Guild Wars 2

In the past, I use to believe that GW2 skills were going to be something similar to how GW1 worked, and for those who have played the original series would know what I mean. There were multiple builds and usually more than one way for every class to be played in game. But as I played through the GW2 betas that quickly changed.

I am bothered to see now how some classes have more or less builds than others. And even with there being another build, it usually only includes swapping out a few utilities while maintaining the same 5 skills from your weapon. Not only that, some classes have mechanics which keep them from even being played at their max potential or at all in certain game modes. (Necro’s and Rangers).

So to start the conversation, How did we go from creating almost endless combos of builds in GW1 to being pigeon hold into certain builds to fit the meta in GW2? Is there any chance that things will improve or only get worse?

/Discuss

The build diversity is the same in both games.
GW1 had more skills, sure, but the majority were underpowered and never even used in the first place.
GW2 has less skills, but makes up for it with traits and expanded gear compared to gw1. If two builds used the same skills/utilities but had different traits/gear, those two builds would be played very differently.

Additionally, gw1 and gw2 were made by completely different people. Don’t let the ArenaNet name fool you. Almost everyone who set the foundations of GW1 had left the company by the time GW2 got into the picture.

Builds were more varied in GW1 because of the 2nd profession, which gave more options with different skills, and weapons too. Whether, or not, it was a good thing, is debatable though.

In theory, they could add new trait lines from other professions, with older and newer traits, and that could introduce more various builds. It would be a nightmare to balance though in pvp.

Mada.5319:

The build diversity is the same in both games.
GW1 had more skills, sure, but the majority were underpowered and never even used in the first place.
GW2 has less skills, but makes up for it with traits and expanded gear compared to gw1. If two builds used the same skills/utilities but had different traits/gear, those two builds would be played very differently.

Additionally, gw1 and gw2 were made by completely different people. Don’t let the ArenaNet name fool you. Almost everyone who set the foundations of GW1 had left the company by the time GW2 got into the picture.

Uhm, no. In GW I could choose to use my pet or not, choose to run traps or not, I could even choose which skills I used to DPS. GW was waaaaay more diverse in builds than GW2, and that’s just Ranger. Each profession had 5-10 builds they could run and still do well(even in HA/TA/RA). Yes there were “prefered” builds for PvP but you still had 3-4x the builds you could choose from.

Galphar.3901:

Mada.5319:

The build diversity is the same in both games.
GW1 had more skills, sure, but the majority were underpowered and never even used in the first place.
GW2 has less skills, but makes up for it with traits and expanded gear compared to gw1. If two builds used the same skills/utilities but had different traits/gear, those two builds would be played very differently.

Additionally, gw1 and gw2 were made by completely different people. Don’t let the ArenaNet name fool you. Almost everyone who set the foundations of GW1 had left the company by the time GW2 got into the picture.

Uhm, no. In GW I could choose to use my pet or not, choose to run traps or not, I could even choose which skills I used to DPS. GW was waaaaay more diverse in builds than GW2, and that’s just Ranger. Each profession had 5-10 builds they could run and still do well(even in HA/TA/RA). Yes there were “prefered” builds for PvP but you still had 3-4x the builds you could choose from.

I also recall the same, when looking at pvp or pve there were usually 3 or more builds one could choose in order to complete the content. Neither of the builds in GW1 were lets say “Not optimal” due to lack of max dps as we see which is the trend in GW2. In GW2 you either fit the meta or you do not. With that alone is a huge difference between the two.

I remember making a Paragon/Elementalist and Paragon/Necromancer build, I was proud of them. Much rather have what this game offers, though, since Guild Wars felt restrictive. Since the community was dedicated to GWPvX like holy scripture, it was useless to have a build that performed both professions, as opposed to using one profession to empower the other. The only time I could use one of them was during a Vanquish and I wasn’t exactly thrilled to do those.

I’d argue the PvE is more fun and pronounced in GW2 than GW1, but the lack of build variety and diversity compared to GW1 hurts. Even though it’s PvE was very basic and shallow, I found a lot more longevity in the layouts and builds I could create. Like I said in previous other threads: GW2’s gameplay + GW1’s customization = GOOD GRAVY!

Mada.5319:

Additionally, gw1 and gw2 were made by completely different people. Don’t let the ArenaNet name fool you. Almost everyone who set the foundations of GW1 had left the company by the time GW2 got into the picture.

This is very true.

Guild Wars 1 definitely 100% had more build diversity, something this game could do with. That said, there were plenty of times I wasn’t allowed into a FoW or Underworld group because I wasn’t running the build of the month. You ran that build or you didn’t pug. It was pretty much that simple. It took me forever to finish DoA because I didn’t want to use the build of the month and I couldn’t get a party. Eventually me and my wife beat it with six heroes.

Build diversity was greater in Guild Wars 1 because you had 8 slots you could put anything in. You didn’t have to take a healing skill. You didn’t have to have five weapon skills. You did have a second profession.

Which created builds like permasins, spirit spammers, 600 monks, even the ursan builds.

There’s simply no real way to even come close to balancing a game like that. People claim Guild Wars 2 is imbalanced, but Guild Wars 1 in many ways was far worse.

And two of the professions needed complete overhauls because they were so underpowered people didn’t want to play them.

In GW2, Anet opted for simplicity with regard to skill bars. Weapon choice locks skills, utilities can only be slotted 3 at a time. Elite skills are a separate category and are seldom the key component in one’s build, FGS aside. Weapon skills are designed in such a way that weapon choice pretty much dictates what skills are used when. Synergy in GW2 is almost always at the 5 person team level. This was done, ostensibly, to make the game “easier to balance.” However, ANet traded easier skill balance for harder gear/stat balance — at least in PvE.

GW skill bars were more readily customizable. Elite skills were just one more option for what went on the bar, however, they were often the centerpoint of one’s build. Gear was less important to one’s build. Gear was readily balanced, but skills were not. Synergy was available at the team level or the individual level.

For me, GW allowed for a lot of build diversity. Gw2 is a very simple game by comparison. All respect to those who feel otherwise, but I don’t find this to be a good thing.

^ What Vayne said. There were WAY more available skills in GW1 (something which my “collect them all!” personality loved), but the truth of the matter was that the vast majority of the skills were mediocre and never saw any use. Orison of Healing was the baseline Monk healing skill that all other heal skills were compared to, but no decent Monk worth his Protective Spirit EVER carried it on his bar.

What’s more, as Vayne also pointed out, having an abundance of skills didn’t prevent the end-game from devolving into the “if you’re not running meta we will kick you” stagnation. My Assassin basically had to do everything by herself with Heroes, since the only real use for an Assassin in end-game content was as a perma-Shadow Form tank, which I absolutely refused to run. (I made an Assassin to stab things with daggers, not to be a tank!)

If GW1 didn’t have Heroes, which allowed me to do the content by myself, I would have quit GW1 long ago instead of staying with it and loving it for 7 years.

Basically, the problem with low build diversity is not with the availability of skills. The problem is that the game’s design still favours Damage over Support or CC. There is little reason to run the latter two when Damage roles can do the same job, but much faster and more efficiently.

There were way more builds in GW1. Just looking at my folder of saved build templates, it is gigantic. And most of those are necromancer builds for different parts of the game. I wish GW2 had that much build diversity.

Yeah, GW1 has build diversity, but balancing all of the skills was a long time problem.

Also that the build diversity was limited by fully dedicated roles, the “Holy trinity”.
Two of them were useless in dealing damage, while DPS didn’t possess survival capabilities.

GW2 offers you more free choice on what build you want to use. But as GW2 is still young game, nothing is fully viable, due to various reasons, like imbalance.

But the flaws in GW2 right now is: Lack of mob variety (After entanglement, number of unique mobs increased, Partially Digested Husks, Mordrem Husks, Mordrem Trashers, Mordrem Hounds), though it’s still not quite large roster yet.)

Since the mobs, even on scale up don’t provide variety needed to encourage more Support or Control builds.

Only if ANet includes variety (Heavy armor, buffers, Condition DMG and etc.) instead of ranks (Veteran, Elite and Champion) on difficulty scale up, that way we have to use more other builds than just DPS, even if it’s more restrictive.

There’s another aspect people really aren’t considering. You can move and cast in Guild Wars 2. Part of the skill is actually in how you play,. when you dodge, which wasn’t as often a factor in Guild Wars 1.

It’s not that there’s no skill here, but the skill set is different. You have less skills, but you can change them more often.

In Guild Wars 1, if you wanted to do Bogroot Growths in hard mode, you had to make a build that would get you through Sparkfly Swamp. Then you’d have to use the SAME build to get you through the dungeon…because you couldn’t swap skills outside an outpost. It meant that very often success or failure in Guild Wars 1 was decided before you ever left the outpost.

The same can’t be said for Guild Wars 2. It doesn’t need as much build diversity because other types of skills come into play.

Edit: But it should have MORE build diversity than it has now. I’m just saying it will never have, nor should it have, the type of build diversity that Guild Wars 1 had.

If build diversity means letting my thief use a rifle, then I am all for it. 1000 different skills isnt necessary, just more ways to use skills. Im tired of my shortbow.

Galphar.3901:

Mada.5319:

The build diversity is the same in both games.
GW1 had more skills, sure, but the majority were underpowered and never even used in the first place.
GW2 has less skills, but makes up for it with traits and expanded gear compared to gw1. If two builds used the same skills/utilities but had different traits/gear, those two builds would be played very differently.

Additionally, gw1 and gw2 were made by completely different people. Don’t let the ArenaNet name fool you. Almost everyone who set the foundations of GW1 had left the company by the time GW2 got into the picture.

Uhm, no. In GW I could choose to use my pet or not, choose to run traps or not, I could even choose which skills I used to DPS. GW was waaaaay more diverse in builds than GW2, and that’s just Ranger. Each profession had 5-10 builds they could run and still do well(even in HA/TA/RA). Yes there were “prefered” builds for PvP but you still had 3-4x the builds you could choose from.

In gw2 I can choose to run traps or not. I can choose to use signets or not. I can choose which weapon I wanna dps with. I can choose if I wanna be bunker/tanky, glass cannon power spec or condition spec and that’s just with ranger too.

The differences between gw1 builds were more obvious since the skills were different. The difference between gw2 builds are more subtle since they are based on traits and gear.

Even with this apparent diversity in gw1, you were pigeon-holed into using a select 2-3 builds which were the flavours of the month. In pve, warriors were always 100b. Monks either UA or HB. In gvg, there were only two viable monk support builds and that was after the boonprot nerf (when there was only 1 viable build). That’s right. For over 6 years, gvg monks only had two builds to choose from, with minor adjustments along the way.

Sure you can say, “oh I made this awesome Decapitate (an atrocity of a skill) axe build! It’s completely original. Yay build diversity!” but are you going to get into a dungeon/elite zone group with that build? No. Would you get into a pvp team with it? Definitely not.

The amount of diversity is determined by the number of viable builds. Viable meaning you are efficient in your role and will be a valuable asset to your team, rather than a detriment. In this case, the number of viable builds in gw1 was no more than the number of viable builds in gw2.

Don’t get me wrong. I absolutely adore the gw1 skill and combat system. I love it more than what we have for gw2, but I’m not blinded from the reality that the game was.

GW1 gave you the illusion of variety. Rose-tinted glasses helps maintain that illusion.

There is no build diversity in Guild Wars 2. I’ve spent hours staring at GW2Build editor trying to make something unique.
Regardless of what traits you take for your GS Guardian , what armor you chose, you still won’t be any different from the player next to you, except from Utilities, you will still use the same GS skills and hence still play exactly the same. But by all means, name one trait, or one armor set up that drastically changes how I play my GS Guard.

GS guardian, Knights or Berserker, Meditations or Spirit Weapons with correct traits.

Knights for more survivability while keeping good crit chance, Berserker for more damage on crits and attacks in general.

Meditations for Fury and offensive effects, Spirit Weapons for additional DPS and activated skills for additional stuns, AoE, healing field or weakness.

But these are just PvE. Might melt against more variable foes, like heavy armor.

Nick.6972:

There is no build diversity in Guild Wars 2. I’ve spent hours staring at GW2Build editor trying to make something unique.
Regardless of what traits you take for your GS Guardian , what armor you chose, you still won’t be any different from the player next to you, except from Utilities, you will still use the same GS skills and hence still play exactly the same. But by all means, name one trait, or one armor set up that drastically changes how I play my GS Guard.

But there’s your problem right there. Your great sword warrior. It’s like sayign there are a ton of options for sword warriors in Guild Wars 1. There really weren’t.

If you decide to limit yourself to one weapon (particularly in a game where weapon swap is important), no one can help you find build diversity.

My main was Monk.

In PvP – WoH/RC/LS/PaH/SoR/ZB/Smiter…etc
In PvE – HB/UA/WoH/RoJ/55hp/600hp/ …etc

And I only named the meta builds. Mo/A (Assassin’s Promise) wasn’t even considered meta, but it worked extremely great – (Basic principle, spam all your skills and cast AP for instant recharge of all skills).

No Build Diversity? Get real.

Nick.6972:

My main was Monk.

In PvP – WoH/RC/LS/PaH/SoR/ZB/Smiter…etc
In PvE – HB/UA/WoH/RoJ/55hp/600hp/ …etc

And I only named the meta builds. Mo/A (Assassin’s Promise) wasn’t even considered meta, but it worked extremely great – (Basic principle, spam all your skills and cast AP for instant recharge of all skills).

No Build Diversity? Get real.

A handful of builds over six years. You’re not taking time into account. I’m positive 600 monks appeared way after some other builds and some builds were far less viable by the time they appeared. There was an evolution.

55 monks eventually became just farming builds and pretty much the place people used them was outside Bergen Hotsprings. They weren’t a build that people used to play the game. They were a build people used to farm in one specific spot.

But I wouldn’t take kitten monk build into most dungeons.

If you want to talk about builds that won’t work in harder content or anywhere, Guild Wars 2 has plenty of them.

4,5,0,0,5
4,6,2,0,2
6,6,0,0,2
6,6,2,0,0
3,5,0,4,2
5,5,0,4,0

and that is just some dungeon and PvE building. I will let the PvP and WvW guards answer theirs.

regardless. You really cannot compare Guild Wars 1 with Guild Wars 2. the sheer number of skills is different.
Where you see “lack of build variety” , I see freedom. did you know that you can complete anything in Tyria with any build and any gear set.

I have 4 sets of Armour on ONE of my characters. and I change the build around on it frequently, Because I can.

I am sorry if you think it is so limiting. have fun with that. I am going to go back and play a really fun game….

Greatsword/Hammer

6/6/0/2/0 Full Zerker
vs
0/0/6/6/2 Full Zerker

How do traits change my play style?

I’m playing high level fractals and I don’t see no difference.

Regardless of that, it’s not about gameplay, it’s about variety of builds. and even if as some claim, there were only few meta builds in GW1, even that number was bigger there than it is here.

Nick.6972:

Greatsword/Hammer

6/6/0/2/0 Full Zerker
vs
0/0/6/6/2 Full Zerker

How do traits change my play style?

I’m playing high level fractals and I don’t see no difference.

Regardless of that, it’s not about gameplay, it’s about variety of builds. and even if as some claim, there were only few meta builds in GW1, even that number was bigger there than it is here.

But not all at one time. Like if you were running FoW or UW you were expected to have ONE build most of the time. One. Period. And if you didn’t have that one build, good luck in getting a random group together.

Okay let’s solve this whole question of build diversity now. There is a section in the Guild Wars 1 wiki for rangers called the Guide to Playing a ranger. Here’s the link.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guide_to_playing_as_a_ranger

The relevant comment I’m referring to is in reference to playing a ranger in PvP:

Despite the flexibility available, bow-based Rangers have a very rigid optimal build:
Optional.jpgDistracting Shot.jpgSavage Shot.jpgMending Touch.jpgNatural Stride.jpgApply Poison.jpgLightning Reflexes.jpgResurrection Signet.jpg
The optional slot is for an elite bow attack. This skill set offers unparalleled survivability in PvP along with the ability to spread poison rapidly and the potentially game-altering power of Distracting Shot. It is important to note that while this build looks fairly homogeneous, the chosen elite skill will alter the play-style required by a large degree.

Vayne.8563:

There’s another aspect people really aren’t considering. You can move and cast in Guild Wars 2. Part of the skill is actually in how you play,. when you dodge, which wasn’t as often a factor in Guild Wars 1.

It’s not that I’m not considering it, I just don’t feel them entirely worth mentioning. They’re far from unique features, and cast-while-move is something I particularly don’t like as it reminds me too much of other typical MMOs like WoW. I’m much more a fan of the risk/reward scenarios that exist when you have to commit to attacks and other actions.

Dodge buttons/mechanics have existed for a long time, generally in cases where they favor more precise timing (dodge rolls in GW2 are full of invulnerability frames).

Vayne.8563:

But there’s your problem right there. Your great sword warrior. It’s like sayign there are a ton of options for sword warriors in Guild Wars 1. There really weren’t.

As a sword war, I could focus on a sword elite or a strength elite (sometimes even a tactics elite), then choose to compliment it with sword/strength/tactic skills, adrenaline/energy skills, and secondary profession skills. This was just PvE. Even without limiting myself to one weapon moveset, I felt like I had far more choice in GW1 than in GW2 regarding my skillbar, way more choice.

Vayne.8563:

Edit: But it should have MORE build diversity than it has now. I’m just saying it will never have, nor should it have, the type of build diversity that Guild Wars 1 had.

I’m with you there. Nearing it’s two year anniversary, GW2’s granted us a few new traits and equipment stat combinations. A little over two years after it’s release, GW1 acquired it’s third expansion pack worth of skills. I want them to find that middle ground: GW1 was more than they could chew, GW2 is way too little.

Nick.6972:

Greatsword/Hammer

6/6/0/2/0 Full Zerker
vs
0/0/6/6/2 Full Zerker

How do traits change my play style?

I’m playing high level fractals and I don’t see no difference.

Regardless of that, it’s not about gameplay, it’s about variety of builds. and even if as some claim, there were only few meta builds in GW1, even that number was bigger there than it is here.

Your traits don’t change your play style, you base your traits around your play style. If you go 30/30/0/10/0 it means you’re not interested in being able to provide more condition cleanses, stability or have faster cooldowns on consecrations or longer uptime on shield of the avenger and that you’re more interested in just dealing damage by taking more damage modifiers, vulnerability on blind, renewed blind on kill and so on. If you go 0/0/30/30/10 it meas you want to give up literally every single damage modifier and just take trait lines that increase your own survivability, most likely taking AH in valour, and then mostly weak traits in honour which do negligible support. You have 10 in virtues which opens you up to taking one good support trait but no more. You could always try to compensate your lack of damage by taking unscathed contender however. If you were to take 15/15/0/20/20 however, while you would give up some damage modifiers, you would be able to get yourself some nice larger symbols on your hammer auto chain, two support traits in virtues and some damage boosting traits in zeal an radiance. You don’t see a difference because you are purposely trying to not look for one so you can justify it in your head that there’s no diversity.

And exactly how does it change your first 5 skills or what they do or how you use them?

It doesn’t really. But that doesn’t change the fact that there’s build diversity, you’re just looking for excuses to claim there isn’t, when there’s multiple options for each of the five classes I play.

maha.7902:

It doesn’t really. But that doesn’t change the fact that there’s build diversity in Guild Wars 1, you’re just looking for excuses to claim there isn’t, when there’s thousands of options for each of the eight classes I play.

Rephrased.

Here’s my suggestion – rather than complain, go and play GW1 if you want your precious build diversity back. It’s a waste of time trying to hold a conversation with you if you are literally just going to blank everything I say, and you would be much happier playing a game you enjoyed.

Nick.6972:

And exactly how does it change your first 5 skills or what they do or how you use them?

Most guardians I know swap weapons all the time. A LOT. Probably more than any other profession, and that’s how you change your first five skills. And you change your first five skills on the fly a lot of the time BY swapping weapons.

Simply put if you’re only using a great sword, and not say a staff, without the speed buff and giving allies might feature, you’re gimping a party. There are many times and reasons staves are useful and they do give you five different skills than a great sword.

But then, sometimes you do want control and that’s what a hammer is for. And sometimes, you want to do ranged single target damage, and then you’re moving to scepter focus. There are a few places you can’t melee.

So that’s how you change your first five skills. My wife plays a guardian and she swaps weapons all the time, depending on what’s most effective for the situation. Even between specific encounters in dungeons.

Nick.6972:

And exactly how does it change your first 5 skills or what they do or how you use them?

My warrior run either 6/5/0/0/3, 0/5/0/6/3, my utility skills are most usually FGJ, SIO, balanced stance, my different armor always with soldier rune.

for 6/5/0/0/3 it is a pure great sword damage build, nothing worth mentioning.

But when i am with 0/5/0/6/3, I can either use shout heal, regen banner or phantax strength. I can take empowered allies or shung it off. Weapon choice, i can choose between 1h sword, great sword, rifle, longbow.

My trait differences greatly affect my play style. If i am running shout heal, I can support teammate while running around. If i am running regen banner, i will swap out balanced stance with one banner skill and battle standard for elite, combat will be more stationed. If i am running phantax strength, i will dash into the heat of combat and provide high might to allies.

These builds are not meta build but i feel very comfortable and never got kicked ever.

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

Mesket.5728:

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

I don’t know about you but I’m playing a role. And roleplaying means stats anyway, not build diversity. If you have stats and you increase them that’s all it takes.

Vayne.8563:

Mesket.5728:

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

I don’t know about you but I’m playing a role. And roleplaying means stats anyway, not build diversity. If you have stats and you increase them that’s all it takes.

Fifa 14 has stats (which increases), do you consider it a role playing game?

Mesket.5728:

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

Really?

“_The first thing you should know about Guild Wars 2 is that, this time around, there’s no question that it’s an MMORPG. _”

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto/

naskarpa.5972:

Mesket.5728:

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

Really?

“_The first thing you should know about Guild Wars 2 is that, this time around, there’s no question that it’s an MMORPG. _”

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto/

Thank you, the fact that your argument is part of the manifesto renders it invalid automatically.

We already know the manifesto as the cake is a lie

Mesket.5728:

Vayne.8563:

Mesket.5728:

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

I don’t know about you but I’m playing a role. And roleplaying means stats anyway, not build diversity. If you have stats and you increase them that’s all it takes.

Fifa 14 has stats (which increases), do you consider it a role playing game?

Do you play a role in this game? I do. I play a warrior or a mesmer. That’s a role. More recently RPGs are games that have stat progression. You could actually consider Fifa an RPG if you’re roleplaying someone who players soccer. That’s a role.

Those who are older in the gaming industry tend to think in rigid outlines because years ago there were less crossover games. There were very few RPGs that had arcade elements. That’s since changed.

Just because a game has platforming doesn’t mean it’s not an RPG. Just because a game has less build variety than another doesn’t mean it’s not an RPG. By what grounds do you say Guild Wars 2 isn’t an RPG, since you made the statement.

Vayne.8563:

Mesket.5728:

Vayne.8563:

Mesket.5728:

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

I don’t know about you but I’m playing a role. And roleplaying means stats anyway, not build diversity. If you have stats and you increase them that’s all it takes.

Fifa 14 has stats (which increases), do you consider it a role playing game?

Do you play a role in this game? I do. I play a warrior or a mesmer. That’s a role. More recently RPGs are games that have stat progression. You could actually consider Fifa an RPG if you’re roleplaying someone who players soccer. That’s a role.

Those who are older in the gaming industry tend to think in rigid outlines because years ago there were less crossover games. There were very few RPGs that had arcade elements. That’s since changed.

Just because a game has platforming doesn’t mean it’s not an RPG. Just because a game has less build variety than another doesn’t mean it’s not an RPG. By what grounds do you say Guild Wars 2 isn’t an RPG, since you made the statement.

I’m talking about the gameplay, the dinamic, you don’t play an RPG here; you play an arcade. There is no difference with games like Assasin’s Creed or DarkSiders, or any action platform game. This in an MMO Action Platform Game. Not an RPG. Stop the false advertising. The “roles” are just cosmetic.

Even call of duty or team fortress have more roles and teamplay on its gameplay than this game.

Don’t get me wrong, I love GW2, I have fun with it… but I won’t consider it a role playing game unless they drastically change their design (which it seems they are doing one step at a time).

Mesket.5728:

Vayne.8563:

Mesket.5728:

Vayne.8563:

Mesket.5728:

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

I don’t know about you but I’m playing a role. And roleplaying means stats anyway, not build diversity. If you have stats and you increase them that’s all it takes.

Fifa 14 has stats (which increases), do you consider it a role playing game?

Do you play a role in this game? I do. I play a warrior or a mesmer. That’s a role. More recently RPGs are games that have stat progression. You could actually consider Fifa an RPG if you’re roleplaying someone who players soccer. That’s a role.

Those who are older in the gaming industry tend to think in rigid outlines because years ago there were less crossover games. There were very few RPGs that had arcade elements. That’s since changed.

Just because a game has platforming doesn’t mean it’s not an RPG. Just because a game has less build variety than another doesn’t mean it’s not an RPG. By what grounds do you say Guild Wars 2 isn’t an RPG, since you made the statement.

I’m talking about the gameplay, the dinamic, you don’t play an RPG here; you play an arcade. There is no difference with games like Assasin’s Creed or DarkSiders, or any action platform game. This in an MMO Action Platform Game. Not an RPG. Stop the false advertising.

I don’t agree with you, even rpg, there are many different types. ARPG, SRPG etc

GW2 is an MMORPG, to be exact, it is MMO-A-RPG, which means it is action oriented MMORPG, thats why some player felt like playing arcade game. The game is created with dodge, space, positioning, direction, timing in mind, doesn’t make it not an rpg. The fact is we are all playing a role, a warrior, a mesmer etc.

ROLE playing game =/= healer, tank, dps roles. No matter the PvE meta now is all doing damage and provide support, it is still role playing. GW2 is an RPG, accept it.

Crossaber.8934:

ROLE playing game =/= healer, tank, dps roles. No matter the PvE meta now is all doing damage and provide support, it is still role playing. GW2 is an RPG, accept it.

This is not where I’m aiming. I agree that RPGs come in many types and I also like the fact this game is action oriented… but when it come to roles, its plainly cosmetic. A Warrior, a guardian, a Mesmer, etc… will do the very same things with different colours. Some classes has a couple of unique skills, rarely used except for banners or timewarp but you get the point… we all do the same. Roles are cosmetic. One speciliziation (and only one) completes everything and in the most efficient way. I can’t call that a role playing game. Its merely an action platform game with some customization, but veeeery shallow to be called an RPG.

Mesket.5728:

Crossaber.8934:

ROLE playing game =/= healer, tank, dps roles. No matter the PvE meta now is all doing damage and provide support, it is still role playing. GW2 is an RPG, accept it.

This is not where I’m aiming. I agree that RPGs come in many types and I also like the fact this game is action oriented… but when it come to roles, its plainly cosmetic. A Warrior, a guardian, a Mesmer, etc… will do the very same things with different colours. Some classes has a couple of unique skills, rarely used except for banners or timewarp but you get the point… we all do the same. Roles are cosmetic. One speciliziation (and only one) completes everything and in the most efficient way. I can’t call that a role playing game. Its merely an action platform game with some customization, but veeeery shallow to be called an RPG.

The role in role-playing game is not, originally at least, a reference to combat role. It is a reference to taking on the role of your character in a given scenario. Shallow game play started the genre.

Mesket.5728:

Crossaber.8934:

ROLE playing game =/= healer, tank, dps roles. No matter the PvE meta now is all doing damage and provide support, it is still role playing. GW2 is an RPG, accept it.

This is not where I’m aiming. I agree that RPGs come in many types and I also like the fact this game is action oriented… but when it come to roles, its plainly cosmetic. A Warrior, a guardian, a Mesmer, etc… will do the very same things with different colours. Some classes has a couple of unique skills, rarely used except for banners or timewarp but you get the point… we all do the same. Roles are cosmetic. One speciliziation (and only one) completes everything and in the most efficient way. I can’t call that a role playing game. Its merely an action platform game with some customization, but veeeery shallow to be called an RPG.

What kind of combat role you can find in a single player RPG? Especially in the early type round based RPG, for example FF VI, is there a tank role? nope, what you can get is 2 roles max, healer and dps. What GW2 done is to spread the healing to everyone so nobody is highly rely on another to make it out alive. Doesn’t make it less of an RPG.

Mesket.5728:

Vayne.8563:

Mesket.5728:

Vayne.8563:

Mesket.5728:

this is an arcade, not a roleplaying game.

I don’t know about you but I’m playing a role. And roleplaying means stats anyway, not build diversity. If you have stats and you increase them that’s all it takes.

Fifa 14 has stats (which increases), do you consider it a role playing game?

Do you play a role in this game? I do. I play a warrior or a mesmer. That’s a role. More recently RPGs are games that have stat progression. You could actually consider Fifa an RPG if you’re roleplaying someone who players soccer. That’s a role.

Those who are older in the gaming industry tend to think in rigid outlines because years ago there were less crossover games. There were very few RPGs that had arcade elements. That’s since changed.

Just because a game has platforming doesn’t mean it’s not an RPG. Just because a game has less build variety than another doesn’t mean it’s not an RPG. By what grounds do you say Guild Wars 2 isn’t an RPG, since you made the statement.

I’m talking about the gameplay, the dinamic, you don’t play an RPG here; you play an arcade. There is no difference with games like Assasin’s Creed or DarkSiders, or any action platform game. This in an MMO Action Platform Game. Not an RPG. Stop the false advertising. The “roles” are just cosmetic.

Even call of duty or team fortress have more roles and teamplay on its gameplay than this game.

Don’t get me wrong, I love GW2, I have fun with it… but I won’t consider it a role playing game unless they drastically change their design (which it seems they are doing one step at a time).

role
noun \?r?l\

: the character played by an actor

: a part that someone or something has in a particular activity or situation

: the part that someone has in a family, society, or other group

So essentially, GW2 is role playing, and any game can be considered to be role playing or have some aspects of it so long as your taking control of a character who is not of yourself which you control in particular situations or groups to complete certain activities.

It may not be what you consider as roleplay, but GW2 is definitely that.

on topic: I like where the discussion has gone and its clear to say that GW1 had more build diversity but, in return some skills suffered by being mediocre or not being used at all. And I remember that also which was true. And do not get me started on how each time things were nerfed or buffed, people had to adapt their builds accordingly.

However, some people liked that aspect as it kept things fresh, and then there are those who like simplicity which we have here in GW2. I am not up against the simplicity and few skills that are available but more rather or how much build variety is very LACKING.

The only thing that really separates people within the game from being different than the next person who also plays the same class is Skill. And by that, who can play the build the best is what they have. This is seen more in pvp or WvW however as pve really doesn’t require as much skill as the other 2 imo.

Ashen.2907:

Mesket.5728:

Crossaber.8934:

ROLE playing game =/= healer, tank, dps roles. No matter the PvE meta now is all doing damage and provide support, it is still role playing. GW2 is an RPG, accept it.

This is not where I’m aiming. I agree that RPGs come in many types and I also like the fact this game is action oriented… but when it come to roles, its plainly cosmetic. A Warrior, a guardian, a Mesmer, etc… will do the very same things with different colours. Some classes has a couple of unique skills, rarely used except for banners or timewarp but you get the point… we all do the same. Roles are cosmetic. One speciliziation (and only one) completes everything and in the most efficient way. I can’t call that a role playing game. Its merely an action platform game with some customization, but veeeery shallow to be called an RPG.

The role in role-playing game is not, originally at least, a reference to combat role. It is a reference to taking on the role of your character in a given scenario. Shallow game play started the genre.

Very much this. When we originally played D&D arguably the forerunner of all modern MMOs there were no tanks, and while their were clerics, we weren’t necessarily dedicated healers. The roles we played weren’t just our character classes. You could be a warrior and still be an assassin, not as a class, but what you did. That was a role. You could be a protector. Not a character class a role. You could play that role with any class.

The definition has grown weak because tank and healer and DPS are considered roles too, but those were never the roles we were talking about.

I play a hero trying to save Tyria from Elder Dragons. A hero who grows through ability and stats. That makes this an RPG.

This is what I remember about GW1 diversity….

(party) can you run “X” build?
(me)Yes I know that build….I would like to try this “Y” build, I think it would make things go smoother for the whole party…see the skill here mak….
(party) Be “X” or get kicked.
(me) You know this would be so useful doing “Y” in this particular instance, because you wil….
(party) We don’t care, PVX says that this is the meta for this class so change secondary, get these skills on your bar, show bar so we can go, otherwise kick.
(me) No need to kick, I can solo this, have fun getting your next slave.

I like GW2 no one asks me to show my bar, of course we can’t do that yet right. The only thing is doing the same weapons over and over that gets boring so yes would love see them give us even more weapons and choices. That was one thing that you could do in GW1 that I miss and that was using any weapon the game had on any class.

Here’s the main reason GW2 lacks build diversity. Because we are stuck with 5 kills based on which weapon we choose, we are essentially given only 5 skills to choose for our skill bars compared to the 8 we got in GW. And of those 5 we are regulated even further in that 1 MUST be a Heal skill. We have far fewer choices in GW2 than what we had in GW: Prophecies.

I actually think there are more options in GW2.

For example my main character in both games is a ranger and in GW1 my entire build is geared around inflicting as many conditions on my enemies as possible. Apart from 2 skills (a heal and Comfort Animal) my entire skill bar is devoted to it, as are most of my weapon and armor upgrades. For maximum effect I also need an ele using Mark of Rodgort (to go with my fiery bow string and barrage) and a Mesmer using Epidemic.

In GW2 I can achieve almost exactly the same end result in one step – equip a short bow. I can then either build on it or do other things with the rest of my build – the other 1/2 of my skill bar, the traits and my weapon and armor upgrades.

GW1 certainly created an illusion of having far more choice by having hundreds of skills and letting you combine them however you wanted. But many of those skills were redundant (some were exact copies of each other) or just useless and others relied on another skill to work. You also only had your 8 skills, and possibly extra effects from item and weapon upgrades. There are a lot of traits in GW2 which do the same thing as skills in GW1 but without taking up a slot on your skill bar, which means you can use them and something else.

Galphar.3901:

Here’s the main reason GW2 lacks build diversity. Because we are stuck with 5 kills based on which weapon we choose, we are essentially given only 5 skills to choose for our skill bars compared to the 8 we got in GW. And of those 5 we are regulated even further in that 1 MUST be a Heal skill. We have far fewer choices in GW2 than what we had in GW: Prophecies.

Almost true, but you forget one thing. Many of the skills in this game give you other skills. Elementalists have attunements and everyone else has weapon swap (except engineers which have kits). Playing an Engineer or Ele would give you far far more skills than Guild Wars 1.

So a bar has ten instead of 8. On a standard toon that’s 20 with a weapon swap. Five you can choose. And then a lot of professions have other skills. Press F1 as a necro, four more skills you have access too. The minion skills in GW 1. if you wanted a minion bomb that was another skill slot. You had very few skills in Guild Wars 1 where you hit a skill and the slot became another skill. Very few. Not so in Guild Wars 2.

What you can’t do is mix and match skills. But you have a whole lot more available to you here at one time.

Furthermore, in Guild Wars 1 you couldn’t change skills without going back to town which means starting over. Here you can alter skills as you go, swap out weapons, even traits now.

So in Guild Wars 1 you had a huge variety in the town and as soon as you went into the world, you had your eight skills…end of story.