality
Cond Dmg
Healing Pwr
Crit Dmg

Seven different stats and you can have three. If the same three stat combination is not used more than once then that would be just 35 combinations. However, they place an emphasis on a single stat over the other three. I have two ascended rings that give me the same three stats but they are not the same. One gives me more toughness while the other gives more precision. This means the same three can be used while switching which is primary. This ups it to 105 possible combinations.

I can guarantee that not all possible combinations are covered. Hell, even without the emphasis, the 35 combinations are not all used in game.

I didn’t even include magic find since that is on its way out. If I did then it would be 56 without emphasis and so 168 with.

And there is nothing worse than stupid things like “needles” or “spikes” which are just examples of the many grey items that serve no purpose other than to vendor. I’d rather just get the copper/silver directly.

If I want to level in WvW, I can.
If I want to level through just crafting I can.
If I want to level doing events I can.
If I want to level doing map completion (hearts, vistas, POIs, etc.) I can.
If I want to level through my personal story, I can’t.

You can not level up your character through the personal story alone. You will have to stop to do something else as the xp you get is not sufficient enough to get you to the next level you need to be. It is the only ‘path to 80’ that requires you to stop and level elsewhere. This is very sad considering that doing the story (particularly for the first time) would be considered the least grindy way to level. Aside from crafting assuming you buy the mats rather than running around the map gather from node after node after node.

Deamhan.9538:

And there is nothing worse than stupid things like “needles” or “spikes” which are just examples of the many grey items that serve no purpose other than to vendor. I’d rather just get the copper/silver directly.

That’s something the first game did too, more often. Freaking Aloe Roots, Charr Hides, Lodestones, Remains, Carapaces, Ruined Equipment, Baubles, Totems . . . They didn’t see much use until Nicholas and even then it was questionable.

. . . heck they weren’t even worth as much in comparison as the junk items accumulating in inventory NOW do :P

Honestly the “what you love about GW” is so vague it’s meaningless. Was there a survey? Market research? Or the dev’s own opinions from colleagues and friends. It’s so dependent on who you ask and how you ask it.

Vayne.8563:

I don’t know how anyone in their right mind can think he’s talking about gear.

I’m an editor by trade. I turn off my agenda when reading something. Most people can’t do this.

Vayne.8563:

I keep the language neutral. It doesn’t detract from my points.

…no one says you have to word things in the most offensive or obnoxious way possible. But many people doesn’t seem to realize this.

If I may offer a little constructive criticism, the phrase ‘practice what you preach’ comes to mind (and often) when I read your posts.

Also, it should be ‘many people *don’t* seem to realize this’. Editor, edit thyself.

Tachenon.5270:

Vayne.8563:

I don’t know how anyone in their right mind can think he’s talking about gear.

I’m an editor by trade. I turn off my agenda when reading something. Most people can’t do this.

Vayne.8563:

I keep the language neutral. It doesn’t detract from my points.

…no one says you have to word things in the most offensive or obnoxious way possible. But many people doesn’t seem to realize this.

If I may offer a little constructive criticism, the phrase ‘practice what you preach’ comes to mind (and often) when I read your posts.

Also, it should be ‘many people *don’t* seem to realize this’. Editor, edit thyself.

I don’t proof read or edit posts. I make too many of them. Any writer will tell you that editing is a painstaking process. It’s not worth editing forum posts. I type them and send them. Sometimes there will be errors. Shrugs.

As for practice what I preach, maybe you haven’t been around for the months of abuse I’ve suffered at hands of other forum members. I was more reasonable at the beginning. I’m less reasonable now…as anyone would be.

I don’t practice what I preach, I respond to different people based on my history with that person, not your expectation of me.

Here’s a question.
Excuse me for generalization, but, Chinese players are known for liking “hardcore”/strategic games.
How will arena net keep their interest?
I’m afraid LS wont work.

Nick.6972:

Here’s a question.
Excuse me for generalization, but, Chinese players are known for liking “hardcore”/strategic games.
How will arena net keep their interest?
I’m afraid LS wont work.

But their current philosophy of adding new currencies all the time and making getting them a huge grind suits Asian players perfectly. If anything, Anet can go all-out with grind for them.

One more example of how the GW2 design philosophy has changed over time: when the dungeon token system was introduced, ArenaNet told us it meant to avoid the feeling that you could go through a dungeon and get nothing for it, while someone else could do the same dungeon and get the same reward. Here, they said:

ArenaNet

Fun impacts decisions. Every time you finish a dungeon you get tokens you can trade in for reward items that you want, rather than having a small chance of getting it as a drop, because it’s more fun to always get rewarded for finishing with something you want to have!

So they clearly understood how frustrating it is to rely on a RNG reward system that gives “a small chance of getting it as a drop”.

However, that’s exactly what they have been adding to the game. All weapon skins acquired through the RNG boxes summon exactly the feeling of frustration given by having a very small chance of receiving a given drop. In many ways it’s worse than in the raids seen in other MMORPGs, considering how we are meant to pay real money for the RNG here.

Vayne.8563:

I’m an editor by trade. I turn off my agenda when reading something. Most people can’t do this.

I think everyone who has read your posts realizes you have a very strong agenda of trying to make up as many excuses to defend ArenaNet as possible (with the little token criticism here and there to save face). That’s probably why so many ignore the way you try to defend the Manifesto – your arguments are biased due to your own agenda.

wow, so a person cannot defend the game unless it is biased?
i think he really thinks and believe in what he says, the only problem you have with this is the fact that he thinks differently than you.
your opinion of him is biased not his opinion of the game. besides what he gains by defending a game other than he does it because he believe in what he says?

of course this is my opinion on him, and he can actually be whatever he likes and be moved by whatever sentiment he has. but as far as i know you just hate him because he shows common sense but he uses against some lack of it

Erasculio.2914:

One more example of how the GW2 design philosophy has changed over time: when the dungeon token system was introduced, ArenaNet told us it meant to avoid the feeling that you could go through a dungeon and get nothing for it, while someone else could do the same dungeon and get the same reward. Here, they said:

ArenaNet

Fun impacts decisions. Every time you finish a dungeon you get tokens you can trade in for reward items that you want, rather than having a small chance of getting it as a drop, because it’s more fun to always get rewarded for finishing with something you want to have!

So they clearly understood how frustrating it is to rely on a RNG reward system that gives “a small chance of getting it as a drop”.

However, that’s exactly what they have been adding to the game. All weapon skins acquired through the RNG boxes summon exactly the feeling of frustration given by having a very small chance of receiving a given drop. In many ways it’s worse than in the raids seen in other MMORPGs, considering how we are meant to pay real money for the RNG here.

Vayne.8563:

I’m an editor by trade. I turn off my agenda when reading something. Most people can’t do this.

I think everyone who has read your posts realizes you have a very strong agenda of trying to make up as many excuses to defend ArenaNet as possible (with the little token criticism here and there to save face). That’s probably why so many ignore the way you try to defend the Manifesto – your arguments are biased due to your own agenda.

Actually even many of my opponents have admitted I’m fair minded for the most part. There are a few who haven’t, but I’ve had quite a few people who used to attack me on the forums who now agree with me more often then they don’t.

You’re stuck in the past because I don’t agree with YOU. It doesn’t change reality one whit.

I have no agenda except maybe to stop hyperbole.

Nick.6972:

Here’s a question.
Excuse me for generalization, but, Chinese players are known for liking “hardcore”/strategic games.
How will arena net keep their interest?
I’m afraid LS wont work.

Sounds like WvW to me. I’m going to bet that they are less zerg like and more organized hierarchy of squads and platoons. I would also imagine having specific players as siege engineers and players whose job is simply shuttle supplies to the siege construction.

Nurvus.2891:

It’s the way it goes.

I’m sad about the whiteknighting.

Vayne has been furiously debating all sorts of meaningless things, when the point of the thread is discussing how GW2 is worlds apart from the game ANet set out to make.

One of the most important facts, was that ANet said they wanted GW2 to take everything we loved from GW1 and put it into a persistent world.

To be honest, I have to say that the ONLY things that remain from GW1 are:
- Lore
- Nomenclature for Professions, Skills, etc
- Waypoints

Everything else about Guild Wars 1 was replaced with features that resemble any other MMO, except Guild Wars 1.

Another super important fact, was how they actually point out how meaningless and inconsequential everything you do in most MMOs is.
And yet, almost everything rotates or resets every 15-60 minutes in GW2.

They mentioned how you don’t feel like a Hero because everything is doing what you do, etc.
And that’s exactly what happens in GW2.

They have lost alot of VISION.
I would like them to get it back.

Its not white knighting per se at all, its people like different things.

For you all gw2 took out of gw1 were – Lore, Nomenclature and Waypoints. for others there was more.

What was most important to me in Gw1 were a living world so to speak, that NPC joined in the action. They didnt stay there statically not moving an inch even though they claim their life is immediate peril like I was used to in other MMOs. That I could have my character specked any way I want, I wasnt tied to a trinity. That no matter what level I had an entire world to choose from what to play when I logged, Unlike other MMOs where it was just a small selection of what the whole game consisted off and finally that better gear was not the focus of the game. All of that was carried forward to Gw2 in some cases improved upon as well.

So for you this statement “ANet said they wanted GW2 to take everything we loved from GW1 and put it into a persistent world.” is talk of feline nature… fair enough. For me its 100% true.

Gehenna.3625:

Vayne.8563:

Sorry but if people interpret the manifesto wrong, it’s their problem. I’ve pointed out numerous times how a single line taken out of context changes the definition of what’s being said.

The manifesto was a piece of marketing. It was promising things that weren’t actually realised. Interpret all you want, but for a lot of people who were playing GW1 and were looking forward to GW2, there were a lot of developer comments along the way that certainly supported that interpretation of the manifesto. So I will kindly disagree with you on this point. There was context that I would suspect most current players aren’t even aware of that caused a lot of people to be upset when the game came out. Lots of people did stop playing because of exactly that.

Having said that though, this is normal for any MMO. The big difference I think is that more people were willing to believe Anet this time around because of how they handled GW1.

But, this is all in the past now to be fair. The manifesto was marketing spin and what’s happened has happened. The best thing for anybody to do is the disregard the name of the game and judge it on its own merits. GW2 seems very different than other MMOs but it’s not as different as people think. Hearts are just area quests, delivered in a different way with a bit more freedom on the activities. It’s still a matter of collect this, kill that and escort this person or defend this location. Same goes for the events.

The advantage is that you don’t have a quest log full of quests, the disadvantage is constantly running around trying to find events without much direction. It’s different and for some it’s great for others not so much. But as someone once said “Toto, I’ve a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore.”, the only conclusion for me was that with GW2 we’re not in Guild Wars anymore. What that means to you as a gamer, depends on you. Some love it, some hate it. This is simply the way of things.

Vayne.8563:

In a writing class I taught, I used an example from Shakespeare…“Romeo, Romeo, wherefore are thou, Romeo” and asked the class what it meant.

100% of most classes said she was asking where Romeo was. They were all wrong.

Anet clearly defined in the manifesto what they meant by grind, then referred to that grind two lines later. The only thing really up for discussion here is the standards of school education in different countries.

If you claim to be an educator and are going to quote Shakespeare, then at least do it right: “O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?”

I will trust you can find the rather unfortunate spelling mistake yourself.

I don’t edit posts, sorry, and anyone who points out unedited posts is being silly. This isn’t a college thesis, I’m making a simple point. Pointing out my quote not being exact is completely irrelevant to the point I was making and the inaccuracy in no way affects that point. It’s just a red herring.

It’s a fact that most people don’t know that wherefore means why and most people misinterpret that bit of literature. It’s also a fact that when something is defined in a document, the further uses of that word, particularly immediately after, retain that definition. There’s no reason in the world to suppose that in the beginning of the paragraph Colin meant one thing by grind and by the end of the paragraph he’d suddenly changed his definition of grind. That so many people mistook it is not an issue. Lots of people mistake lots of things…it doesn’t make them right.

And no, I won’t start editing posts. Once you edit for a living for a few years, you’ll learn to care a whole lot less about how well edited your IMs or forum posts are.

Vayne.8563:

There’s no reason in the world to suppose that in the beginning of the paragraph Colin meant one thing by grind and by the end of the paragraph he’d suddenly changed his definition of grind.

No? Someone around here claimed they blamed the, shall we say, manifest confusion on bad editing.

Tachenon.5270:

Vayne.8563:

There’s no reason in the world to suppose that in the beginning of the paragraph Colin meant one thing by grind and by the end of the paragraph he’d suddenly changed his definition of grind.

No? Someone around here claimed they blamed the, shall we say, manifest confusion on bad editing.

Bad editing on their end, bad editing on the end of the people slicing out quotes to make a point, or bad editing on the charr armor?

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Tachenon.5270:

Vayne.8563:

There’s no reason in the world to suppose that in the beginning of the paragraph Colin meant one thing by grind and by the end of the paragraph he’d suddenly changed his definition of grind.

No? Someone around here claimed they blamed the, shall we say, manifest confusion on bad editing.

Bad editing on their end, bad editing on the end of the people slicing out quotes to make a point, or bad editing on the charr armor?

On their end. Unfortunately, the post-Manifesto ‘clarification post’, once widely talked about, remains MIA. The top dollar charr cultural light armor, however, suffers from unambiguous tail-clippage.

Tachenon.5270:

Vayne.8563:

There’s no reason in the world to suppose that in the beginning of the paragraph Colin meant one thing by grind and by the end of the paragraph he’d suddenly changed his definition of grind.

No? Someone around here claimed they blamed the, shall we say, manifest confusion on bad editing.

The video editing, that is to say, taking Colin’s bit and Ree’s bit and interposing them to make it more interesting/exciting. But both mentions of grind where in the same segment here. The same paragraph. There’s no confusion in the English language here.

It’s one thing to have Colin talking about one thing, Ree talking about something else and editing making it confusing (which was clarified). It’s another to say that Colin on one paragraph where he defines a word, means something different the second time he uses it. It’s not reasonable.

Vayne.8563:

Tachenon.5270:

Vayne.8563:

There’s no reason in the world to suppose that in the beginning of the paragraph Colin meant one thing by grind and by the end of the paragraph he’d suddenly changed his definition of grind.

No? Someone around here claimed they blamed the, shall we say, manifest confusion on bad editing.

The video editing, that is to say, taking Colin’s bit and Ree’s bit and interposing them to make it more interesting/exciting. But both mentions of grind where in the same segment here. The same paragraph. There’s no confusion in the English language here.

It’s one thing to have Colin talking about one thing, Ree talking about something else and editing making it confusing (which was clarified). It’s another to say that Colin on one paragraph where he defines a word, means something different the second time he uses it. It’s not reasonable.

You’re the one who’s been unreasonable.
It’s very easy english, and you still refuse all logic.

You’re defending that they were intelligent and correct in their english usage, and we are uneducated for failing to understand their extremely organized speech – that was somehow poorly edited.
Let’s take a look at that “correctness”, shall we?

They don’t define “Grind” as “doing boring things to get to the fun stuff”.
They use “boring” + “Grind” + “to get to the fun stuff” in the same sentence, wich clearly indicates they are three different things – so “boring” is one thing, “Grind” is another, and “boring” + “Grind” + “to get to the fun stuff” is another thing entirely.

You don’t say “undry wet” or “huge big” or “stinks with bad smell” – as you’re placing words with somewhat similar meaning together.
Likewise you wouldn’t say “boring Grind to get to the fun stuff” if “Grind” meant “boring things to get to the fun stuff”.

This CLEARLY means that when they say “We simply don’t want players to Grind in GW2.” they do NOT mean “We simply don’t want players to grind to get to the fun stuff in GW2.”
It’s simple, it’s obvious.
Grind is grind, and it’s still Grind when they say it in this sentence.

Would you expect ANet to go “kitten , you’re right, we kittened up.”?
Ofcourse not. They choose what they believe to be the lesser evil – to say what they meant was something else.

But all of this is beside the point.
The game is a shadow of what it set out to be.

There is no feeling of hero. You feel more of a nobody than in most MMOs.
The dynamic events are mostly meaningless and rotate every 15-60 minutes.
The big bad events – elemental, dragon, shadow, etc – are extremely simplistic.
They took away skill hunting and didn’t add anything meaningful in its place.

GW2 has lost almost everything that made GW1 awesome.
And for what?

Nurvus.2891:

It’s your interpretation, and it’s their excuse.

They don’t define grind.
They don’t say "Grind is “doing stuff repeatedly to get to the fun stuff”.
They say Grind “to get to the fun stuff.”
Wich means Grind is one thing, and Grind to get to the fun stuff is another thing.

You choose to distort it to your white knighting convenience.

It’s funny how even “grind to get to the fun stuff” is suddenly meant to mean specifically “level grind”. That’s nowhere close to what Colin says…

There are some discussions not worth having, though. I think everyone in this forum has realized by now that Vayne won’t ever change his mind, even if Colin himself admitted how our dear editor is wrong. No amount of arguments is going to convince him, so it’s better we just ignore his posts about this subject.

(While still mentioning from time to time how the Manifesto was ultimatelly wrong, of course. Can’t allow people to forget that.)

Erasculio.2914:

Nurvus.2891:

It’s your interpretation, and it’s their excuse.

They don’t define grind.
They don’t say "Grind is “doing stuff repeatedly to get to the fun stuff”.
They say Grind “to get to the fun stuff.”
Wich means Grind is one thing, and Grind to get to the fun stuff is another thing.

You choose to distort it to your white knighting convenience.

It’s funny how even “grind to get to the fun stuff” is suddenly meant to mean specifically “level grind”. That’s nowhere close to what Colin says…

There are some discussions not worth having, though. I think everyone in this forum has realized by now that Vayne won’t ever change his mind, even if Colin himself admitted how our dear editor is wrong. No amount of arguments is going to convince him, so it’s better we just ignore his posts about this subject.

(While still mentioning from time to time how the Manifesto was ultimatelly wrong, of course. Can’t allow people to forget that.)

It’s so funny that you guys, years after, can’t acknowledge something Anet has already explained. I’m regurgitating their explanation. Do you have any idea how many times since the manifesto that Colin has repeated this explanation. That in most games you play one game to get to max level and then play another game. They were talking and have said they were talking about having fun things to do at lower levels and all through the game. He ends he paragraph with we want to change the way people view combat. He doesn’t end the paragraph with we want to change the way people farm.

This isn’t even an argument. It’s simply poor comprehension.

even if i am not english native, i feel a lot of this posts are just what we call roll the omelette on the frying pan…

you are changing meanings of things just to have a point that, even if you are right doesn’t change anything.

the manifesto is a lie? so what?
the manifesto is true? than?

what are we arguing about here? you like the game you play it, you feel cheated by arenanet you don’t, none of you though need to make the others change mind. you should be brave enough to made your mind up on your own

Nurvus.2891:

Vayne.8563:

Tachenon.5270:

Vayne.8563:

There’s no reason in the world to suppose that in the beginning of the paragraph Colin meant one thing by grind and by the end of the paragraph he’d suddenly changed his definition of grind.

No? Someone around here claimed they blamed the, shall we say, manifest confusion on bad editing.

The video editing, that is to say, taking Colin’s bit and Ree’s bit and interposing them to make it more interesting/exciting. But both mentions of grind where in the same segment here. The same paragraph. There’s no confusion in the English language here.

It’s one thing to have Colin talking about one thing, Ree talking about something else and editing making it confusing (which was clarified). It’s another to say that Colin on one paragraph where he defines a word, means something different the second time he uses it. It’s not reasonable.

You’re the one who’s been unreasonable.
It’s very easy english, and you still refuse all logic.

You’re defending that they were intelligent and correct in their english usage, and we are uneducated for failing to understand their extremely organized speech – that was somehow poorly edited.
Let’s take a look at that “correctness”, shall we?

They don’t define “Grind” as “doing boring things to get to the fun stuff”.
They use “boring” + “Grind” + “to get to the fun stuff” in the same sentence, wich clearly indicates they are three different things – so “boring” is one thing, “Grind” is another, and “boring” + “Grind” + “to get to the fun stuff” is another thing entirely.

You don’t say “undry wet” or “huge big” or “stinks with bad smell” – as you’re placing words with somewhat similar meaning together.
Likewise you wouldn’t say “boring Grind to get to the fun stuff” if “Grind” meant “boring things to get to the fun stuff”.

This CLEARLY means that when they say “We simply don’t want players to Grind in GW2.” they do NOT mean “We simply don’t want players to grind to get to the fun stuff in GW2.”
It’s simple, it’s obvious.
Grind is grind, and it’s still Grind when they say it in this sentence.

Would you expect ANet to go “kitten , you’re right, we kittened up.”?
Ofcourse not. They choose what they believe to be the lesser evil – to say what they meant was something else.

But all of this is beside the point.
The game is a shadow of what it set out to be.

There is no feeling of hero. You feel more of a nobody than in most MMOs.
The dynamic events are mostly meaningless and rotate every 15-60 minutes.
The big bad events – elemental, dragon, shadow, etc – are extremely simplistic.
They took away skill hunting and didn’t add anything meaningful in its place.

GW2 has lost almost everything that made GW1 awesome.
And for what?

Since this has been covered many many times since the manifesto was created, I can only assume you want to argue over a point that is completely wrong. There’s nothing in Colin’s statement to suggest gear grind or farming at all. And we know for a FACT that Anet has said there will be things to grind for in Guild Wars 2 for people who like that play style but they won’t be required. This isn’t a guess. It’s a fact. It was said more than once.

And the paragraph ends “we want to change the way people view combat”.

You see in MMO parlance what people did was grind levels. That’s what it was and that’s what old gamers talk about. Farming isn’t grinding. You can say anything is grinding, but what in that paragraph leads you to believe Colin is talking about loot or grinding mats, or farming? There’s not one line in that paragraph that backs up what you say.

All you have is a single line, taken out of context, filled in with a definition of your choosing. It’s just bad intepretation. Defend it all you want, it’s demonstrably wrong.

Vayne.8563:

This isn’t even an argument. It’s simply poor comprehension.

Indeed.

I’m not sure you realize you are talking about yourself, though.

Vayne.8563:

You see in MMO parlance what people did was grind levels. That’s what it was and that’s what old gamers talk about.

“MMO parlance”, “what old gamers talk about”… Excuses. You have zero basis on those statements. They are just a way to find excuses for what ArenaNet has said.

Erasculio.2914:

Vayne.8563:

This isn’t even an argument. It’s simply poor comprehension.

Indeed.

I’m not sure you realize you are talking about yourself, though.

Vayne.8563:

You see in MMO parlance what people did was grind levels. That’s what it was and that’s what old gamers talk about.

“MMO parlance”, “what old gamers talk about”… Excuses. You have zero basis on those statements. They are just a way to find excuses for what ArenaNet has said.

From the first paragraph on Grinding in Wikipedia:

“Grinding is a term used in video gaming to describe the process of engaging in repetitive tasks during video games. ¹² The most common usage is in the context of MMORPGs like Realm of the Mad God, Tibia, or Lineage ³ in which it is often necessary for a character to repeatedly kill AI-controlled monsters, using basically the same strategy over and over again to advance their character level to be able to access newer content. MUDs, generally sharing much of the same gameplay as MMORPGs, encounter the same problem. Grinding may be required by some games to unlock additional features.”

Are you sure you really want to argue about the original defintion and how most people use it? This wasn’t just stated by me here, but other people over the course of the months. That’s what grinding was. You don’t have to believe it, but that hardly changes it.

Vayne.8563:

It’s one thing to have Colin talking about one thing, Ree talking about something else and editing making it confusing (which was clarified).

You mean, like…

“I went to the village and swung my sword. Then I swung it again – hey! I thought they were too busy grinding to get to the fun stuff, like in most villages, but ten minutes later they told me I was the best kitten sword swinger they’d seen in the last ten minutes. They remembered.”

Vayne.8563:

It’s another to say that Colin on one paragraph where he defines a word, means something different the second time he uses it. It’s not reasonable.

Yes. Let’s change the way people view combat. Instead of swinging swords and swinging them again – hey! – let’s dispense with the boring grind associated with subsequent sword swinging and make combat more dynamic and fun. Let’s have the players actively kiting and dodging and casting on the run. Won’t that be fun stuff, guys? Yes! Fun stuff indeed!

(And they threw in a heaping helping of red circles to make the dodging even more fun. I particularly enjoy dodging out of one red circle into another one. I find it quite stimulating. And innovative.)

Then, in a dramatic (and potentially confusing) turn of events, they took many (note: ‘many’ does not mean ‘all’) of the things we are going to use all this fun and innovative combat against and turned them into a boring grind, and while they were at it, they reduced a great deal (note: the phrase ’ a great deal’ does not mean ‘all’) of the other fun stuff to the (itsy bitsy teeny weeny but fortunately not yellow polka dot – yet!) chance of getting something cool (and fun) when the non-boring, non-grindy innovative combat is over. Or stuffed it into one box in a bajillion (note: imaginary number – see also: hyperbole – used for dramatic effect). Or made it so that getting it requires mass quantities of boring (but not necessarily combative!) grind.

So. Did they change the way people view combat? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Attempts to settle this would be, I suspect, in vain. Ahem. In the end, however, combat is still combat, it’s still swinging a sword, and it’s still swinging it again, over and over (and over and over) until the boring grind you’re combating is finally dead (at least until it remembers to respawn ten minutes – or less! – later), at which point you’re probably going to get some blues or greens that you probably can’t use anyway, or maybe even nothing at all, unless you’re one of the fortunate few who get precursors for killing rats.

Yes. Yes, it’s all so very clear. How was anyone ever confused by anything in the Manifesto?

Tachenon.5270:

Vayne.8563:

It’s one thing to have Colin talking about one thing, Ree talking about something else and editing making it confusing (which was clarified).

You mean, like…

“I went to the village and swung my sword. Then I swung it again – hey! I thought they were too busy grinding to get to the fun stuff, like in most villages, but ten minutes later they told me I was the best kitten sword swinger they’d seen in the last ten minutes. They remembered.”

Vayne.8563:

It’s another to say that Colin on one paragraph where he defines a word, means something different the second time he uses it. It’s not reasonable.

Yes. Let’s change the way people view combat. Instead of swinging swords and swinging them again – hey! – let’s dispense with the boring grind associated with subsequent sword swinging and make combat more dynamic and fun. Let’s have the players actively kiting and dodging and casting on the run. Won’t that be fun stuff, guys? Yes! Fun stuff indeed!

(And they threw in a heaping helping of red circles to make the dodging even more fun. I particularly enjoy dodging out of one red circle into another one. I find it quite stimulating. And innovative.)

Then, in a dramatic (and potentially confusing) turn of events, they took many (note: ‘many’ does not mean ‘all’) of the things we are going to use all this fun and innovative combat against and turned them into a boring grind, and while they were at it, they reduced a great deal (note: the phrase ’ a great deal’ does not mean ‘all’) of the other fun stuff to the (itsy bitsy teeny weeny but fortunately not yellow polka dot – yet!) chance of getting something cool (and fun) when the non-boring, non-grindy innovative combat is over. Or stuffed it into one box in a bajillion (note: imaginary number – see also: hyperbole – used for dramatic effect). Or made it so that getting it requires mass quantities of boring (but not necessarily combative!) grind.

So. Did they change the way people view combat? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Attempts to settle this would be, I suspect, in vain. Ahem. In the end, however, combat is still combat, it’s still swinging a sword, and it’s still swinging it again, over and over (and over and over) until the boring grind you’re combating is finally dead (at least until it remembers to respawn ten minutes – or less! – later), at which point you’re probably going to get some blues or greens that you probably can’t use anyway, or maybe even nothing at all, unless you’re one of the fortunate few who get precursors for killing rats.

Yes. Yes, it’s all so very clear. How was anyone ever confused by anything in the Manifesto?

Quoting it because it made my day.

Tachenon.5270:

Vayne.8563:

It’s one thing to have Colin talking about one thing, Ree talking about something else and editing making it confusing (which was clarified).

You mean, like…

“I went to the village and swung my sword. Then I swung it again – hey! I thought they were too busy grinding to get to the fun stuff, like in most villages, but ten minutes later they told me I was the best kitten sword swinger they’d seen in the last ten minutes. They remembered.”

Vayne.8563:

It’s another to say that Colin on one paragraph where he defines a word, means something different the second time he uses it. It’s not reasonable.

Yes. Let’s change the way people view combat. Instead of swinging swords and swinging them again – hey! – let’s dispense with the boring grind associated with subsequent sword swinging and make combat more dynamic and fun. Let’s have the players actively kiting and dodging and casting on the run. Won’t that be fun stuff, guys? Yes! Fun stuff indeed!

(And they threw in a heaping helping of red circles to make the dodging even more fun. I particularly enjoy dodging out of one red circle into another one. I find it quite stimulating. And innovative.)

Then, in a dramatic (and potentially confusing) turn of events, they took many (note: ‘many’ does not mean ‘all’) of the things we are going to use all this fun and innovative combat against and turned them into a boring grind, and while they were at it, they reduced a great deal (note: the phrase ’ a great deal’ does not mean ‘all’) of the other fun stuff to the (itsy bitsy teeny weeny but fortunately not yellow polka dot – yet!) chance of getting something cool (and fun) when the non-boring, non-grindy innovative combat is over. Or stuffed it into one box in a bajillion (note: imaginary number – see also: hyperbole – used for dramatic effect). Or made it so that getting it requires mass quantities of boring (but not necessarily combative!) grind.

So. Did they change the way people view combat? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Attempts to settle this would be, I suspect, in vain. Ahem. In the end, however, combat is still combat, it’s still swinging a sword, and it’s still swinging it again, over and over (and over and over) until the boring grind you’re combating is finally dead (at least until it remembers to respawn ten minutes – or less! – later), at which point you’re probably going to get some blues or greens that you probably can’t use anyway, or maybe even nothing at all, unless you’re one of the fortunate few who get precursors for killing rats.

Yes. Yes, it’s all so very clear. How was anyone ever confused by anything in the Manifesto?

The problem here is confusion which isn’t lying. Now if the manifesto indeed did confuse you, you have had many many years after it to find out what was actually in the game. But you’re still missing the point.

Active combat, at the time the manifesto was made, was woefullly rare in MMOs. I mean there wasn’t a lot of it at all. So yes, when people played Guild Wars 2 they loved the combat…surely at first. 3 year old manifesto remains three years old.

And they’re talking about stuff (and this is an example Colin gave) about having encounters like the Shadow Behemoth right in a starting zone. You know when the game launched and it didn’t have those guaranteed golds, those events were really awesome. It’s the guaranteed golds that game MUCH MUCH after launch that changed the nature of those fun events. That’s what Colin was talking about. Not just moving from quest hub to quest hub, skipping a wall of text to follow an arrow to get to the star. That’s not fun. That was NEVER fun. It’s more fun to have things just happen as you go through the world, at least for some of us. And that’s the kind of thing Colin was talking about.

Now everyone’s definition of fun is going to be different. This is why anyone who wants to know more about the game, can research the game and find out about it. Exactly what a dynamic event was was well known long before launch. How they worked, how they cycled, how some were part of chains and some were stand alone. And you could learn about the personal story.

Honestly people saying they were misled about an entire game from a five minute video made two years before the game came out are pushing the envelope of plausibility.

Maybe, MAYBE if you watched the manifesto, decided you liked the game from it and watched NOTHING ELSE, I’d have a modicum of sympathy for those who feel misled, but for the most part, this information people are saying they’re not getting was pretty much everywhere.

It’s completely disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

Vayne.8563:

Are you sure you really want to argue about the original defintion and how most people use it?

Yes. Because your little definition of grind is just a random person’s definition, being exploited as much as possible to make up excuses for ArenaNet. Can you give anything close to an evidence that most people use your or Wikipedia’s definition of the word “grind”?

No?

So yep. All you have are excuses.

Erasculio.2914:

Vayne.8563:

Are you sure you really want to argue about the original defintion and how most people use it?

Yes. Because your little definition of grind is just a random person’s definition, being exploited as much as possible to make up excuses for ArenaNet. Can you give anything close to an evidence that most people use your or Wikipedia’s definition of the word “grind”?

No?

So yep. All you have are excuses.

So wikipedia is a random person? No one fact checks it no one else has ever said those words.

Okay. So you don’t believe that’s the original and most used definition of grind.

I’ll let others read your posts and decide if they want to believe your version or mine.

Vayne.8563:

So wikipedia is a random person?

Do you know who Hyphz is?

No?

He’s the guy who wrote that content.

And to your claim that everything in Wikipedia is true, well, guess what the Grinding article says about Guild Wars 2?

“Guild Wars 2, the sequel to Guild Wars, departs from the formula found in Guild Wars, with a clear gear treadmil”.

So I guess now it’s a fact that GW2 has a “clear gear treadmil”, then?

Vayne.8563:

I’ll let others read your posts and decide if they want to believe your version or mine.

Vayne, I already told you – it’s clear as day that you have a very strong agenda in trying to find excuses for ArenaNet. You are assuming you have a credibility that isn’t there (much like Wikipedia, for the records). It’s not hard to not believe in your posts when you are defending ArenaNet – that’s what you do all the time anyway, with the token criticism here and there.

@Erasculio
I read your Guild Wars 2 review – http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/User:Erasculio – and I completely agree.

“Guild Wars 2 takes everything you love about Guild Wars 1, and puts it into a persistent world.”

That’s quite a statement, a bit loaded, possibly presumtuous, and veeeery vague. Not a whole lot to dissect there, even with context. So what did I love from GW1?

If I had to pick one thing that I wanted from GW1 to go to GW2, it would have to be the freedom. The ‘freedom’ is what I sought after spending time in WoW and other MMOs. I never once felt obligated to log-in, to hurry things up for the next batch of content. I could play whenever I wanted to and not miss anything – and I never did.

GW2’s emphasis on temporary content really hurts that. In a typical WoW-MMO, I’m encouraged to play as much of the latest content to be properly geared for the upcoming content. In GW2, I’m encouraged to play as much of the latest content as I can because it’s likely to not be around much longer. That’s not the freedom I enjoyed in GW1.

And from a gameplay perspective, I don’t really get it. Why can’t I replay any of it? I can run CoF as many times as I want, keep remaking characters to experience certain story paths, and pretty much to some degree replay anything else in the game. Is it to instill a sense of a ‘living story’? How’s that going to happen when it only applies to a freckle of the game?

“To make money” is a reason I can grasp, but GW2 came with a price tag, it’s not like they can’t make money selling the game. I’d prefer them to milk money out of potential customers and not current ones.

Erasculio.2914:

Vayne.8563:

So wikipedia is a random person?

Do you know who Hyphz is?

No?

He’s the guy who wrote that content.

And to your claim that everything in Wikipedia is true, well, guess what the Grinding article says about Guild Wars 2?

“Guild Wars 2, the sequel to Guild Wars, departs from the formula found in Guild Wars, with a clear gear treadmil”.

So I guess now it’s a fact that GW2 has a “clear gear treadmil”, then?

Vayne.8563:

I’ll let others read your posts and decide if they want to believe your version or mine.

Vayne, I already told you – it’s clear as day that you have a very strong agenda in trying to find excuses for ArenaNet. You are assuming you have a credibility that isn’t there (much like Wikipedia, for the records). It’s not hard to not believe in your posts when you are defending ArenaNet – that’s what you do all the time anyway, with the token criticism here and there.

Well, I don’t know, I didn’t FIRST find out what I was saying from Wikipedia, I just went there for confirmation. See, I already KNEW how the word has been typically used, so I’m quite willing to believe what it says in Wikipedia. I’m sure it says it in other places as well, but I’ll let you do your own research.

My own experience and research has born out the wikipedia article. The truth is you’d rather attack Anet when you’re completely and demonstrably wrong, over something that is pretty much basic knowledge of the genre. If you don’t know what grinding is or how it’s been used over the years, fair enough.

But that has nothing to do with me having an agenda. My agenda is for people to learn to communicate better…including Anet.

Smith.1826:

“Guild Wars 2 takes everything you love about Guild Wars 1, and puts it into a persistent world.”

That’s quite a statement, a bit loaded, possibly presumtuous, and veeeery vague. Not a whole lot to dissect there, even with context. So what did I love from GW1?

If I had to pick one thing that I wanted from GW1 to go to GW2, it would have to be the freedom. The ‘freedom’ is what I sought after spending time in WoW and other MMOs. I never once felt obligated to log-in, to hurry things up for the next batch of content. I could play whenever I wanted to and not miss anything – and I never did.

GW2’s emphasis on temporary content really hurts that. In a typical WoW-MMO, I’m encouraged to play as much of the latest content to be properly geared for the upcoming content. In GW2, I’m encouraged to play as much of the latest content as I can because it’s likely to not be around much longer. That’s not the freedom I enjoyed in GW1.

And from a gameplay perspective, I don’t really get it. Why can’t I replay any of it? I can run CoF as many times as I want, keep remaking characters to experience certain story paths, and pretty much to some degree replay anything else in the game. Is it to instill a sense of a ‘living story’? How’s that going to happen when it only applies to a freckle of the game?

“To make money” is a reason I can grasp, but GW2 came with a price tag, it’s not like they can’t make money selling the game. I’d prefer them to milk money out of potential customers and not current ones.

Yep that line is the only line in the manifesto I’d question…everything you love about Guild Wars 1. Everything WHO loves? It’s obviously marketing. But of course, some people took it as gospel…in spite of the fact they knew not only that the skill system was different but how it was different.

And though Guild Wars 2 lacks some of Guild Wars 1’s freedom, Guild Wars 1 lacks some of Guild Wars 2’s freedom. Which freedom you crave depends on what’s important to you.

I absolutely hated the pathing in Guild Wars 1. How you couldn’t really wander off road. How my ranger couldn’t jump over a log. Guild Wars 1 is a pretty linear experience, compared to Guild Wars 2 at any rate.

Vayne

There are some things people can agree on with “everything you love about Guild Wars 1” ya know. It’s not all entirely subjective.

Statements like that made by developers are aimed precisely at those things that a lot of people liked about the game. So what are those things? It wouldn’t be a bad idea to list them so everyone can agree/disagree on it. There’s a certain amount of democratization with what makes games good or bad, something developers should always key into. “Good things” about a game can be generally determined by a set of peers: players, critics, developers, writers, artists, etc…

Here I’ll start with a few things I think are “universally” good about GW1:

• high skill customization of player characters
• well-implemented, reasonably balanced, and competitive PvP component
• engaging and well-written lore and personal story
• visually well-designed world
• strong guild(and alliance) component
• friendly and strong community
• friendly and strong player-developer relationship
• little to no leveling grind
• cash shop was reasonable and cosmetic
• boxprice was affordable, no monthly fee
• farming was fairly profitable

Would anyone disagree with those? 0.o

Vayne.8563:

Yep that line is the only line in the manifesto I’d question…everything you love about Guild Wars 1. Everything WHO loves? It’s obviously marketing. But of course, some people took it as gospel…in spite of the fact they knew not only that the skill system was different but how it was different.

And though Guild Wars 2 lacks some of Guild Wars 1’s freedom, Guild Wars 1 lacks some of Guild Wars 2’s freedom. Which freedom you crave depends on what’s important to you.

I absolutely hated the pathing in Guild Wars 1. How you couldn’t really wander off road. How my ranger couldn’t jump over a log. Guild Wars 1 is a pretty linear experience, compared to Guild Wars 2 at any rate.

I just don’t really see how temporary content can be supported. Are there players out there who genuinely enjoy the availability? More importantly, why? And is their ‘enjoyment’ from that more important than that of new and returning players?

This artificial sense of urgency is very shaky. Maybe there’s hope with their talk of wanting to add more permanent content, but until we get more details and see what other content that make concrete, right now is a very concerning route.

Smith.1826:

Vayne.8563:

Yep that line is the only line in the manifesto I’d question…everything you love about Guild Wars 1. Everything WHO loves? It’s obviously marketing. But of course, some people took it as gospel…in spite of the fact they knew not only that the skill system was different but how it was different.

And though Guild Wars 2 lacks some of Guild Wars 1’s freedom, Guild Wars 1 lacks some of Guild Wars 2’s freedom. Which freedom you crave depends on what’s important to you.

I absolutely hated the pathing in Guild Wars 1. How you couldn’t really wander off road. How my ranger couldn’t jump over a log. Guild Wars 1 is a pretty linear experience, compared to Guild Wars 2 at any rate.

I just don’t really see how temporary content can be supported. Are there players out there who genuinely enjoy the availability? More importantly, why? And is their ‘enjoyment’ from that more important than that of new and returning players?

This artificial sense of urgency is very shaky. Maybe there’s hope with their talk of wanting to add more permanent content, but until we get more details and see what other content that make concrete, right now is a very concerning route.

Okay…I agree…and I disagree.

The problem with permanent content from other games I’ve played is how much they divide the player base. Just about every other game has instances that never or almost never get played. They sit there.

Some new guy comes in, he wants to do the instance and he can’t. Why? Because no one wants to do it.

Because the content is coming so fast and furious, there’d be 26 updates a year with multiple things in each update. It would be unsustainable.

Take the races from this patch. Some people really like it but how many people will do it when there are 16 mini games instead of four. Then you’ll not have enough to do any of it. Anet ran into this situation with PvP in the original Guild Wars and it’s one of the reasons they didn’t make multiple PvP formats. They said so.

In the end, I don’t really like it the way they’re doing it either. I’d prefer patches to be more spaced out and give people more time to breathe.

But if they continue the way they’re doing it, I dont’ really think leaving that stuff in the game is the best policy. I think it would divide the playerbase too much and most of the stuff wouldn’t get used anyway.

Vayne.8563:

Okay…I agree…and I disagree.

The problem with permanent content from other games I’ve played is how much they divide the player base. Just about every other game has instances that never or almost never get played. They sit there.

Some new guy comes in, he wants to do the instance and he can’t. Why? Because no one wants to do it.

This would depend on the content. If you’re talking about raids and instances made ‘moot’ through an MMO’s expansions, that’s just the developers flat-out neglecting them to encourage players to buy the ‘newest and coolest’ content. This is a poor way to go about it.

A great way to go about it? Sorrow’s Furnace from GW1. That content is still there, still relevant, and still fun. They could also apply the scaling you see from events apply to the content they could create, if player numbers should become an issue.

And it’s not about just making the temporary content permanent, it’s about making permanent content: focusing more on stable pieces of game, less on quality>quantity content.

I think what’s going on here is people making a bunch of different interpretations of the manifesto. Sort of the same way people make different interpretations of the Bible.

Erasculio.2914:

I think everyone who has read your posts realizes you have a very strong agenda of trying to make up as many excuses to defend ArenaNet as possible (with the little token criticism here and there to save face). That’s probably why so many ignore the way you try to defend the Manifesto – your arguments are biased due to your own agenda.

How is his argument biased or based on an agenda? He’s stating his opinions same as you. It’s unfortunate that people feel the need to gang up on him due to his frequent posting. I’ve read nothing but calm, collected, thoughtful posts from him, and all I see him get is bile in return. Turning the discussion from it’s topic to an attack on his credibility is a sign of a weak argument.

I think this thread should be closed because it doesn’t seem to be about discussing how to interpret the manifesto anymore, so much as attacking people who don’t share a preconceived interpretation.

They took everything we liked about gw1 and put it in gw2, /looks for her rit and monk.