Guild Wars 2

Corpus Christi.2057:

Just like someone else’s said here already, two different teams under the name “ArenaNet” created GW1 and GW2.

The times when the MMO games were complex, diversified and demanding are over, I’m afraid. The sooner you realise that, the better for you. To mention a few, Lineage 2, Guild Wars 1 and WoW ( at the beginning ).

Nowadays, it’s all about simplicity and addressing the widest group of customers possible ( hence GW2’s lack of diversity, few skills, worthless elite skills and other things you complain about ). Especially when we talk about non-sub fee games as still, some of the sub-based games, do have a tiny bit of “eloquence”, e.g. WildStar which is more demanding than GW2, but the graphics make it unbearable for me.

Cheers

Lack of sub fees is irrelevant. Guild Wars also lacked sub fees. And they still managed to provide a game with greater depth, replayability, variety, and diversity. For lower end machines.

What has changed then? Not the ability of the company to provide a similar experience.

I am very sure that Anet could provide us with an upgrade to Guild Wars that had it’s depth, replayability, variety, and diversity.

Why don’t they? Because today’s gamers are content with whatever sub-standard schlock the gaming companies release.

It’s Ironic, there used to be a time when there were LESS choices, Under those conditions one would assume that game studios could say " Give them ..just about enough to be entertained…where they gonna go?"

And yet, games pre- WoW were in general MORE diverse.

Game companies will not give us quality if we do not demand it. Unfortunately Most of today’s gamers are content with sub-standard games. So gaming companies in general will give their customers what their customers show they will pay for. Today’s gamers are willing to accept any excuse even if it means putting up with a sub-par game, so why would gaming companies give us anything else?

I blame gamers. Gamers aren’t likely to vote with their walletds, so companies keep going cha-ching… as players Mouth off about sub-standard games On the forums.

Maybe that’s why they run forums? To get us to think we are being effective by venting…as we keep handing over our CC ?

Nerelith.7360:

Corpus Christi.2057:

Just like someone else’s said here already, two different teams under the name “ArenaNet” created GW1 and GW2.

The times when the MMO games were complex, diversified and demanding are over, I’m afraid. The sooner you realise that, the better for you. To mention a few, Lineage 2, Guild Wars 1 and WoW ( at the beginning ).

Nowadays, it’s all about simplicity and addressing the widest group of customers possible ( hence GW2’s lack of diversity, few skills, worthless elite skills and other things you complain about ). Especially when we talk about non-sub fee games as still, some of the sub-based games, do have a tiny bit of “eloquence”, e.g. WildStar which is more demanding than GW2, but the graphics make it unbearable for me.

Cheers

Lack of sub fees is irrelevant. Guild Wars also lacked sub fees. And they still managed to provide a game with greater depth, replayability, variety, and diversity. For lower end machines.

What has changed then? Not the ability of the company to provide a similar experience.

I am very sure that Anet could provide us with an upgrade to Guild Wars that had it’s depth, replayability, variety, and diversity.

Why don’t they? Because today’s gamers are content with whatever sub-standard schlock the gaming companies release.

It’s Ironic, there used to be a time when there were LESS choices, Under those conditions one would assume that game studios could say " Give them ..just about enough to be entertained…where they gonna go?"

And yet, games pre- WoW were in general MORE diverse.

Game companies will not give us quality if we do not demand it. Unfortunately Most of today’s gamers are content with sub-standard games. So gaming companies in general will give their customers what their customers show they will pay for. Today’s gamers are willing to accept any excuse even if it means putting up with a sub-par game, so why would gaming companies give us anything else?

I blame gamers. Gamers aren’t likely to vote with their walletds, so companies keep going cha-ching… as players Mouth off about sub-standard games On the forums.

Maybe that’s why they run forums? To get us to think we are being effective by venting…as we keep handing over our CC ?

The problem here is using the word quality. I thought Guild Wars 1 was a quality game but many people didn’t think it. It’s like you’re the ultimate arbiter of what’s quality and what’s not. It doesn’t work that way.

It’s a logical statement that the bigger your audience, the more forgiving your system has to be. Logically speaking only the top 10% of players are in the top 10%. If you make a game for them, you have a chance to get 10% of everyone because that’s who you make the game for.

The trick is to make the game easy enough for most people, but hard enough for most people as well. I think Guild Wars 2 pretty much hits that mark. There are people who think this game is too hard. I don’t think it’s hard enough, but I recognize that I play a lot. Most people won’t play as much as I do.

Who should demand this deeper more complex game? The 20% (arbitrary number) that want it. What about the larger group that aren’t in the top 20%, what about what they want. Maybe they’re voting with their wallets by not buy the harder games, and they’re voting with their wallets by buying games that you think are mediocre but they quite enjoy.

Eve Online and games like it will always be niche games, because they’re too complex for most people. Too involved. People want to unwind and relax after work or after dealing with their kids. Not everyone plays games to be challenged.

I’m voting with my wallet, because I enjoy the game. It’s the kind of game I want to play. I think it’s a quality game. Sorry you don’t agree.

Oniyui.8279:

Forcing players to cut skills from their build and make choices neither strips diversity nor creates simplicity. Developers streamlining abilities into fewer core choices for each profession eliminates redundancy.

There’s still a ton of complexity and diversity that players fail to recognize.

That may be true, but it is still not as diverse as Guild Wars.

Nerelith.7360:

Oniyui.8279:

Forcing players to cut skills from their build and make choices neither strips diversity nor creates simplicity. Developers streamlining abilities into fewer core choices for each profession eliminates redundancy.

There’s still a ton of complexity and diversity that players fail to recognize.

That may be true, but it is still not as diverse as Guild Wars.

Yep, you’re 100% right.

i snip the rest because i am tired on explaining the same thing over and over and not getting trough, changing the subject to benefit your own argument is a sign i can’t argue with you.
however, i think i owe a simple explanation on what the problem is with engi’s.

That we cant use and swap all weapons at once hinders freedom too. That we cannot access all utility skills at the same time is also a disadvantage but they’re disadvantages that make sense. Why is it okey for ele to have no ability to swap but not okey for engineer? doesnt the same argument apply to both? The real only difference between Ele and Engineer is essentially if you choose kits the utility skill you’ll have access to are chosen for you. As a plus though even if you choose a regular utility you’ll get access to an extra skill.

an elementalist uses the F keys to switch elements, this means it has a weapon swap.
the engineer uses a skill to get the same, however, it doesn’t give you 4 skill sets and uses a skill slot to use.
so to put it simple, the the engineer needs to sacrifice a skill slot to get weapon swap, the engineer doesn’t and get 2X more sets.
THAT is the issue i am faced with, THAT’S the the flaw in the engineer.
if, like i already stated, the kits can be slotted in the F keys the problem would be solved.
as long as that isn’t done an engineer needs weapon swap, it’s only fair.

In anycase should every class work exactly the same and offer the same exact benefits and costs? I Feel it makes the game a lot more interesting when each class has its own way to do things. Its impossible for every class to make everyone happy even if they’re exact copies of each other mechanic wise. Just like you might skip a class cause it doesnt fit your play style whats wrong with skipping a class because you dont like its mechanics?

so because a profession or two is made wrong i have to be ok with it, i am so glad you’re not a game dev.
beside, you’re taking this argument way out of proportion, not even relevant to the subject.

sorudo.9054:

i snip the rest because i am tired on explaining the same thing over and over and not getting trough, changing the subject to benefit your own argument is a sign i can’t argue with you.
however, i think i owe a simple explanation on what the problem is with engi’s.

That we cant use and swap all weapons at once hinders freedom too. That we cannot access all utility skills at the same time is also a disadvantage but they’re disadvantages that make sense. Why is it okey for ele to have no ability to swap but not okey for engineer? doesnt the same argument apply to both? The real only difference between Ele and Engineer is essentially if you choose kits the utility skill you’ll have access to are chosen for you. As a plus though even if you choose a regular utility you’ll get access to an extra skill.

an elementalist uses the F keys to switch elements, this means it has a weapon swap.
the engineer uses a skill to get the same, however, it doesn’t give you 4 skill sets and uses a skill slot to use.
so to put it simple, the the engineer needs to sacrifice a skill slot to get weapon swap, the engineer doesn’t and get 2X more sets.
THAT is the issue i am faced with, THAT’S the the flaw in the engineer.
if, like i already stated, the kits can be slotted in the F keys the problem would be solved.
as long as that isn’t done an engineer needs weapon swap, it’s only fair.

In anycase should every class work exactly the same and offer the same exact benefits and costs? I Feel it makes the game a lot more interesting when each class has its own way to do things. Its impossible for every class to make everyone happy even if they’re exact copies of each other mechanic wise. Just like you might skip a class cause it doesnt fit your play style whats wrong with skipping a class because you dont like its mechanics?

so because a profession or two is made wrong i have to be ok with it, i am so glad you’re not a game dev.
beside, you’re taking this argument way out of proportion, not even relevant to the subject.

But the engineer has no cooldown on swaps, where as the elementalist has a cooldown on attunements.

Vayne.8563:

sorudo.9054:

i snip the rest because i am tired on explaining the same thing over and over and not getting trough, changing the subject to benefit your own argument is a sign i can’t argue with you.
however, i think i owe a simple explanation on what the problem is with engi’s.

That we cant use and swap all weapons at once hinders freedom too. That we cannot access all utility skills at the same time is also a disadvantage but they’re disadvantages that make sense. Why is it okey for ele to have no ability to swap but not okey for engineer? doesnt the same argument apply to both? The real only difference between Ele and Engineer is essentially if you choose kits the utility skill you’ll have access to are chosen for you. As a plus though even if you choose a regular utility you’ll get access to an extra skill.

an elementalist uses the F keys to switch elements, this means it has a weapon swap.
the engineer uses a skill to get the same, however, it doesn’t give you 4 skill sets and uses a skill slot to use.
so to put it simple, the the engineer needs to sacrifice a skill slot to get weapon swap, the engineer doesn’t and get 2X more sets.
THAT is the issue i am faced with, THAT’S the the flaw in the engineer.
if, like i already stated, the kits can be slotted in the F keys the problem would be solved.
as long as that isn’t done an engineer needs weapon swap, it’s only fair.

In anycase should every class work exactly the same and offer the same exact benefits and costs? I Feel it makes the game a lot more interesting when each class has its own way to do things. Its impossible for every class to make everyone happy even if they’re exact copies of each other mechanic wise. Just like you might skip a class cause it doesnt fit your play style whats wrong with skipping a class because you dont like its mechanics?

so because a profession or two is made wrong i have to be ok with it, i am so glad you’re not a game dev.
beside, you’re taking this argument way out of proportion, not even relevant to the subject.

But the engineer has no cooldown on swaps, where as the elementalist has a cooldown on attunements.

with 4 skill set’s, that isn’t even an issue.
better yet, in the time i am using the element i used before the cooldown is gone already.

sorudo.9054:

Vayne.8563:

sorudo.9054:

i snip the rest because i am tired on explaining the same thing over and over and not getting trough, changing the subject to benefit your own argument is a sign i can’t argue with you.
however, i think i owe a simple explanation on what the problem is with engi’s.

That we cant use and swap all weapons at once hinders freedom too. That we cannot access all utility skills at the same time is also a disadvantage but they’re disadvantages that make sense. Why is it okey for ele to have no ability to swap but not okey for engineer? doesnt the same argument apply to both? The real only difference between Ele and Engineer is essentially if you choose kits the utility skill you’ll have access to are chosen for you. As a plus though even if you choose a regular utility you’ll get access to an extra skill.

an elementalist uses the F keys to switch elements, this means it has a weapon swap.
the engineer uses a skill to get the same, however, it doesn’t give you 4 skill sets and uses a skill slot to use.
so to put it simple, the the engineer needs to sacrifice a skill slot to get weapon swap, the engineer doesn’t and get 2X more sets.
THAT is the issue i am faced with, THAT’S the the flaw in the engineer.
if, like i already stated, the kits can be slotted in the F keys the problem would be solved.
as long as that isn’t done an engineer needs weapon swap, it’s only fair.

In anycase should every class work exactly the same and offer the same exact benefits and costs? I Feel it makes the game a lot more interesting when each class has its own way to do things. Its impossible for every class to make everyone happy even if they’re exact copies of each other mechanic wise. Just like you might skip a class cause it doesnt fit your play style whats wrong with skipping a class because you dont like its mechanics?

so because a profession or two is made wrong i have to be ok with it, i am so glad you’re not a game dev.
beside, you’re taking this argument way out of proportion, not even relevant to the subject.

But the engineer has no cooldown on swaps, where as the elementalist has a cooldown on attunements.

with 4 skill set’s, that isn’t even an issue.
better yet, in the time i am using the element i used before the cooldown is gone already.

I don’t know. The kits in lot of ways seem more powerful to me than the cooldowns on eles. Not every skill is always useful in every attunement. There’s less control there. Also, you get six skills for every kit, not five.

Obsidian.1328:

Galen Grey.4709:

It really needs to be a balance too many options can be as bad as too few options.

I would disagree with that. Some here have said in this post that that the GW1 meta changed so fast that infrequent players found it hard to keep up. My question is, why do you need to use the meta? If you weren’t getting included in dungeon runs(for example) because you weren’t using the latest flavor or the month build, then don’t run with that group. It was a combination of titles, lazy players, and new uber skills that led to GW1 speed runs, not because of having too many skill to choose from. The areas were meant to take hours to finish, not minutes. Heroes were an attempt to fix that, but they brought their own issues to the game: i.e. the core game mechanics were never meant for highly customizable npc’s.

Thing is there is an entire spectrum of players. All here (in this thread) probably agree Gw2 is way too easy and could use a bump in difficult yet its important to point out that one of the major criticism that probably led to the mega server was people and quite a number of them complaining they’re unable to complete events in mid level maps because they’re not finding people to do them with. Now dynamic events are undoubtedly the easiest content in this game yet some find them too hard to solo. We’re not even talking 1 or 2 people but quite a large number of posts.

That sounds more like a problem with scaling.

Dont ask me, I am not one to use pre-made builds much less meta builds

But its pretty clear a lot of people value BiS as well as the most optimal build even in a game like Gw2 where the least optimal build possible is still good enough to do any content. Its a psychological thing and nothing will ever change that.

The problem with too many skills is it makes life hard without using external resources and while for some people thats not an issue it most definitely is for others. How many people had issues with the season 1 short stories because they were no accessable in game?

An MMO is made up of different groups of people, some just want to be the best and dont want to experiment, some want to experiment, some just want to go and play, some are willing to invest time researching how to be better, some just dont want to research anything, some are willing to persevere no matter how long it takes to succeed, some give up the first time they fail. Not just that but people also fall anything in between. You need to find a balance because if you go one extreme you’ll alienate or the rest and there is more then 2 types of groups.

Vayne.8563:

sorudo.9054:

Vayne.8563:

sorudo.9054:

i snip the rest because i am tired on explaining the same thing over and over and not getting trough, changing the subject to benefit your own argument is a sign i can’t argue with you.
however, i think i owe a simple explanation on what the problem is with engi’s.

That we cant use and swap all weapons at once hinders freedom too. That we cannot access all utility skills at the same time is also a disadvantage but they’re disadvantages that make sense. Why is it okey for ele to have no ability to swap but not okey for engineer? doesnt the same argument apply to both? The real only difference between Ele and Engineer is essentially if you choose kits the utility skill you’ll have access to are chosen for you. As a plus though even if you choose a regular utility you’ll get access to an extra skill.

an elementalist uses the F keys to switch elements, this means it has a weapon swap.
the engineer uses a skill to get the same, however, it doesn’t give you 4 skill sets and uses a skill slot to use.
so to put it simple, the the engineer needs to sacrifice a skill slot to get weapon swap, the engineer doesn’t and get 2X more sets.
THAT is the issue i am faced with, THAT’S the the flaw in the engineer.
if, like i already stated, the kits can be slotted in the F keys the problem would be solved.
as long as that isn’t done an engineer needs weapon swap, it’s only fair.

In anycase should every class work exactly the same and offer the same exact benefits and costs? I Feel it makes the game a lot more interesting when each class has its own way to do things. Its impossible for every class to make everyone happy even if they’re exact copies of each other mechanic wise. Just like you might skip a class cause it doesnt fit your play style whats wrong with skipping a class because you dont like its mechanics?

so because a profession or two is made wrong i have to be ok with it, i am so glad you’re not a game dev.
beside, you’re taking this argument way out of proportion, not even relevant to the subject.

But the engineer has no cooldown on swaps, where as the elementalist has a cooldown on attunements.

with 4 skill set’s, that isn’t even an issue.
better yet, in the time i am using the element i used before the cooldown is gone already.

I don’t know. The kits in lot of ways seem more powerful to me than the cooldowns on eles. Not every skill is always useful in every attunement. There’s less control there. Also, you get six skills for every kit, not five.

and it still takes away the rest, takes up a skill slot and is way to specific.
the kits are also not always useful, while one skill is nice the other might be completely useless
i can do with one attunement and win, i tried with kits but the only one that seems to be useful is the auto attack from the flame thrower.
also, like i said when you don’t use kits it takes away weapon swap, the flaw i am trying to make clear here.
kits might be nice for ppl who like them, i for one don’t but get punished from not using them.

so like i said (for the 3rd time), if we could swap weapons while there is no kit equipped then it would solve the problem.

Nerelith.7360:

The problem was " Too many situational skills that too many players today may NOT know the situation in which to use them."

Not in this game, that’s the problem, the skill mechanics don’t run deep enough. There’s nothing that will ever make Ele scepter water #2 useful, it’s simply a junk skill. There are many others like it.

Oniyui.8279:

Forcing players to cut skills from their build and make choices neither strips diversity nor creates simplicity. Developers streamlining abilities into fewer core choices for each profession eliminates redundancy.

There’s still a ton of complexity and diversity that players fail to recognize.

Pretty much this.

In GW1 the complexity was weighted almost entirely on the skills. In GW2 the weighting is spread out into stats, gear, runes and sigils, traits, etc. Combat is also entirely different. It’s more like an ARPG like Diablo. GW1 combat was closer to KotOR imo.

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Well…to be fair it technically is an MMORPG, it’s a persistent ‘verse. But that’s neither here nor there.

I’d say the way to get us REALLY good games, is rather to convince the average Joe to start buying great games. The trick is to prove you have a great game for ’em.

It’s not an RPG it’s a space flight sim with some RPG elements. No one is doing it. The guy is absolutely famous because of previous games he’s designed for Origin. It’s like saying Learner and Lowe could get someone to invest in their musical. Hardly a standard situation.

It’s still an mmorpg, you’re playing a role in a persistent world. The space sim part is simply the platform its presented on.

At any rate, you’re missing the point. By accepting a “least common denominator” mentality for these games you’re indirectly supporting shallow development. Like I said, if you don’t want to support that kind of mentality, don’t play them anymore.

Only works if the bulk of people do the same thing, that’s my point.

Ummm…what? So W3 and sPvP in GW2 don’t count since they have low populations? I have no idea what you mean here.

If I don’t play any games and only wait for the one super uber best game ever to come out, I’ll not have any games.

Correct. And the gaming community would force studios to make better games because of it.

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Well…to be fair it technically is an MMORPG, it’s a persistent ‘verse. But that’s neither here nor there.

I’d say the way to get us REALLY good games, is rather to convince the average Joe to start buying great games. The trick is to prove you have a great game for ’em.

It’s not an RPG it’s a space flight sim with some RPG elements. No one is doing it. The guy is absolutely famous because of previous games he’s designed for Origin. It’s like saying Learner and Lowe could get someone to invest in their musical. Hardly a standard situation.

It’s still an mmorpg, you’re playing a role in a persistent world. The space sim part is simply the platform its presented on.

At any rate, you’re missing the point. By accepting a “least common denominator” mentality for these games you’re indirectly supporting shallow development. Like I said, if you don’t want to support that kind of mentality, don’t play them anymore.

Only works if the bulk of people do the same thing, that’s my point.

Ummm…what? So W3 and sPvP in GW2 don’t count since they have low populations? I have no idea what you mean here.

If I don’t play any games and only wait for the one super uber best game ever to come out, I’ll not have any games.

Correct. And the gaming community would force studios to make better games because of it.

Ummm no, you’re not following me. If I stop buying games, on my own, then nothing will happen. If EVERYONE stops buying games then the industry will be forced to improve. The problem is, everyone isn’t going to stop buying games and most companies can get along nicely without me. So I get no games at all, and everything stays the same…except that I won’t be playing anything.

It’s called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It’s a bad move, unless you can get enough numbers boycotting to make a dent in profits.

Obsidian.1328:

It doesn’t have to be that way. I mean look at Star Citizen. Robertson’s initial goal was what, 500k in crowdfunding? It’s now at about 50 million. And space sims aren’t exactly mainstream.

All I’m saying is there are ways around the “meta” for bankrolling these games. I have no idea if SC will be any good, but the amount of people willing to throw money at a game that doesn’t(seem to) cater to greedy investors should tell you something.

There’s always a choice, even if that choice is don’t play any of them.

So you think if Chris Roberts (not Reobertson…) name wasn’t on this thing it would have been successful at all? There are a LOT of well off video gamers that cut their teeth on Wing Commander and kind of worship the guy (even after that horrid Movie he got talked into). I loved the series, but I’m not giving the guy $100 up front….

Vayne.8563:

sorudo.9054:

i snip the rest because i am tired on explaining the same thing over and over and not getting trough, changing the subject to benefit your own argument is a sign i can’t argue with you.
however, i think i owe a simple explanation on what the problem is with engi’s.

That we cant use and swap all weapons at once hinders freedom too. That we cannot access all utility skills at the same time is also a disadvantage but they’re disadvantages that make sense. Why is it okey for ele to have no ability to swap but not okey for engineer? doesnt the same argument apply to both? The real only difference between Ele and Engineer is essentially if you choose kits the utility skill you’ll have access to are chosen for you. As a plus though even if you choose a regular utility you’ll get access to an extra skill.

an elementalist uses the F keys to switch elements, this means it has a weapon swap.
the engineer uses a skill to get the same, however, it doesn’t give you 4 skill sets and uses a skill slot to use.
so to put it simple, the the engineer needs to sacrifice a skill slot to get weapon swap, the engineer doesn’t and get 2X more sets.
THAT is the issue i am faced with, THAT’S the the flaw in the engineer.
if, like i already stated, the kits can be slotted in the F keys the problem would be solved.
as long as that isn’t done an engineer needs weapon swap, it’s only fair.

In anycase should every class work exactly the same and offer the same exact benefits and costs? I Feel it makes the game a lot more interesting when each class has its own way to do things. Its impossible for every class to make everyone happy even if they’re exact copies of each other mechanic wise. Just like you might skip a class cause it doesnt fit your play style whats wrong with skipping a class because you dont like its mechanics?

so because a profession or two is made wrong i have to be ok with it, i am so glad you’re not a game dev.
beside, you’re taking this argument way out of proportion, not even relevant to the subject.

But the engineer has no cooldown on swaps, where as the elementalist has a cooldown on attunements.

In my opinion, the lack of cooldowns is not really a game changer. I rather have the 4 attunements, because you can put " on swap" sigils on an elementalist weapon, and NOT have to “waste” a utility slot to get the weapon swap.

Engineer is lackluster, and needs to be revamped.

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Well…to be fair it technically is an MMORPG, it’s a persistent ‘verse. But that’s neither here nor there.

I’d say the way to get us REALLY good games, is rather to convince the average Joe to start buying great games. The trick is to prove you have a great game for ’em.

It’s not an RPG it’s a space flight sim with some RPG elements. No one is doing it. The guy is absolutely famous because of previous games he’s designed for Origin. It’s like saying Learner and Lowe could get someone to invest in their musical. Hardly a standard situation.

It’s still an mmorpg, you’re playing a role in a persistent world. The space sim part is simply the platform its presented on.

At any rate, you’re missing the point. By accepting a “least common denominator” mentality for these games you’re indirectly supporting shallow development. Like I said, if you don’t want to support that kind of mentality, don’t play them anymore.

Only works if the bulk of people do the same thing, that’s my point.

Ummm…what? So W3 and sPvP in GW2 don’t count since they have low populations? I have no idea what you mean here.

If I don’t play any games and only wait for the one super uber best game ever to come out, I’ll not have any games.

Correct. And the gaming community would force studios to make better games because of it.

Ummm no, you’re not following me. If I stop buying games, on my own, then nothing will happen. If EVERYONE stops buying games then the industry will be forced to improve. The problem is, everyone isn’t going to stop buying games and most companies can get along nicely without me. So I get no games at all, and everything stays the same…except that I won’t be playing anything.

It’s called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It’s a bad move, unless you can get enough numbers boycotting to make a dent in profits.

…said no protest movement ever.

Brother Grimm.5176:

Obsidian.1328:

It doesn’t have to be that way. I mean look at Star Citizen. Robertson’s initial goal was what, 500k in crowdfunding? It’s now at about 50 million. And space sims aren’t exactly mainstream.

All I’m saying is there are ways around the “meta” for bankrolling these games. I have no idea if SC will be any good, but the amount of people willing to throw money at a game that doesn’t(seem to) cater to greedy investors should tell you something.

There’s always a choice, even if that choice is don’t play any of them.

So you think if Chris Roberts (not Reobertson…) name wasn’t on this thing it would have been successful at all? There are a LOT of well off video gamers that cut their teeth on Wing Commander and kind of worship the guy (even after that horrid Movie he got talked into). I loved the series, but I’m not giving the guy $100 up front….

That’s odd…didn’t GW1 ANet have some of the most loyal fans in the industry?

Nerelith.7360:

Vayne.8563:

sorudo.9054:

i snip the rest because i am tired on explaining the same thing over and over and not getting trough, changing the subject to benefit your own argument is a sign i can’t argue with you.
however, i think i owe a simple explanation on what the problem is with engi’s.

That we cant use and swap all weapons at once hinders freedom too. That we cannot access all utility skills at the same time is also a disadvantage but they’re disadvantages that make sense. Why is it okey for ele to have no ability to swap but not okey for engineer? doesnt the same argument apply to both? The real only difference between Ele and Engineer is essentially if you choose kits the utility skill you’ll have access to are chosen for you. As a plus though even if you choose a regular utility you’ll get access to an extra skill.

an elementalist uses the F keys to switch elements, this means it has a weapon swap.
the engineer uses a skill to get the same, however, it doesn’t give you 4 skill sets and uses a skill slot to use.
so to put it simple, the the engineer needs to sacrifice a skill slot to get weapon swap, the engineer doesn’t and get 2X more sets.
THAT is the issue i am faced with, THAT’S the the flaw in the engineer.
if, like i already stated, the kits can be slotted in the F keys the problem would be solved.
as long as that isn’t done an engineer needs weapon swap, it’s only fair.

In anycase should every class work exactly the same and offer the same exact benefits and costs? I Feel it makes the game a lot more interesting when each class has its own way to do things. Its impossible for every class to make everyone happy even if they’re exact copies of each other mechanic wise. Just like you might skip a class cause it doesnt fit your play style whats wrong with skipping a class because you dont like its mechanics?

so because a profession or two is made wrong i have to be ok with it, i am so glad you’re not a game dev.
beside, you’re taking this argument way out of proportion, not even relevant to the subject.

But the engineer has no cooldown on swaps, where as the elementalist has a cooldown on attunements.

In my opinion, the lack of cooldowns is not really a game changer. I rather have the 4 attunements, because you can put " on swap" sigils on an elementalist weapon, and NOT have to “waste” a utility slot to get the weapon swap.

Engineer is lackluster, and needs to be revamped.

EXACTLY my point, a slot wasted is more a problem then a small cooldown with 4 escape options.

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.

Toucher rangers! Got I hated them in AB’s. I did like the additions of PVE skills. I used some on my warrior to add blinding I the build. I never bothered with GWPvX build guides. I much proffered to find my own way. I did love how much pain my RoJ cryer monk could do. And my warrior before the Ursan nerf.

I do wish I could change my weapon skills in GW2. It would be nice to use more than 2 weapon skills when I’m using my GS in a dungeon.

BrotherBelial.3094:

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.

Toucher rangers! Got I hated them in AB’s. I did like the additions of PVE skills. I used some on my warrior to add blinding I the build. I never bothered with GWPvX build guides. I much proffered to find my own way. I did love how much pain my RoJ cryer monk could do. And my warrior before the Ursan nerf.

I do wish I could change my weapon skills in GW2. It would be nice to use more than 2 weapon skills when I’m using my GS in a dungeon.

My favorite was using a R/P BM build in RA. Players would see me with a spear and shield and think they could ignore my wolf until he two-shot them, lol.

Vayne.8563:

If EVERYONE stops buying games then the industry will be forced to improve.

Um, no.

If everyone stops buying games then the businesses in that industry die. For evidence just look at any industry where sales tanked and whole businesses were wiped out. In fact there was a time that the home electronic game industry almost went away due to glut and greed and that people just stopped buying games. True they were terrible games but the fact is that the consumer almost cashiered an entire industry. That didn’t do anything to improve the games, improved tech did. In the current age all it’ll do is ensure that investors will steer clear of the high detailed or cutting edge games and go for the low hanging fruit, FarmVille 14 anyone?

Now I’m not saying we should spend spend spend and blindly keep Anet in business without regard to the current conditions of the game (though I disagree that it’s that bad). But I think they are hearing us to a degree and change is coming. Whether or not you will be happy about it, is a separate subject. Either way I feel that engaging in these discussions is good and LS2 is some proof that at least some complaints have been heard.

Peace.

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Well…to be fair it technically is an MMORPG, it’s a persistent ‘verse. But that’s neither here nor there.

I’d say the way to get us REALLY good games, is rather to convince the average Joe to start buying great games. The trick is to prove you have a great game for ’em.

It’s not an RPG it’s a space flight sim with some RPG elements. No one is doing it. The guy is absolutely famous because of previous games he’s designed for Origin. It’s like saying Learner and Lowe could get someone to invest in their musical. Hardly a standard situation.

It’s still an mmorpg, you’re playing a role in a persistent world. The space sim part is simply the platform its presented on.

At any rate, you’re missing the point. By accepting a “least common denominator” mentality for these games you’re indirectly supporting shallow development. Like I said, if you don’t want to support that kind of mentality, don’t play them anymore.

Only works if the bulk of people do the same thing, that’s my point.

Ummm…what? So W3 and sPvP in GW2 don’t count since they have low populations? I have no idea what you mean here.

If I don’t play any games and only wait for the one super uber best game ever to come out, I’ll not have any games.

Correct. And the gaming community would force studios to make better games because of it.

Ummm no, you’re not following me. If I stop buying games, on my own, then nothing will happen. If EVERYONE stops buying games then the industry will be forced to improve. The problem is, everyone isn’t going to stop buying games and most companies can get along nicely without me. So I get no games at all, and everything stays the same…except that I won’t be playing anything.

It’s called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It’s a bad move, unless you can get enough numbers boycotting to make a dent in profits.

…said no protest movement ever.

Protest movements usually stand for something substantial. LIke you know, freeing people from bondage, or saving the Earth from global warming. And many of those protest movements aren’t successful if you haven’t noticed. But they’re worth fighting for for years if you believe in them. It might take 20 years before the industry even feels a boycott. I could be long dead by then. This is just a bad analogy.

You’re equating the life and death struggles of people in the world to someone making games you like.

Obsidian.1328:

Brother Grimm.5176:

Obsidian.1328:

It doesn’t have to be that way. I mean look at Star Citizen. Robertson’s initial goal was what, 500k in crowdfunding? It’s now at about 50 million. And space sims aren’t exactly mainstream.

All I’m saying is there are ways around the “meta” for bankrolling these games. I have no idea if SC will be any good, but the amount of people willing to throw money at a game that doesn’t(seem to) cater to greedy investors should tell you something.

There’s always a choice, even if that choice is don’t play any of them.

So you think if Chris Roberts (not Reobertson…) name wasn’t on this thing it would have been successful at all? There are a LOT of well off video gamers that cut their teeth on Wing Commander and kind of worship the guy (even after that horrid Movie he got talked into). I loved the series, but I’m not giving the guy $100 up front….

That’s odd…didn’t GW1 ANet have some of the most loyal fans in the industry?

Not in the same numbers over the same amount of time. Guild Wars 1 was a niche game. You know that 7 million sales it wracked up. That was 7 million sales among all titles. My wife and I have five accounts between us. Many people had more by themselves. But we had five accounts of four games. So two of us has 20 of those sales.

Guild Wars 1 was popular, but you can’t compare it to the Wing Commander series.

Edit: Last time I checked there was never a Guild Wars movie.

Obsidian.1328:

Brother Grimm.5176:

Obsidian.1328:

It doesn’t have to be that way. I mean look at Star Citizen. Robertson’s initial goal was what, 500k in crowdfunding? It’s now at about 50 million. And space sims aren’t exactly mainstream.

All I’m saying is there are ways around the “meta” for bankrolling these games. I have no idea if SC will be any good, but the amount of people willing to throw money at a game that doesn’t(seem to) cater to greedy investors should tell you something.

There’s always a choice, even if that choice is don’t play any of them.

So you think if Chris Roberts (not Reobertson…) name wasn’t on this thing it would have been successful at all? There are a LOT of well off video gamers that cut their teeth on Wing Commander and kind of worship the guy (even after that horrid Movie he got talked into). I loved the series, but I’m not giving the guy $100 up front….

That’s odd…didn’t GW1 ANet have some of the most loyal fans in the industry?

The Arenanet that launched Guild Wars had the most loyal fans in the Industry and it was well earned loyalty.

This Anet? Not sure it’s the same as they old Anet. If the old Anet ran Guild wars the way that this one runs gw2, it would not have earned the loyalty it did.

Vayne.8563:

Just like in Guild Wars 1 when you saw a W/Mo and you thought, great, here’s another one. They ended up with a bad bad reputation.

Heh. This brings back memories on my Monk.

“Warrior, please stop using Healing Signet when you’re under direct attack. You just die faster. … NO, DON’T USE FRENZY WHILE YOU’RE HEAL SIGGING! -_-”

I didn’t read through many of the replies, just the first few so excuse me if I am echoing someone. This is one major thing I miss about GW1; the ability to make hundreds (probably even thousands) of different builds. Sure, many won’t be as efficient but part of the fun for me was figuring out what did and what did not work.

GW2 has one build that nearly everyone seems to care about. Berserker this, berserker that! There are several different builds set ups still out there that I’m sure the game intended us to use. I’ve tried berserker and yes, it is efficient, but personally, I only find it efficient if the entire party has berserker on. If a group has players that are not using it, the people using the berserker builds then turn out to be the hindrance of the team since they cannot stay alive. I don’t want this to turn into a berserker discussion thread as I am sure there are tons out there.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I hope creating builds becomes more elaborate in the future. I also hope that in doing so, it will make people less one-dimensional with berserker builds and can explore with new builds and set-ups. Heck, nerf the hell out of berserker builds so people can then explore all of the different set-ups this game currently has to offer. You’d be surprised what you can find!

weskay.9217:

I didn’t read through many of the replies, just the first few so excuse me if I am echoing someone. This is one major thing I miss about GW1; the ability to make hundreds (probably even thousands) of different builds. Sure, many won’t be as efficient but part of the fun for me was figuring out what did and what did not work.

GW2 has one build that nearly everyone seems to care about. Berserker this, berserker that! There are several different builds set ups still out there that I’m sure the game intended us to use. I’ve tried berserker and yes, it is efficient, but personally, I only find it efficient if the entire party has berserker on. If a group has players that are not using it, the people using the berserker builds then turn out to be the hindrance of the team since they cannot stay alive. I don’t want this to turn into a berserker discussion thread as I am sure there are tons out there.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I hope creating builds becomes more elaborate in the future. I also hope that in doing so, it will make people less one-dimensional with berserker builds and can explore with new builds and set-ups. Heck, nerf the hell out of berserker builds so people can then explore all of the different set-ups this game currently has to offer. You’d be surprised what you can find!

I don’t berserker isn’t really a build per se. It’s stats on armor and weapons. Your build has as much to do with skill and trait selection as just armor. Also you can mix and match a bit, because carrying around multiple sets of armor gets tiresome.

So you can have a relatively balanced build that’s say mostly zerker, throw a couple of other things in for good measure, and just have fun.

But for one of my guardians (yes I have two), I put him in celestial gear which gives you all stats, so I can just play with whatever build I feel like on him. Yes he runs dungeons with my guild and we do just fine.

Nerf berserker builds? Sorry, did we just spent hundreds of gold and hours grinding multiple ascended armour and weapon sets for nothing? Why should we have our gear stat combination nerfed just so we can move to the second highest DPS option just so everyone can then move on to complaining about that instead?

Vayne.8563:

Ummm no, you’re not following me. If I stop buying games, on my own, then nothing will happen. If EVERYONE stops buying games then the industry will be forced to improve. The problem is, everyone isn’t going to stop buying games and most companies can get along nicely without me. So I get no games at all, and everything stays the same…except that I won’t be playing anything.

It’s called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It’s a bad move, unless you can get enough numbers boycotting to make a dent in profits.

‘Be the change you want to see.’ Unless you don’t really wanna see one, that is.

maha.7902:

Nerf berserker builds? Sorry, did we just spent hundreds of gold and hours grinding multiple ascended armour and weapon sets for nothing? Why should we have our gear stat combination nerfed just so we can move to the second highest DPS option just so everyone can then move on to complaining about that instead?

Well, tough luck that your build is largely affected by/reliant on your gear. Blame Anet for going with the generic mmo approach to handling the gear/build relation instead of sticking to their original (and brilliant) design.

It’s not reliant on the gear at all, the gear just amplifies the effect of the bonuses that dps builds offer. This is why if berserker gear was to be nerfed to the point that it was actually bad, we would just use what was now the new highest dps gear. Nerfing berserker would literally solve nothing. Then again, ‘solve’ implies there was a problem in the first place.

Well that’s the thing – that amplification is what prevents you from running multiple builds at a time, let alone experiment, because you need the right gear for it to see its full potential (and that literally means multiple sets of ascended in pve), which is more often than not an effort in boredom and annoyance, unless you’re into gem buying.

At least you’re able to skip that part in pvp, but unfortunately the pvp experience is equally lacklustre because GW2 build experimenting gets old rather fast (especially if you’re rolling solo), and sooner and later you will realize it just isn’t worth the trouble outside random messing around or playing with friends.

maha.7902:

It’s not reliant on the gear at all, the gear just amplifies the effect of the bonuses that dps builds offer. This is why if berserker gear was to be nerfed to the point that it was actually bad, we would just use what was now the new highest dps gear. Nerfing berserker would literally solve nothing. Then again, ‘solve’ implies there was a problem in the first place.

There is a problem. A game that lacks build diversity lacks replay value. Guild Wars had build diversity as a core part of the gaming experience, which is why it is still around 8 years later.

If Anet doesn’t inject real build diversity it is basically shooting itself in the foot.

I agree nerfing Berserker gear is not the answer. The answer is to boost the other parts of the game so that they are as effective.

This game needs to Look at the other 2 legs of it’s Trinity stool which are out of balance because they are weaker.

Support, and Control.

I know. This game isn’t supposed to have a trinity? I beg to differ, look up the youtube. " WTF No trinity" And you will see this game is supposed to have a trinity.

But when damage suffices… why bother with anything else? If damage suffices, the game is one dimensional at best.

KarlaGrey.5903:

Well that’s the thing – that amplification is what prevents you from running multiple builds at a time, let alone experiment, because you need the right gear for it to see its full potential (and that literally means multiple sets of ascended in pve), which is more often than not an effort in boredom and annoyance, unless you’re into gem buying.

At least you’re able to skip that part in pvp, but unfortunately the pvp experience is equally lacklustre because GW2 build experimenting gets old rather fast (especially if you’re rolling solo), and sooner and later you will realize it just isn’t worth the trouble outside random messing around or playing with friends.

It doesn’t prevent it at all. You can pick up exotic gear cheaply, and it’s exactly what I did for builds I wanted to experiment with – and then when I felt they were worth it, it was then that I started grinding ascended. I’m still not seeing what makes nerfing berserker okay here though, the only reasoning I’ve ever gathered on this forum is that people want it nerfed purely out of malice.

I didn’t say anything should be nerfed, I just pointed out a (imo) bad design, because it (greatly) restricts play and building freedom.

Nerelith summed up nicely what the bigger underlying issue is, however I also believe having a strong connection between gear and stats is fatal for genuine freedom of building your character, especially when there is also a gear threadmill, which makes things even worse.

Nerelith.7360:

maha.7902:

It’s not reliant on the gear at all, the gear just amplifies the effect of the bonuses that dps builds offer. This is why if berserker gear was to be nerfed to the point that it was actually bad, we would just use what was now the new highest dps gear. Nerfing berserker would literally solve nothing. Then again, ‘solve’ implies there was a problem in the first place.

There is a problem. A game that lacks build diversity lacks replay value. Guild Wars had build diversity as a core part of the gaming experience, which is why it is still around 8 years later.

If Anet doesn’t inject real build diversity it is basically shooting itself in the foot.

I agree nerfing Berserker gear is not the answer. The answer is to boost the other parts of the game so that they are as effective.

This game needs to Look at the other 2 legs of it’s Trinity stool which are out of balance because they are weaker.

Support, and Control.

I know. This game isn’t supposed to have a trinity? I beg to differ, look up the youtube. " WTF No trinity" And you will see this game is supposed to have a trinity.

But when damage suffices… why bother with anything else? If damage suffices, the game is one dimensional at best.

There is trait diversity. And there is no requirement to use certain gear stat combination. Therefore, build diversity exists in this game. You see people using a stat combination an shout no diversity. I look at their trait differences, sigil choices, rune choices, weapon choices and I see lots of variety. As a warrior I pve the only weapon I have never found a use for is rifle. Everything else is optimal somehow, somewhere. Other gear stats do not need or deserve to be boosted because they lack the same risk/reward that berserker has. Why should someone running PVT be on par with someone running berserker? Support I’d absolutely not imbalanced, it is crucial to parties who want to complete content in decent time, and control already has uses in this game – anet just need to make bosses more threatening. Give them a dangerous choreographed attack which you can interrupt for every boss fight and you would literally see control being used in every fight – it’s just bosses aren’t threatening enough to make it worthwhile. Phone autocorrect is messing up a few words, sorry.

The thread is about build diversity with skills, not Zerks. Calm down.

But whatever. Bosses in GW did have big, choreographed, dangerous skills. And we had a lot of options to shut them down, punish, interrupt each type, because of skill diversity.

Meaning it wasn’t dependent on armor, runes or a nonexistent trait Tree. When I ABSOLUTELY needed to interrupt, I took the skills to do so. I didn’t buy a new set of armor or build a new weapons set. When I needed to DPS, I loaded those skills. Or a mixture of skills. Or changed 2nd prof. Sometimes one key skill made a huge difference.

There is some of that in GW2, but honestly, it’s a pretty narrow game.

Builds are nothing to do with it. Take the berserker abomination in arah p2 as a benchmark, it has an enrage skill which you can interrupt and put on a minute cooldown if you time the interrupt properly, and then in between that and it’s second enrage you can shave defiant to get ready for the next interrupt. Apply this kind of important to interrupt kind of attack on a long-ish cooldown to more bosses and you’ll see a lot of control being used – and best of all, using CC is completely independent of your build. The trouble with GW2 currently is that bosses mostly hit like a wet noodle.

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Well…to be fair it technically is an MMORPG, it’s a persistent ‘verse. But that’s neither here nor there.

I’d say the way to get us REALLY good games, is rather to convince the average Joe to start buying great games. The trick is to prove you have a great game for ’em.

It’s not an RPG it’s a space flight sim with some RPG elements. No one is doing it. The guy is absolutely famous because of previous games he’s designed for Origin. It’s like saying Learner and Lowe could get someone to invest in their musical. Hardly a standard situation.

It’s still an mmorpg, you’re playing a role in a persistent world. The space sim part is simply the platform its presented on.

At any rate, you’re missing the point. By accepting a “least common denominator” mentality for these games you’re indirectly supporting shallow development. Like I said, if you don’t want to support that kind of mentality, don’t play them anymore.

Only works if the bulk of people do the same thing, that’s my point.

Ummm…what? So W3 and sPvP in GW2 don’t count since they have low populations? I have no idea what you mean here.

If I don’t play any games and only wait for the one super uber best game ever to come out, I’ll not have any games.

Correct. And the gaming community would force studios to make better games because of it.

Ummm no, you’re not following me. If I stop buying games, on my own, then nothing will happen. If EVERYONE stops buying games then the industry will be forced to improve. The problem is, everyone isn’t going to stop buying games and most companies can get along nicely without me. So I get no games at all, and everything stays the same…except that I won’t be playing anything.

It’s called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It’s a bad move, unless you can get enough numbers boycotting to make a dent in profits.

…said no protest movement ever.

Protest movements usually stand for something substantial. LIke you know, freeing people from bondage, or saving the Earth from global warming. And many of those protest movements aren’t successful if you haven’t noticed. But they’re worth fighting for for years if you believe in them. It might take 20 years before the industry even feels a boycott. I could be long dead by then. This is just a bad analogy.

You’re equating the life and death struggles of people in the world to someone making games you like.

Not really, remember the New Coke outrage? Thousands of /raging Americans ready to storm Coke HQ over a friggin’ soft drink. You don’t have to be saving the world to protest something, dude.

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Brother Grimm.5176:

Obsidian.1328:

It doesn’t have to be that way. I mean look at Star Citizen. Robertson’s initial goal was what, 500k in crowdfunding? It’s now at about 50 million. And space sims aren’t exactly mainstream.

All I’m saying is there are ways around the “meta” for bankrolling these games. I have no idea if SC will be any good, but the amount of people willing to throw money at a game that doesn’t(seem to) cater to greedy investors should tell you something.

There’s always a choice, even if that choice is don’t play any of them.

So you think if Chris Roberts (not Reobertson…) name wasn’t on this thing it would have been successful at all? There are a LOT of well off video gamers that cut their teeth on Wing Commander and kind of worship the guy (even after that horrid Movie he got talked into). I loved the series, but I’m not giving the guy $100 up front….

That’s odd…didn’t GW1 ANet have some of the most loyal fans in the industry?

Not in the same numbers over the same amount of time. Guild Wars 1 was a niche game. You know that 7 million sales it wracked up. That was 7 million sales among all titles. My wife and I have five accounts between us. Many people had more by themselves. But we had five accounts of four games. So two of us has 20 of those sales.

Guild Wars 1 was popular, but you can’t compare it to the Wing Commander series.

Edit: Last time I checked there was never a Guild Wars movie.

Brand loyalty doesn’t have anything to do with numbers. It was highly successful as a co-op rpg. Grimm was talking about putting faith in a developer based on player loyalty.

And there sure as heck ain’t gonna be a Guild Wars movie now, is there? I wonder why that is…

I think a big part of what made GW1 feel so diverse is that they let us create entire team compositions.

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Well…to be fair it technically is an MMORPG, it’s a persistent ‘verse. But that’s neither here nor there.

I’d say the way to get us REALLY good games, is rather to convince the average Joe to start buying great games. The trick is to prove you have a great game for ’em.

It’s not an RPG it’s a space flight sim with some RPG elements. No one is doing it. The guy is absolutely famous because of previous games he’s designed for Origin. It’s like saying Learner and Lowe could get someone to invest in their musical. Hardly a standard situation.

It’s still an mmorpg, you’re playing a role in a persistent world. The space sim part is simply the platform its presented on.

At any rate, you’re missing the point. By accepting a “least common denominator” mentality for these games you’re indirectly supporting shallow development. Like I said, if you don’t want to support that kind of mentality, don’t play them anymore.

Only works if the bulk of people do the same thing, that’s my point.

Ummm…what? So W3 and sPvP in GW2 don’t count since they have low populations? I have no idea what you mean here.

If I don’t play any games and only wait for the one super uber best game ever to come out, I’ll not have any games.

Correct. And the gaming community would force studios to make better games because of it.

Ummm no, you’re not following me. If I stop buying games, on my own, then nothing will happen. If EVERYONE stops buying games then the industry will be forced to improve. The problem is, everyone isn’t going to stop buying games and most companies can get along nicely without me. So I get no games at all, and everything stays the same…except that I won’t be playing anything.

It’s called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It’s a bad move, unless you can get enough numbers boycotting to make a dent in profits.

…said no protest movement ever.

Protest movements usually stand for something substantial. LIke you know, freeing people from bondage, or saving the Earth from global warming. And many of those protest movements aren’t successful if you haven’t noticed. But they’re worth fighting for for years if you believe in them. It might take 20 years before the industry even feels a boycott. I could be long dead by then. This is just a bad analogy.

You’re equating the life and death struggles of people in the world to someone making games you like.

Not really, remember the New Coke outrage? Thousands of /raging Americans ready to storm Coke HQ over a friggin’ soft drink. You don’t have to be saving the world to protest something, dude.

Not quite the same thing. There were millions and millions of coke drinkers who didn’t like the new product. But a drink isn’t an MMO. The fact is, people often doing think deeply about their entertainment experience. With Coke, you take a drink and either you like it or you don’t. It’s two options. On or off. It’s binary.

With a game, you like it, but you don’t like everything about it. Do you really think most people in the game even have a clue that a meta exists, or what a meta is? Do you think they really sit and ask questions about stacking or build diversity?

I’ll bet you they don’t. You’d need millions of people to all boycott games in general. It’s not going to happen. Even if 100,000 people boycott, it’s not going to stop people from doing what they’re doing.

Can you get more than that? I doubt it. To put this in perspective, TB talked about boycotting Mass Effect 3 and said he wasn’t going to buy it because of their marketing practices. I agreed with him and I didn’t buy it either.

According to Wikipedia, the game sold 1.5 million copies and grossed 200 million dollars. Do you think EA even noticed my not buying the game?

Hammerguard.9834:

I think a big part of what made GW1 feel so diverse is that they let us create entire team compositions.

This is something people tend to forget but the possibility of creating full on teams .. or ‘ways’ as they were called. Creating a full heroway from scratch to complete a very particular task in a certain area was a ton of fun and it required you to specialize heavily to accomplish it. I never feel like I have to do that in gw2, if its not in a instance it can be zerged and if its in an instance it is normally so simplified that any of my characters can do it with their standard composition anyway.

I don’t think GW1 had more build diversity – at least not in the metagame scheme of things. The primary difference is that it had the trinity – which basically created 2 more roles and thus tripled the size of the metagame. Take the GW1 metagame and then remove everything that isn’t even remotely part of the GW2 vision and you have about the same size of build diversity.

You don’t have SoLS healers, UA/HB monks, Panic mesmers, Imbagons, ST rits, T1/2/3, MoP etc. These are roles that don’t work within the GW2 game.

And that list isn’t all-inclusive.

Agree with the OP. GW2’s combat and skill system is vastly shallower then GW1 ever was. It doesn’t have the depth or mechanics, or even the multiplayer of the original.

The biggest difference is that GW1’s skill system was built like a puzzle, each piece building on top of each other to create a single unified whole. And the effectiveness depended upon you skill and experience of the game, not equipment or level.

But that doesn’t happen here. Most of your skills are chosen for you, and even the few in which you do pick don’t combine together to do anything more then their base effect. In fact, the significant majority of skills are not designed to build on top of each other in any way. They just go off and do their little thing and that’s about it, spam spam spam.

Traits are no different. While a few do give you new options, most simply enhance what your already doing, but don’t fundamentally change your skills or how you use them.

So despite having more skills on your skill bar, your doing much much less with them.

Vayne.8563:

Obsidian.1328:

Not really, remember the New Coke outrage? Thousands of /raging Americans ready to storm Coke HQ over a friggin’ soft drink. You don’t have to be saving the world to protest something, dude.

Not quite the same thing. There were millions and millions of coke drinkers who didn’t like the new product. But a drink isn’t an MMO. The fact is, people often doing think deeply about their entertainment experience. With Coke, you take a drink and either you like it or you don’t. It’s two options. On or off. It’s binary.

No one anywhere kind of likes Coke?

With a game, you like it, but you don’t like everything about it. Do you really think most people in the game even have a clue that a meta exists, or what a meta is? Do you think they really sit and ask questions about stacking or build diversity?

Absolutely.

I’ll bet you they don’t. You’d need millions of people to all boycott games in general. It’s not going to happen. Even if 100,000 people boycott, it’s not going to stop people from doing what they’re doing.

So…because it’s hard you shouldn’t try?

Can you get more than that? I doubt it. To put this in perspective, TB talked about boycotting Mass Effect 3 and said he wasn’t going to buy it because of their marketing practices. I agreed with him and I didn’t buy it either.

According to Wikipedia, the game sold 1.5 million copies and grossed 200 million dollars. Do you think EA even noticed my not buying the game?

At least you had a clear conscience.

hannah mee.7925:

Take the GW1 metagame and then remove everything that isn’t even remotely part of the GW2 vision and you have about the same size of build diversity.

So your Position is…. “Take Guild Wars and it’s awesome build diversity, remove all the skills, so that it is the same as Gw2 ,… and it will be the same as Gw2 in terms of build diversity” ??

Umm that is called the Mathematical law of identity.

A = A

Obviously, if you remove all parts of Guild Wars that are not in Gw2 it will be equally diverse.

No one is arguing that if you remove all that extra build diversity that Guild Wars has…that it will no longer be more diverse than Gw2.

We are saying that if you leave both games as is…. Guild Wars has more build diversity.

I THINK what he was trying to get at is that if you compared the “meta” that the community demanded, that GW1’s added diversity really only came through by having healer and tank roles.

IF that’s what he was trying to say, I don’t entirely agree. There WAS more viable builds in GW1, even if you wanted to compare solely DPS meta. Not THAT many more (you’re probably talking 3 or 4 per class in GW1 as opposed to 1 or 2 in GW2), but there was more.

But at the same time, it does seem like a few people in this thread are comparing ALL the potential builds you COULD roll with in GW1 (no matter how ineffective they might be), and comparing them solely to the accepted meta in GW2 (ignoring that you could run several less effective builds and gear if you wanted to in this game as well).

That seems a little bit of apples to oranges, but it really doesn’t change the overall point. There WAS more diversity in GW1… the argument seems to focus on a matter of degree.

I don’t see how anyone can say that there weren’t more viable builds in Guild Wars 1. It wasn’t called Build Wars for nothing. But that was like the entire game. Builds were it. If you didn’t like builds you were pretty much screwed. Without liking builds it would have been a lot harder for that game to hold your interest for a couple of years. The builds made the game.

The question in my mind is is that amount of build variety good or bad. If you liked builds, obviously it’s a good thing. I liked them which is why I played for so long.

But there are many downsides to that too. Take away the builds from Guild Wars 1 and what do you have? I play Guild Wars 2 worrying a whole lot less about builds and it gives me a freedom I like. It’s a different kind of game.

Having that kind of build variety here would kill a lot of the freedom. It certainly did in Guild Wars 1.

Vayne.8563:

Take away the builds from Guild Wars 1 and what do you have? I play Guild Wars 2 worrying a whole lot less about builds and it gives me a freedom I like. It’s a different kind of game.

Having that kind of build variety here would kill a lot of the freedom. It certainly did in Guild Wars 1.

lulwut? GW2 is just as much about builds as GW1. No one wins spvp tournaments by slap dashing together random traits and utilities. They win by using very specific combos. The same goes for pve speedclears and wvw zerg fights. You think anyone is going to win with a team of zerker axe rangers in spvp or a wvw zerg that doesn’t use a hammer train?

Even UW/FoE could be beaten with random pug builds if you didn’t care about clearing it any time soon or with DP under 45%. The only stuff in GW1 that absolutely needed specific builds/team comp to do is DoA and GvG/HoH.

The only difference in the two is GW1 was about giving people tons of ways (but only couple good ones) to play 1-2 roles per class where GW2 gives you the option of playing virtually every possible role per class but only 1-2 ways to maximize that classes ability.

They both give the illusion of choice but revolve around a small pool of “correct” choices.