Guild Wars 2

Here’s a review written by forbes.

I like to think of forbes as a reputable source. Much of what’s written there is reasonable and it resonates with me as what I see to be problems with GW2. Whilst GW2 isn’t a horrible game, the truth of things is is that it’s no better of a game than WoW, and it’s not that dissimilar either. What dissimilarity does arise from it is muchly an illusion.

That’s the problem with GW2 for me. And what I’m finding is that with the inclusion of tiered gear, GW2 has moved just that final step toward being a WoW clone. A WoW also-ran. That’s how I feel about it. But don’t just reply to this. Read the article and see whether it resonates with you and helps to illustrate my feelings at all.

One of the important quotes was this one:

While described as “action combat” it nevertheless isn’t really reliant on any player skills so much as it is on damage-per-second and your level.

And that’s completely true. The thing is is that with Ascended gear, GW2 is even more relying on stats over skill, to the point where the game is just playing itself. It’s just numbers vs. numbers, and that’s the biggest letdown at all. There are no shows of skill to be found anywhere in GW2 other than perhaps in sPvP. But everywhere else? None.

Compared to other games I’ve played, like ME3’s multi-player, where things like skill, the ability of players to co-operate with each other, and tactics can be shown, and at higher difficulties are even required… I just find GW2 to be a flop in comparison. I was expecting something more like ME3, but the notion of skill involved is an illusion. Only numbers matter.

The reviewer goes on to point out that barrel rolling is too clunky to be useful due to the nature of the combat, which I agree with, too. Combat is too slow, and the barrel roll is just unhelpful. If characters simply moved faster, such long and elaborate rolls wouldn’t be necessary. Again, to see how you do this right, you need only look at the speed of movement and dodging in ME3, which is organic and intuitive by comparison. In ME3 you can quickly dodge back out of range of foes as is needed.

It touches upon other things, too, including the similarity of both renown and dynamic events to the fetch quests of yore, and that the illusion of variety (simple reskins of skills/objects) quickly dies off, leaving only repetition. It’s just the same skills over and over with slightly different animations and button pictures. And combat skills have the same problem, too. Too few combat skills which are all very similar, no true variety on offer. And I like his point about being able to acquire new weapon skills as time goes on too as a form of sidegrade-based horizontal progression, so you can mix & match what works for you, similar to GW1.

All in all I find that this review is quite intriguing and it really hits the mark on a number of things. Again, GW2 isn’t a horrible game. This review says that, too. It’s just that GW2 is basically WoW in far, far too many ways. And I don’t want WoW, neither does the reviewer. We’re both waiting for that MMO that will truly break the mold, rather than creating a grand illusion of doing so with PR speak.

So… does this review resonate with you?

Erik Kain, Contributor

In other words he is not a Frobes employee, just a random nobody giving his opinion.

Cyberg.5064:

Erik Kain, Contributor

In other words he is not a Frobes employee, just a random nobody giving his opinion.

Which forbes thought was quality enough to publish under their name. So I’m not sure that I understand the point you think you have.

Besides, I’m asking people whether they think this review resonates with them. Not what irrelevant details they’re able to spot.

Perhaps this game will develop into that “mold-breaker” or it may be the catalyst for a developer to take the genre to the next level. Both basically embrace my hope that we are not far from something revolutionary and exciting. Now I will read the review. Sorry if I strayed from the point.

He has a series of fun reviews. If you read his reviews after those, you’ll see that the game eventually wins him over.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/10/10/guild-wars-2-review-how-i-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to-love-the-mmo/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/10/03/guild-wars-2-vs-mists-of-pandaria/

Some of his later reviews.

Not really. (Note: this is a pretty old article)

I have my grievances with ArenaNet, and I already have them aired in their respective sections. This contributor’s opinion is not really one I agree with on the whole, though.

The progression in this game is actually one that suits me, a mix between horizontal and vertical. Perhaps I’m just one of those that enjoys both.

Too little vertical, all horizontal, and I quickly tire of the game as just a costume contest and virtual chat-room.
Too little horizontal, all vertical (essentially WoW), and the game becomes a job.

Nothing is ever perfect, but the current balance is at least done well. Nothing about it feels like WoW, where a casual player could essentially never reach end-game content. I have friends that are definitely occasional players, and we’ve run level 80 content together. That alone creates a difference to me.

The things I do like and agree with:

The skills system in this game, especially after GW1, was something of a letdown for me. I admit I expected more variety, and the option to unlock more weapon skills as you progress in the game would’ve been fantastic. Having it be tied to how experienced you are with a weapon (the game already does track how many kills you have with each weapon) would’ve streamlined the system, and allowing the variety of weapon skills increases the variety of things each weapon can do. This I can get on board with.

The overall conclusion of the article is correct: right now, Guild Wars 2 is not revolutionary in any way, shape, or form. To me, it is just a very well made MMORPG. A lot of the systems could use refining, and I have a particular amount of distaste for how buggy and clunky many parts of the game feel. Dynamic Events are often down for weeks, or more. Recently, my server had what equated to the entire cursed shore bugged (Grenth, Plinx, Melandru) at once, and was left in that state for many days. Translated to a more general gripe, much of what is supposed to make this game unique is only partially functional.

I still have some degree of faith that these are resolvable issues. I certainly am impressed with how effective some of ArenaNet’s changes have been. This is the first MMORPG that has been able to nearly eradicate all botting (save for the sneakiest ones). By contrast, WoW had masses of them running rampant, in the open, for years on end. There’s also a very impressive stream of content release (though not without bugs yet again). I’m still having fun, as Fractals is one of my favorite instances in any game i’ve ever played.

I’m cautiously optimistic.

The writer is constantly comparing chalk and cheese. GW2 is superficially similar at first glance to ME3 but that’s where it ends. For example ME3’s roll mechanic is typically for getting back behind cover quickly; where you’ll then adopt a chest-high-wall hugging combat strategy similar to gears of war.

GW2 has no chest high walls, and dodging serves as an attack evasion skill – dodge rolls seem slow, because during the entire roll you are invincible, and therefore slow is good it makes it easier to dodge the attack.

ME3’s combo system is superficially similar to GW2’s, the effect is just less dramatic (ie. leaping into someone’s fire field to yields a flame aura, Vs throwing a warp bolt into a biotic pull yields a screen shaking explosion of blue energy).

Standing still chugging numbers like a standard MMO will get you killed every time so I don’t see what he’s getting at shrug – not much resonance with me I’m afraid.

AuldWolf.7598:

Cyberg.5064:

Erik Kain, Contributor

In other words he is not a Frobes employee, just a random nobody giving his opinion.

Which forbes thought was quality enough to publish under their name. So I’m not sure that I understand the point you think you have.

Besides, I’m asking people whether they think this review resonates with them. Not what irrelevant details they’re able to spot.

I know what you’re saying, but, he’s right. The guy is a nobody giving his opinion. Forbes may have thought it was “quality” work, but, considering most of them have not even SEEN, let alone PLAYED, the game, they’re just taking his word for it.

AuldWolf.7598:

Here’s a review written by forbes.

I like to think of forbes as a reputable source. Much of what’s written there is reasonable and it resonates with me as what I see to be problems with GW2. Whilst GW2 isn’t a horrible game, the truth of things is is that it’s no better of a game than WoW, and it’s not that dissimilar either. What dissimilarity does arise from it is muchly an illusion.

That’s the problem with GW2 for me. And what I’m finding is that with the inclusion of tiered gear, GW2 has moved just that final step toward being a WoW clone. A WoW also-ran. That’s how I feel about it. But don’t just reply to this. Read the article and see whether it resonates with you and helps to illustrate my feelings at all.

One of the important quotes was this one:

While described as “action combat” it nevertheless isn’t really reliant on any player skills so much as it is on damage-per-second and your level.

And that’s completely true. The thing is is that with Ascended gear, GW2 is even more relying on stats over skill, to the point where the game is just playing itself. It’s just numbers vs. numbers, and that’s the biggest letdown at all. There are no shows of skill to be found anywhere in GW2 other than perhaps in sPvP. But everywhere else? None.

Compared to other games I’ve played, like ME3’s multi-player, where things like skill, the ability of players to co-operate with each other, and tactics can be shown, and at higher difficulties are even required… I just find GW2 to be a flop in comparison. I was expecting something more like ME3, but the notion of skill involved is an illusion. Only numbers matter.

The reviewer goes on to point out that barrel rolling is too clunky to be useful due to the nature of the combat, which I agree with, too. Combat is too slow, and the barrel roll is just unhelpful. If characters simply moved faster, such long and elaborate rolls wouldn’t be necessary. Again, to see how you do this right, you need only look at the speed of movement and dodging in ME3, which is organic and intuitive by comparison. In ME3 you can quickly dodge back out of range of foes as is needed.

It touches upon other things, too, including the similarity of both renown and dynamic events to the fetch quests of yore, and that the illusion of variety (simple reskins of skills/objects) quickly dies off, leaving only repetition. It’s just the same skills over and over with slightly different animations and button pictures. And combat skills have the same problem, too. Too few combat skills which are all very similar, no true variety on offer. And I like his point about being able to acquire new weapon skills as time goes on too as a form of sidegrade-based horizontal progression, so you can mix & match what works for you, similar to GW1.

All in all I find that this review is quite intriguing and it really hits the mark on a number of things. Again, GW2 isn’t a horrible game. This review says that, too. It’s just that GW2 is basically WoW in far, far too many ways. And I don’t want WoW, neither does the reviewer. We’re both waiting for that MMO that will truly break the mold, rather than creating a grand illusion of doing so with PR speak.

So… does this review resonate with you?

no the review doesnt resonate with me. Neither does the same bland material rehashed a million ways on this forum. GW2 is not an action game, its an RPG game with action dodging..you can move out of the way of most attacks if you keep moving and learn to position yourself away from the area of effect of an enemy’s attack. Enemy attacks have a certain shape to them..if you learn the shape you can move out of the way if you are quick enough..if you are trying to get that last bit of dps in though you’re going to get squashed..besides many classes have evades and movement built in to their attacks when used properly. Its not Assass Creed 3 plus RPG though..it never will be, too many abstract elements in place imo.

It’s interesting to read his first review of the game, and later compare it with his next ones. It’s more or less the following:

1) “Guild Wars 2 is trying to do what the other MMOs do and fails at that, plus it does some other weird stuff”.

2) “Ok, Guild Wars 2 was not trying to do what the other MMOs were doing. Those other weird stuff are actually the core of the game, and they’re rather nice”.

3) “I’m sold, GW2 is better than Mists of Pandaria”.

Nice change in opinion, but I think it highlights how a big issue with GW2 are actually players of other MMOs who join the game looking for more of the same, instead of being open for something new.

It doesn’t, because with experience, the reviewer has changed his opinion.

And…not to go off topic, but for all the supposed fluidity of ME3’s combat, it’s hampered by the incredibly obnoxious all-in-wonder button syndrome that they refuse to split into separate bindable functions for the PC version. I absolutely LOVE herpa-derping around in and out of cover when trying to revive a teammate, or stopping to revive a teammate when it’s currently suicidal when I’m actually trying to sprint AWAY and get into a better position because one button does all of those things.

It’s funny that you bring up ME3 multiplayer as well, because the weapon leveling system/RNG packs in general in that game was atrocious, and remained that way for months before they took measures to correct it.

Even then, power creep was all over the place in that game when they released the first DLC. Geth Infiltrators basically outperformed everyone in damage with the combination of Tactical Cloak’s damage boost, Hunter Mode, and their absurd heavy melee, allowing them destroy entire groups of enemies before they could even retaliate or even perform actions, and heavier targets didn’t last much longer than that. Then, they could also shoot proximity mines for crowd control and further damage boosts AND use any weapon they wanted with no repercussions. THAT also took months of balancing to bring into line, mostly revolving around buffing virtually every other race/class combination in the game.

SMGs were completely useless aside from extremely specific builds, and assault rifles weren’t much better besides a few specific ones, mostly the Falcon and Mattock because they had unique properties that the other ARs didn’t, and pretty much every single weapon besides Widow/Black Widow and the Carnifex went through numerous incremental buffs before they were as good as they are now, and because of the power creep from their content updates, even those weapons have received buffs as well.

It’s taken almost a year for ME3’s multiplayer to get to the state it’s in now. GW2 is a much larger game and has been live less than 4 months.

I got annoyed with his constant harping on the voice acting, then later found out he played a Norn Warrior.
/facepalm

Congratulations on choosing the worst of all the storylines and indeed acting, from what I heard.
Should´ve chosen a Norn female, like everybody else.

As for his other gripes, they do have merit and it was indeed part of my quick disenchantment with the supposed “groundbreakingness” and this game´s hype.

But after the initial disappointment the game still grows on you. Mainly because of the Art and the hidden depths of the combat system. Mind you, not that deep.

Though I did read better reviews and even wrote one on par with this.
Forbes is going downhill fast, as all old media and their biased&controlled “reporting” should.
Good riddance.

AuldWolf.7598:

I like to think of forbes as a reputable source.

I like to think everyone as an holder of his own subjective opinion, and I also like to think any man that considers himself an intelligent individual doesn’t even pay attention to the source of an information but to its content.

There is no truth or fact to be found in that review, just the opinion of the reviewer, the exact opposite of which can be easily argued too.
That opinionated post of forbes isn’t worth more or less than any of the blog-esque reviews players post in this forum – it’s just another opinion that millions disagree with.

When Anet started to listen to these “reviews”, these complaints… they made Ascended tier.
Before, when they were listening to nobody they made a masterpiece that was widely voted 9 by every reviewer on the internet.

That is enough of an indicator for me that Anet should stop taking advices from reviewers and start listening to their loyal playerbase.

The first time I read that review I thought that it’s complete nonsense. The dude is not even complaining about Guild Wars 2 problems, he is complaining about MMOs in general. Liked AngryJoeReview so much more.

I’m going to trust and respect Forbes on the business articles, but when it comes to fields that they don’t know that much like gaming and movies – not so much.

The quote is horrible and just flat out incorrect.

While he does have a point like having to use skills to run faster while exploring being tedius and don’t mess with high level animals or they’ll bash your face in! (uhm why does a doe do so much more damage then a raptor?) This is a very old review.

Secondly, while the personal story isn’t extremely exciting, most of us didnt buy the game for that. so meh.

The grind thing, now that they manipulated the drop rates to make it impossible to get anything outside ofa dungeon is spot on. (before they disguised it well but now it’s just blatant and not fun at all)

If ever they figure out what they did or restore the original drop rates of armor rares globs and crafting mats, this game would be less of a pain. Can’t imagine why there’s a delay really.

He is essentially reviewing it as a person looking for a single player RPG. Guild Wars 2 is not a very good single player RPG. In the same vein, Halo and Super Smash Bros are also not very good single player RPGs. Guild Wars 2 is a great multiplayer RPG. Playing with friends is a blast, playing with strangers is fun too.

He even says that fans of MMORPGs will love Guild Wars 2, and that he doesn’t really like MMORPGs that much. In that regard, I would read his review as him giving the game a 8 or 9 out of 10.

RuneTalos.6938:

He is essentially reviewing it as a person looking for a single player RPG. Guild Wars 2 is not a very good single player RPG. In the same vein, Halo and Super Smash Bros are also not very good single player RPGs. Guild Wars 2 is a great multiplayer RPG. Playing with friends is a blast, playing with strangers is fun too.

He even says that fans of MMORPGs will love Guild Wars 2, and that he doesn’t really like MMORPGs that much. In that regard, I would read his review as him giving the game a 8 or 9 out of 10.

His later reviews drown the game in praise.

Firstly, it’s a reviewer from Forbes. They’re about as credible as the Onion for accurate news regarding video games.

Second, I tend to find that those who complain that combat is “purely a matter of stats” just suck at the combat. Because when I played with my friends, they would complain about how they struggle with mobs, and I would be downing 4-5 mobs at the same time in the exact same area. Or they’d be struggling with a Veteran mob, while I’m working with one other player to down a Champion mob. And there is very little difference between our gear. Chances are good that if you’re blaming stats for your struggles in combat, that you just suck at the combat and want a scapegoat. There are obvious imbalances, but almost every class has the potential to be quite lethal when used smartly. And dodge-rolls are EXTREMELY useful, if you say otherwise then you’ve been doing it wrong. Period.

Third, people very often complain about a game differentiating itself from other games in the genre. GW2 is trying to be different (with mixed success), so it doesn’t make sense to complain about why it’s not more like WoW. It’s not trying to be WoW.

And lastly, worth noting that the reviewer has since changed his mind and given the game a much more positive review. Not that this increases his credibility as a reviewer because he’s still reviewing a video game for Forbes (which is like me reviewing daily stock reports, entirely unreliable), but even he doesn’t agree with himself any more.

Angry Joe gets the reviewing right, pointing out some of my own frustrations with the game and highlighting all of the good things in a very good way.

Not much in the way of substance, and pretty much what you would expect from a non-gaming source. He doesn’t like the story, he likes character creation, he feels he moves too slowly. The review doesn’t really engage with significant issues positive or negative, and there are plenty of each. GW2 broke significant ground in addressing players playing with other players. Non-competitive quests and resource nodes (and others elements) are a huge contributor to creating a good in-game culture that sets it apart from WoW dramatically. While the differences appear small, the effect is dramatic. I would certainly have mentioned those aspects. He did get the title right and it’s appropriate that GW2 now gets the grindy tag. It’s the direction they have chosen to go and it begins the cultural shift to one more like WoW.

Forbes has actually had some very good video game-related articles. I thought their analyses of ME3’s endings and the surrounding controversy were extremely well done.

I’ve read this particular set of GW2 reviews before, and I found them interesting because the way he goes through the process of “Bzuh?” to “Hey, I like this” seems to be fairly common among people picking up GW2 for the first time. This is the core of it:

Erasculio.2914:

It’s interesting to read his first review of the game, and later compare it with his next ones. It’s more or less the following:

1) “Guild Wars 2 is trying to do what the other MMOs do and fails at that, plus it does some other weird stuff”.

2) “Ok, Guild Wars 2 was not trying to do what the other MMOs were doing. Those other weird stuff are actually the core of the game, and they’re rather nice”.

3) “I’m sold, GW2 is better than Mists of Pandaria”.

Nice change in opinion, but I think it highlights how a big issue with GW2 are actually players of other MMOs who join the game looking for more of the same, instead of being open for something new.

I don’t think it’s always a case of people picking it up looking for more of the same, though; I followed GW2 for a very long time before I actually played it, knowing that I liked everything I’d read about what it was doing differently, and I didn’t enjoy it for about the first three hours. Other people have had similar experiences. It’s hard to explain, but it’s almost like my brain rebelled when faced with something that looked familiar but didn’t operate according to the “MMO rules” I’d gotten used to over years of playing them, and as a result it took a while to get hooked. The dawning realization that the “other weird stuff” is the meat of the game is something I’ve read about more than once; it’s like having to get past the idea of salt and sweet flavors being mixed together before you realize they enhance each other.