Guild Wars 2

Please note that I am not trying to be controversial or start a flame war. This is a sincere yet probing question that I want to ask the community, not just for its sake but also for my own. I haven’t been playing that long (My main character—my only character—is still level 14), so I haven’t really explored everything that Guild Wars 2 has to offer!

Nevertheless, from what I have experienced so far, I haven’t really seen much that stands out, or that is ground-breaking, or innovative. The only MMO I’ve ever played before GW2 is, you guessed it, World of Warcraft (and not for that long either—3 years). The only reason I mention this is to simply point out that as far as experience goes, the MMO genre is still new to me.

I guess, to put it in another way: If I’m still new to the MMO genre, having only played WoW, and Guild Wars 2, for me, does not even seem innovative—what does that say about what Guild Wars 2 has to offer?

Again, not trying to be controversial, but I do want to open a discussion and invite/challenge the community to explore this issue that has been on my mind.

So far I haven’t even said what I haven’t found innovative, so let me clarify:

1. Heart Quests
To be honest, the essence—the bones, the framework, etc.—of a dynamic quest, is the same thing as a traditional quest, only it’s presented differently. Both Hearts and quests are similar in that they have the expected “Kill X amount of Y” or “Collect X amount of Y” or “Escort Z”. None of this is new.

What is new, is how it is presented. I no longer have to go to a person, hear the context, and then accept the quest. In fact, I don’t even have to speak to a person. I just “happen” along by, but it is still presented to me on my screen.

In some ways, this is worse, because not only is it the same as a quest, but context, meaning, and story, have been undermined if not completely stripped away. That is not an improvement, it’s a downgrade.

2. Dynamic Events
I would also argue that Dynamic Events are the same as quests, only they happen randomly. Again, same stuff, same bone structure/essence. A single Dynamic event can vary and grow in terms of its quest or objective based on whether it was completed or not, and this is good. Yet the variation does not overcome the repetitiveness of the Dynamic Event. At first it’s cool, because you are experiencing it for the first time, but after a while you realize that it’s just the same Dynamic Events over and over again with a little variation.

3. Trading Post
I actually like the Trading Post and it’s new as far as I’m concerned. The ability to request X amount of whatever you want for your determined asking price is very convenient.

Moreover, the Gem store is a wonderful idea. While I wouldn’t actually spend money for gems, I think the option to trade gold for gems is absolutely incredible, especially when those gems get me vanity items. I mention this because in WoW, if you want a promotional pet or mount, you HAVE to buy it with money. In Guild Wars 2, you can simply trade your hard-earned gold for gems and get it without ever having to metaphorically swipe your credit card.

Conclusion
For the sake of space and my purposes, I’m only going to mention these few items. Feel free to add upon or critique my points. And I have to say repeat and stress the fact that I haven’t yet experienced everything. For crying out loud, I haven’t even tried WvW or sPVP. So understand that this isn’t a criticism/review perse: If it was, I would be very irresponsible for not having tried the whole pie!

Rather, this is simply an initial observation, that’s it. In posting this observation, I only wish to see if other players can confirm them, or, with hope, deny them and confidently say that Guild Wars 2 brings much to the table. Thank you for reading, and please, keep it polite and respectful, being charitable to the opinions of others.

Addendum
Actually, I want to qualify my post by saying that not being innovative isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes the old formulas are good to keep, so if you wish to argue this, by all means. At that point, the discussion would not longer be “How does GW2 innovate”, but “How does GW2” improve upon the old formula.

I will, in this post, make any necessary edits so as not to modify the original one.

Edit 1: What is a Dynamic Event?
Thank you again, Taihaku, for the helpful post.

Elemental invasions and rifts are NOT dynamic events. Dynamic events are something that actually chain. They start in one area and chain to a completely different one while sometimes telling a story about an item or area. If people actually paid attention and followed an event chain then they would know that that is what Dynamic events are not just activities that pop up every once in a while.

This shows what I’m talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTF9T4oQ480&feature=plcp

Edit 2: Is it fair to judge a game based on innovation, given that we understand “innovation” in it’s true sense?
Thank you Hyral, for that important point you made. True innovation means bringing something absolutely new, never-before done, utterly unique, etc. Should we expect this from every game? No, that’s not very fair at all. We can, at the very least, expect what Hyral calls “creative rendition”. In other words, it’s fair to criticize Guild Wars 2 if they do not in some way improve or offer a different yet creative alternative to the old formula. Feel free to answer the respond in light of this information.

Hyral.4168:

There’s something to be said for mise en scene. The composition of their features distinguishes Guild Wars 2 from the collective generic formula.

I still don’t think you can find true innovation in video games, save for once a generation at most. This generation has struck me as particularly stagnant, too easily distracted by gizmos we’ve actually had for decades. But playing with the formula still counts as a creative rendition, which might be more important than innovation.

On a fundamental level, Guild Wars 2 is nothing I haven’t seen before. WoW was especially unoriginal, but not unenjoyable. At price point, I guess I’m more interested in a worthwhile enjoyment rather than a bare step into what might be innovation.

Edit 3: The value of Heart Quests
Two posters here have persuaded me and shown me the value of Heart quests. They have provided an excellent counter-argument to my second observation about Dynamic Events. I will not, for the sake of space, quote them here. But their posts definitely deserved to be mentioned; it behooves everyone to read their thoughtful post.
They are Edge and Gradius. You’ll find them in the mid-upper first page.

Edit 4: Does Guild Wars 2 a Revolution or an Evolution? (or neither?)

Untouch and Amirin brought up what I think is helpful terminology. This is related to Edit 2, so I encourage you to look a both and reply in light of this illuminating information. Feel free to agree or disagree.

Untouch.2541:

I’ve been seeing people saying that GW2 is more “WoW-ified” than GW1.
I still don’t see that though, I’ve played both games.

The ways that GW1 was different was the combat system (GW2 is also different), the skill system (GW2 is also different), the world system (GW2 is also different) and the quest/mission system (GW2 is also different) also PvP.

Anyone mind explaining what you mean?

Also, I’ve been saying this since before beta, it’s an evolution not a revolution. Almost every mechanic it takes, it makes better.
The DE system is much better than RIFT’s.
The combat system is much better than DCUO’s.

Diminishing Returns…oh no,wait…final fantasy did that first…scratch that!

In my opinion level scaling, groupless grouping and global TP accessible from anywhere are GW2’s crowning innovations.

Theres more but these make the biggest difference to me.

New MMO,same old MMO ways.

wollie.9751:

In my opinion level scaling, groupless grouping and global TP accessible from anywhere are GW2’s crowning innovations.

Theres more but these make the biggest difference to me.

I can’t say much about level scaling, since I have no idea what it’s like to level from, say, 1-40 in comparison to 41-80.

But I think the groupless grouping, as contradictory as it sounds, is innovative as far as I’m concerned; thank you for bringing that up. In WoW, I don’t think I have ever informally/unofficially grouped up with random players on the scale that Guild Wars 2 does it.

In Guild Wars 2, not only do large-scale events just happen, they happen on a large scale!

Yet, I would like to play devil’s advocate and say: does this undermine community? After all, you could do any of these events without really having to explain mechanics or communicate at all really because the sheer numbers of people will ensure that any event gets completed, whether people understand what’s going on or not.

Dynamic (regular) Events were done in Rift on Day 1 – well before GW2.

Khaldar.7486:

Dynamic (regular) Events were done in Rift on Day 1 – well before GW2.

Only they weren’t exactly dynamic. Open a rift, kill stuff, rift closes. Life goes on.

Khaldar.7486:

Dynamic (regular) Events were done in Rift on Day 1 – well before GW2.

Actually, when I think about it, even WoW had dynamic events. I remember right before Cataclysm, elementals would invade the city and everyone would work together to defeat them (although it was really the level 80s doing the work, since the elementals were to difficult for anyone below to actually contribute anything).

I also remember people being especially annoyed by the fact that the Auction House, Vendors, etc., would be unavailable until all the elementals were destroyed, but that’s besides the point.

The idea that everyone is allied and no grouping is necessary is not so much innovation as a step closer to perfection within an MMO. By effectively making everyone at an event one group ( via boons and heals affecting nearby allies, grouped or not), they’ve eliminated the problem of anti social players refusing to group. This was bad in rift, for example, when you had hi levels tagging all the mobs and refusing to join the main group.

The death of the holy trinity.

ituhata.6830:

Khaldar.7486:

Dynamic (regular) Events were done in Rift on Day 1 – well before GW2.

Only they weren’t exactly dynamic. Open a rift, kill stuff, rift closes. Life goes on.

Nah, Rift had plenty of wandering bosses, camp defenses, etc.

Mars Hill.1542:

Khaldar.7486:

Dynamic (regular) Events were done in Rift on Day 1 – well before GW2.

Actually, when I think about it, even WoW had dynamic events. I remember right before Cataclysm, elementals would invade the city and everyone would work together to defeat them (although it was really the level 80s doing the work, since the elementals were to difficult for anyone below to actually contribute anything).

I also remember people being especially annoyed by the fact that the Auction House, Vendors, etc., would be unavailable until all the elementals were destroyed, but that’s besides the point.

Elemental invasions and rifts are NOT dynamic events. Dynamic events are something that actually chain. They start in one area and chain to a completely different one while sometimes telling a story about an item or area. If people actually paid attention and followed an event chain then they would know that that is what Dynamic events are not just activities that pop up every once in a while.

This shows what I’m talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTF9T4oQ480&feature=plcp

Some thoughts

• Hearts – added very late in development only to give traditional MMO players something familiar. These are not a method of story delivery in this game, they were added as an after thought.

• Dynamic Events – Entirely different mechanic than traditional quest. Things are actively moving, voice acted dialog is generally happening, many of them chain two or three times. After the event ends, follow NPC to the other side of the map where things play out and a new event triggers. Aside from the ones clearly marked as gather events (which I tend to avoid) you aren’t taking item X back to NPC Y. Dynamic Events first appeared in RifT but the implementation in GW2 is much better. Dynamic Events tell the story of the world.

• Personal Story – A unique set of instanced zones. Nothing like quest, every chapter has voice acted dialog. These take you from level 1 (starting with the tutorial which you can think of as your first personal story chapter) all the way up to 80. Multiple story archs play out and these give you a reason to care about the things going on in the world. The story of your character is told through PS. This is the core story delivery method in this game and most MMOs do not have anything like this.

• Dungeons story mode – Tell the story of the Heros of Tyria. Dungeons are a common thing, but toned down story mode dungeons with dialog created as a means of story delivery is something rather new or at least their implementation is.

I feel sad for the players just running through the game only doing Heart quest. I want to say “No wonder you don’t like it, you don’t get it. Take the time to learn your options for how to play”

Calavera.1086:

The death of the holy trinity.

Honestly, I wouldn’t necessarily say that’s a bad thing.

And besides, the holy trinity isn’t exactly gone from Guild Wars 2. There is healing, damage mitigation, crowd control, damage-dealing, aggro, etc. These functions are merely given to each profession.

So, in a sense, each individual player is a holy trinity unto themselves. So there is no death here, only a change in form.

However, I know what you mean: you’re saying that Guild Wars 2 did away with the need to have a dedicated role.

I wouldn’t call it innovation, but it is arguably a step in the right direction. However, as I’ve stated before, I personally do not see the holy trinity as a bad thing.

“Please note that I am not trying to be controversial or start a flame war. "

But that is exactly what just happened…

Revenant.2691:

ituhata.6830:

Khaldar.7486:

Dynamic (regular) Events were done in Rift on Day 1 – well before GW2.

Only they weren’t exactly dynamic. Open a rift, kill stuff, rift closes. Life goes on.

Nah, Rift had plenty of wandering bosses, camp defenses, etc.

Are wandering bosses counted as dynamic events these days? <(0.o)>

What happens if the camp defense fails? Do you get a new quest to retake it? Inquiring minds want to know what other people think the word ‘dynamic’ means.

You can still group and join a DE. But…now everyone/anyone can participate in group events regardless of their gear, level or guild. That is a huge improvement over other MMO’s. Some would say not…but opinions are like kittens (gotta love that filter, lol)…everyone has one.

Level scaling is pretty cool too. A lot of games penalize upper levels trying to help lower levels. I also like that we don’t have to compete for loot and harvest nodes.

Taihaku.8412:

Mars Hill.1542:

Khaldar.7486:

Dynamic (regular) Events were done in Rift on Day 1 – well before GW2.

Actually, when I think about it, even WoW had dynamic events. I remember right before Cataclysm, elementals would invade the city and everyone would work together to defeat them (although it was really the level 80s doing the work, since the elementals were to difficult for anyone below to actually contribute anything).

I also remember people being especially annoyed by the fact that the Auction House, Vendors, etc., would be unavailable until all the elementals were destroyed, but that’s besides the point.

Elemental invasions and rifts are NOT dynamic events. Dynamic events are something that actually chain. They start in one area and chain to a completely different one while sometimes telling a story about an item or area. If people actually paid attention and followed an event chain then they would know that that is what Dynamic events are not just activities that pop up every once in a while.

This shows what I’m talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTF9T4oQ480&feature=plcp

Very very excellent point Taihaku. I should’ve realized this, having read a book on hermeneutics that talked about Dynamic Context (which I will not go into).

Thank you for that clarification. Seen in that light, that WoW even that I previously mentioned ought not to be considered a Dynamic Event.

Nothing, really. However, They’ve put a bunch of things together into a well-fitting package, much like WoW did back in its time, to create a new standard platform to build upon.

I suppose from the perspective of someone that hasn’t really been following the genre of MMORPGs for an extended period of time, this game can seem like the same “fecal” sandwich with a different arrangement of condiments. Now for someone like me, that’s seen quite a few different MMORPGs, it’s somewhat refreshing to see someone do something—ANYTHING—slightly different than everyone else. When I went to give SWTOR a try, for example, I played for about an hour an uninstalled the game in disgust; it WAS the same “fecal” sandwich as WoW/EQ, with the SAME condiments; it just had a different name on the menu.

People that have been playing MMOGs (I don’t even feel comfortable calling them “RPGs”, anymore) for years and consider themselves “veterans” of the genre are something akin to sufferers of Stockholm Syndrome; we’ve been held hostage by the same, kitten things for so long that ANY sort of innovation is seen as a gift from the gods.

At least that’s how I see it. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to continue to abuse myself and like it.

Mars Hill.1542:

Calavera.1086:

The death of the holy trinity.

Honestly, I wouldn’t necessarily say that’s a bad thing.

And besides, the holy trinity isn’t exactly gone from Guild Wars 2. There is healing, damage mitigation, crowd control, damage-dealing, aggro, etc. These functions are merely given to each profession.

So, in a sense, each individual player is a holy trinity unto themselves. So there is no death here, only a change in form.

However, I know what you mean: you’re saying that Guild Wars 2 did away with the need to have a dedicated role.

I wouldn’t call it innovation, but it is arguably a step in the right direction. However, as I’ve stated before, I personally do not see the holy trinity as a bad thing.

To me the holy trinity was the worst thing in MMOs. All a tanker had to do was keep the aggro on him, all the DPS had to do is keep pressing 1-2 buttons, all a healer had to do is click on health bars. That’s not fun.

You have healing spells and damage mitigation in GW2 but in no way you can be a dedicated healer or tanker, if you try you will compromise the whole group as you’ll not be efficient. Now everyone must take care of themselves and the guy next to him. If you’re low on health you can’t count on the healer, you MUST evade and heal yourself. If you’re pulling too much aggro you must get away, if a fellow player falls you must run to bring him back on his feet.

That’s fun and that’s the best part of GW2 imo.

Raf.1078:

You can still group and join a DE. But…now everyone/anyone can participate in group events regardless of their gear, level or guild. That is a huge improvement over other MMO’s. Some would say not…but opinions are like kittens (gotta love that filter, lol)…everyone has one.

Level scaling is pretty cool too. A lot of games penalize upper levels trying to help lower levels. I also like that we don’t have to compete for loot and harvest nodes.

I agree Raf. Not having to compete for loot or nodes is refreshing and eliminates a lot of grief and exploit. I also agree with you concerning the fact that it is a huge improvement that anyone participate in group events. However, I’m referring to the idea of it. The implementation of it, on the other hand, I will leave open for debate. I actually have to get to class now.

No innovation at all.

Calavera.1086:

Mars Hill.1542:

Calavera.1086:

The death of the holy trinity.

Honestly, I wouldn’t necessarily say that’s a bad thing.

And besides, the holy trinity isn’t exactly gone from Guild Wars 2. There is healing, damage mitigation, crowd control, damage-dealing, aggro, etc. These functions are merely given to each profession.

So, in a sense, each individual player is a holy trinity unto themselves. So there is no death here, only a change in form.

However, I know what you mean: you’re saying that Guild Wars 2 did away with the need to have a dedicated role.

I wouldn’t call it innovation, but it is arguably a step in the right direction. However, as I’ve stated before, I personally do not see the holy trinity as a bad thing.

To me the holy trinity was the worst thing in MMOs. All a tanker had to do was keep the aggro on him, all the DPS had to do is keep pressing 1-2 buttons, all a healer had to do is click on health bars. That’s not fun.

You have healing spells and damage mitigation in GW2 but in no way you can be a dedicated healer or tanker, if you try you will compromise the whole group as you’ll not be efficient. Now everyone must take care of themselves and the guy next to him. If you’re low on health you can’t count on the healer, you MUST evade and heal yourself. If you’re pulling too much aggro you must get away, if a fellow player falls you must run to bring him back on his feet.

That’s fun and that’s the best part of GW2 imo.

Thank you Calavera for your thoughtful opinion. I only want to say that, what I really enjoyed about the Holy Trinity system in WoW was that system of interdependency that encouraged teamwork and communication. I love that.

On the other hand, it did suck when people didn’t know what there role was or how to execute their role and the large responsibility associated with some of the roles.

For me, too much independence turns the game less into an MMORPG and more of an RPG. In a sense, I want to have to communicate and depend on others because that encourages teamwork, friendship, and good times. Not to say that that cannot happen in Guild Wars 2, only that in my experience so far, it works well, if not better, with the Holy Trinity system.

Mars Hill.1542:

wollie.9751:

In my opinion level scaling, groupless grouping and global TP accessible from anywhere are GW2’s crowning innovations.

Theres more but these make the biggest difference to me.

I can’t say much about level scaling, since I have no idea what it’s like to level from, say, 1-40 in comparison to 41-80.

But I think the groupless grouping, as contradictory as it sounds, is innovative as far as I’m concerned; thank you for bringing that up. In WoW, I don’t think I have ever informally/unofficially grouped up with random players on the scale that Guild Wars 2 does it.

In Guild Wars 2, not only do large-scale events just happen, they happen on a large scale!

Yet, I would like to play devil’s advocate and say: does this undermine community? After all, you could do any of these events without really having to explain mechanics or communicate at all really because the sheer numbers of people will ensure that any event gets completed, whether people understand what’s going on or not.

Level scaling as in when I go to an area I get scaled to that level. It makes it so I can go and play the game in any area I choose. It also makes it to where I don’t have to move on from zones I’m not done with just because my level got too high. Its basically freedom.

There’s something to be said for mise en scene. The composition of their features distinguishes Guild Wars 2 from the collective generic formula.

I still don’t think you can find true innovation in video games, save for once a generation at most. This generation has struck me as particularly stagnant, too easily distracted by gizmos we’ve actually had for decades. But playing with the formula still counts as a creative rendition, which might be more important than innovation.

On a fundamental level, Guild Wars 2 is nothing I haven’t seen before. WoW was especially unoriginal, but not unenjoyable. At price point, I guess I’m more interested in a worthwhile enjoyment rather than a bare step into what might be innovation.

Anet seemed to look at the way previous MMOs utilized various mechanics and did a lot of “how can we do this better” work. In that respect, they’ve done some innovative thinking and tweaking to the way we play this MMO compared to others.

However, the thing that makes my head spin is that after all of this “how can this be done better” work, they implement a version of FFXIV’s Fatigue system which throws mud all over any innovations that have been done. Fatigue got so much hate and backlash because of its xp limiting (and ultimately play limiting) effects, that Square Enix ultimately killed it.

It’s too bad, because overall AreaNet made a good many evolutionary (not revolutionary) steps forward, but the DR system is a big leap backwards.

There really is nothing new here, sorry to say it. I know some people have fanboi vision atm and will defend something with out merit but thats the truth of the matter. Big promises no delivery, the game is not bad but its not new or close to innovative.

Mars Hill.1542:

1. Heart Quests
To be honest, the essence—the bones, the framework, etc.—of a dynamic quest, is the same thing as a traditional quest, only it’s presented differently. Both Hearts and quests are similar in that they have the expected “Kill X amount of Y” or “Collect X amount of Y” or “Escort Z”. None of this is new.

What is new, is how it is presented. I no longer have to go to a person, hear the context, and then accept the quest. In fact, I don’t even have to speak to a person. I just “happen” along by, but it is still presented to me on my screen.

In some ways, this is worse, because not only is it the same as a quest, but context, meaning, and story, have been undermined if not completely stripped away. That is not an improvement, it’s a downgrade.

I’m focusing on this point because I feel you’re really off on this one.

Reknown tasks (heart quests) are so open ended it’s amazing, but you only get out of them what you put in. If you feel like they’re a step backwards from normal questing.. that’s a failure on your end, not the design, but how you are choosing to utilize the design.

There is nothing preventing you from seeking out context. You, as the player, are perfectly capable of seeing the location of the heart vendor and speaking with him at any point prior to completing his task and getting details on what this particular area is all about. There is often an amazing amount of detail in their conversation trees if you’re willing to take the time to do this.

I think this approach to questing is of the most realistic type I’ve ever seen. You approach an area (example, farm) and can see that that the crops need watering, the cattle need feeding, the fence needs repairing, the farmhands need motivating, and the bandits are terrorizing the workers in the fields. It makes perfect sense to me that you can dispatch a few of those bandits on your way in and the owner of the farm is at least a little bit thankful for your assistance by the time you talk to him.

From there, you can converse with the owner and get the full scoop on the area and help out in any number of different ways. But one of the coolest parts here (and what makes the most sense) is that your heroism is being appreciated before you’ve even introduce yourself.

What doesn’t make sense (and is a step backwards) is they style of quests we’re used to from games like WoW, where you can kill off a few dozen ogres and then speak with someone with a “!” above their head and they hit you up with a mission to thin out the ogre ranks by killing 10 of them. Nothing you did on your way in to the NPC counts.

I really feel that players who don’t speak to the heart task NPC prior to maxing his contribution bar are really doing themselves a disservice and missing out a big part of the game and its lore. You can get so much more depth regarding a region and the NPCs that populate it by taking the time to speak with these NPCs and keeping yourself informed. HOWEVER.. as strange as it seems to me some players just don’t like playing that way, and are all too happy to skirt through an area without ever speaking with any of the NPCs. But these are the same types of players that didn’t even bother to read the quest text in games like WoW.

Point is, it’s a choice, and how you choose to play is up to you. If you’re not liking how heart tasks play out compared to standard MMO questing, it might be because you’re one of those people that won’t go the extra mile in a game unless the game forces you to. But if bothers you that much.. that’s something you have to change, not the game.

For some reason, I’m not able to use the edit/quote/report functions, but oh well.

@Hyral. I think you raise a good point. True innovation is not something that is seen often or even easily achieved. I would even say that It’s arguable that to expect innovation from every game sequel or any game for that matter is unreasonable. So you’re right when you say that creative rendition might be a better way to judge than innovation.

One small note to make: I do think this game, or the makers of this game rather, purported (correct me If I’m wrong on that, this is what I’ve simply been hearing) to be different. If not so, at the very least it was expected by the community to be different, so it is a worthwhile endeavor, I think, to see if it did make any innovations or lived up to its name. To be sure, we ought not to downgrade a game simply because it was not innovative, but at the very least we should, again, see if it brought anything new and worthwhile to the genre (unique/new isn’t necessarily a good thing).

We haven’t seen good WvW type PVP in a fantasy genre in over 10 years.

What I do wish is that it had the smooth nature of say Lake Wintersgrasp rather than the clunky laggy nature of Warhammer Online.

I was reading over your post and to me it seems like (I certainly don’t mean to offend) you are broadening your definition of “questing” to make your argument sound. When I look at a traditional quest in any other MMO I think of the following:

1) Obtain Quest
2) Kill 10 things / Bring 10 things back to Quest Giver
3) Get Reward
4) Never Interact w/ Quest Giver again

When in Guild Wars 2, it’s really presented in a different way. You called them “Heart Quests” when they are really more like earning Renown with the NPC him/herself. Think of it this way:

1) You Approach the area of the NPC, you don’t have to interact with him/her.
2) Kill 10 things / Bring 10 things back to Quest Giver
3) Here is the Difference You can purchase things from this person that you can’t get elsewhere, forever
4) Interact w/ NPC whenever you want/need what he/she sells.

Again, I don’t mean to offend, but you are really selling the renown system short by leaving out details like this. They are what make the difference. They are what make ANet’s system innovative.

@ Edge. I concede. You’ve adequately shut down my argument.

I don’t want to say that I’m the kind of person that likes to be guided/spoonfed/forced to engage with the story as opposed to engaging it on my own terms, but I do admit that it is convenient, for me, for it to be had that way. The Guild Wars Story Line is actually a good example of this.

One of my favorite games is Mass Effect, and I actually enjoyed going over my codex and looking at all the Lore that the game provided. I’m not gonna lie, it becomes tedious after a while, and I was many times tempted to just skip all the info and get right back to playing. So it’s a mix: Sometimes I want to engage the story, sometimes I just want to mindlessly farm and progress.

I like your last paragraph: the Dynamic Events and Heart quests do have context, it’s just a matter of choosing whether or not to engage with it by interacting with the NPC.

I also agree that this way to quest is more realistic.

I would have to say the most innovative thing about GW2 is not how much new things it brings to the MMO world but because it takes all these good features that all these MMOs have and puts them into 1 game.

For me, these are the most important changes.

1) The fact we manage our healthbar ourselves.
I always hated to have my life in the hands of a “healer”. I take care of it better; a healer can be interrupted, can be a bad healer, can be disconnected, can prioritize another player, can be out of energy, etc.
I can’t trust every random healer, but I trust myself.
This is probably the change I love the most in GW2.

2) Realistic combat system
I always found tank/healer gimmick to be a joke.
First off, it never made sense to me that a mob would focus on the most armored guy and ignore everything else: it felt more like exploiting poor AI than fighting.
Second, not for importance, the fact I finally get to both tank, heal and DPS; this is the only system I found realistic, in a real battle you would have to kill, defend yourself and heal yourself, while also protecting/buffing the team.

3) Active blocking, dodging, missing (blind), proactive healing.
Makes combat a lot more adrenalinic, makes reflexes and skill matter a lot more.
It turns from “boss is hitting me for 10k but I have 80% chance to dodge it by simply standing here and let the RNG play for me” to "I need to be lighting fast in dodging his bursts or I’m dead.

4) Mass PvP.
I’ve been literally dreaming of this since L2 / DaoC.
I never cared for those “arena” things beside L2 Olympiads, mass PvP was always my thing.
I’ve survived 50vs200 and mass sieges in those games, it’s beyond epic and nothing like instanced, limited, predictable, boring, uneventful pvp.

5) No power progression.
Chasing +1 stats was never for me. I’m not a brain-dead monkey. I play for fun.

The essence, the bones you say are the same? Hello? Do you even hear yourself speaking. You have similar bone structure hundreds of creatures on this planet. If you simplify further then all life is Carbon based. Basically I am saying that I have not seen anything on earth that is innovative since multi-celled organisms. Your all just copycats of that first amoeba.

They had some innovation to the way the interface presents information. As to innovation to what we actually do? Not so much.

GW2 takes strides into WoW’s theme park formula and imo is actually less innovative than GW1.

Taihaku.8412:

Mars Hill.1542:

Khaldar.7486:

Dynamic (regular) Events were done in Rift on Day 1 – well before GW2.

Actually, when I think about it, even WoW had dynamic events. I remember right before Cataclysm, elementals would invade the city and everyone would work together to defeat them (although it was really the level 80s doing the work, since the elementals were to difficult for anyone below to actually contribute anything).

I also remember people being especially annoyed by the fact that the Auction House, Vendors, etc., would be unavailable until all the elementals were destroyed, but that’s besides the point.

Elemental invasions and rifts are NOT dynamic events. Dynamic events are something that actually chain. They start in one area and chain to a completely different one while sometimes telling a story about an item or area. If people actually paid attention and followed an event chain then they would know that that is what Dynamic events are not just activities that pop up every once in a while.

This shows what I’m talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTF9T4oQ480&feature=plcp

I really like this video. I ‘noticed’ these event chains in its entirety about a week ago. Now maybe I am just slow, but some part of me thinks that in a world busy with so much activity that Arenanet has designed, they could have made these events feel more cohesive, and compel the player to stay and see them through instead of heading away to do the next thing on the map.

Some part of me just wishes we don’t have minimaps at all.

pvp, spvp is its own game so it can be more balanced than pvp other mmos. And WvW is the most epic large scale pvp on the market unless you sign up for Eve Online.

This is the first mmo I’ve played where not only do you get rewarded for taking your time and exploring, but they make you WANT to explore and take it all in.

For an mmo, IMHO, that is a huge innovation.

That video is very explanatory of how GW2 should be played… I’m not surprised some people got bored of the game, they didn’t even play it yet.

My fav DE chain so far is where the Asuras take some Ettins prisoners for experiments, then Ettins try to escape, then you finally make it to the lab and something goes wrong because one Ettin becomes more intelligent than 10 Asuras and makes a long speech where he completely destroys the Asura researcher with words.

Now, that is GW2.

Most innovations are in combat and player interaction (everyone necessarily resses and heals, changes on trinity, combos, lack of zero-sum rewarding system for group play, etc). And I won’t kid, those make a huge difference. I can’t understand how
you didn’t see it.

Most of the rest is a blend of popular MMORPG ideas (dynamic events and personal story to name two) with a portion of Guild Wars’ philosophy, of the latter, mainly the idea of no gear treadmill at max level other than for looks/prestige, the B2P model, the idea of easily being able to make a character and jump into PvP (although GW’s PvP required a little work to unlock certain skills/weapon upgrades). Of course a lot of GW
was left behind as well (mainly the “MORPG” model, complex skill system and hench system, among others).

Needless to say, GW’s imported ideas still feel fresh and brand new for people who never had contact with it.

Nothing, really. Frankly, most of the things it does better than most MMOs, GW1 did far better. It attempts to package itself in a different way, and it succeeds in some ways, and fails miserably in others.

I think GW2 will be remembered primarily for being able to pick up and play without effort. No need to party, no huge list of quests to do, no need to have dedicated healers, etc. I guess that’s the one thing it really solved in the genre. Unfortunately it created a new problems, where everyone plays separately because there’s no need to play together. Quests do run seamlessly, but as a result, they feel very empty and lifeless, especially when they repeat literally several times per hour. DEs were marketed as world-changing events, which I think led many to imagine their impact would be felt for days, if not weeks. Obviously this isn’t the case. Maybe after they start adding new ones they’ll reduce the rate? Who knows.

GW2 feels very manufactured to me. I’d even call it soulless. It’s very beautiful, but it’s also incredibly mechanical and dominated by systems. The story is terrible by Guild Wars standards (which were never that high), which doesn’t help.

GW2 suffers from an in-between syndrome in genre evolution. It definitely feels different, but it’s riddled with hundreds of smaller problems and some major ones that the designers either can’t address at this point or seem unwilling to address.

But, as far as changes go, GW2 feels like what would happen if you took GW1 and tried to make it worse by polluting it with staples of the genre. It at least somewhat successfully got rid of the holy trinity and reduced the bulk of MMO interfaces. Hopefully future, better MMOs will imitate that, but with more content, less repetition and more freedom.

Gradius.1462:

I was reading over your post and to me it seems like (I certainly don’t mean to offend) you are broadening your definition of “questing” to make your argument sound. When I look at a traditional quest in any other MMO I think of the following:

1) Obtain Quest
2) Kill 10 things / Bring 10 things back to Quest Giver
3) Get Reward
4) Never Interact w/ Quest Giver again

When in Guild Wars 2, it’s really presented in a different way. You called them “Heart Quests” when they are really more like earning Renown with the NPC him/herself. Think of it this way:

1) You Approach the area of the NPC, you don’t have to interact with him/her.
2) Kill 10 things / Bring 10 things back to Quest Giver
3) Here is the Difference You can purchase things from this person that you can’t get elsewhere, forever
4) Interact w/ NPC whenever you want/need what he/she sells.

Again, I don’t mean to offend, but you are really selling the renown system short by leaving out details like this. They are what make the difference. They are what make ANet’s system innovative.

By no means am I offended Gradius. I think you raised some interesting and good points about Heart Quests being like a renown system.

And for future reference, it is not offensive to point out the logical flaws in someone’s argument; you are only doing your duty as a responsible human being. It is the way in which you point out that flaw that can be considered offensive. In this case, you were respectful, so don’t worry about whether you offended me or not.

Eochaidh.4106:

Most innovations are in combat and player interaction (everyone necessarily resses and heals, changes on trinity, combos, lack of zero-sum rewarding system for group play, etc). And I won’t kid, those make a huge difference. I can’t understand how
you didn’t see it.

Most of the rest is a blend of popular MMORPG ideas (dynamic events and personal story to name two) with a portion of Guild Wars’ philosophy, of the latter, mainly the idea of no gear treadmill at max level other than for looks/prestige, the B2P model, the idea of easily being able to make a character and jump into PvP (although GW’s PvP required a little work to unlock certain skills/weapon upgrades). Of course a lot of GW
was left behind as well (mainly the “MORPG” model, complex skill system and hench system, among others).

Needless to say, GW’s imported ideas still feel fresh and brand new for people who never had contact with it.

I just want to quickly respond to the part I bolded in your quote. My list was not meant to be exhaustive: So it’s not that I didn’t see the things you mentioned; I simply didn’t bother to post every single thing I thought was innovative and every single thing I thought was not. I only posted a few as a starting point for discussion.

@Level scaling people:
This feature is not new. CoH had it long before GW2 was even announced. It also had PvP level scaling. Downscaling would disable higher level powers though.

Mars Hill.1542:

Nevertheless, from what I have experienced so far, I haven’t really seen much that stands out, or that is ground-breaking, or innovative. The only MMO I’ve ever played before GW2 is, you guessed it, World of Warcraft (and not for that long either—3 years). The only reason I mention this is to simply point out that as far as experience goes, the MMO genre is still new to me.

Sorry to answer a question with a question, and I appriciate the tone (you usually don’t find anything but hyperbole and screaming on game forums).

What would YOU consider innovative? Personally, I’ve played lots of MMOs, and there are tweaks and adjustments in each, but GW2 and EVE are the only two that strike me as particularly innovative.

Dynamic events socialize quests. If you break the mechanics down, that is the only change, certainly. Well, that and the fact that they are either triggered or random, and that they scale (somewhat) to participation. What else could be done with a questing system, or a leveling system, that would be more innovative? Certainly there must be something, but I’m not clear on what that is.

Maldavos.4871:

Mars Hill.1542:

Nevertheless, from what I have experienced so far, I haven’t really seen much that stands out, or that is ground-breaking, or innovative. The only MMO I’ve ever played before GW2 is, you guessed it, World of Warcraft (and not for that long either—3 years). The only reason I mention this is to simply point out that as far as experience goes, the MMO genre is still new to me.

Sorry to answer a question with a question, and I appriciate the tone (you usually don’t find anything but hyperbole and screaming on game forums).

What would YOU consider innovative? Personally, I’ve played lots of MMOs, and there are tweaks and adjustments in each, but GW2 and EVE are the only two that strike me as particularly innovative.

Dynamic events socialize quests. If you break the mechanics down, that is the only change, certainly. Well, that and the fact that they are either triggered or random, and that they scale (somewhat) to participation. What else could be done with a questing system, or a leveling system, that would be more innovative? Certainly there must be something, but I’m not clear on what that is.

No that’s fine, and it’s a very good question.

I want to point out that I am not asking for Guild Wars 2 to be innovative in the true sense of the word (as in something brand-spanking new), especially not when it comes to quests. Just in case you haven’t been following the various conversations, I have been updating my second post in order to incorporate several ideas of other posters that have modified my views in some way. One of them stated, very well I might add, that true innovation is not something that happens often. However, creative rendition is something that ought to be expected from a game.

You’re quite right, I think! Your question really strikes the heart of the issue. It’s fair to ask how questing could actually be presented in an innovative way. What else could be done? I want to say…nothing—nothing absolutely unequivocally new could be done. In fact, there’s not much wrong with the old tradition anyway . So let us stray away from that question and ask something better. Allow me to instead ask, “How has Guild Wars 2 creatively rendered the old formula?”

I think it’s fair to say that many were expecting Guild Wars 2 to provide a refreshing, creative, and fun take on the grinding and questing that we have been conditioned to. The question is, have they accomplished that? Is there a difference between, however slight, GW2’s questing system? and if so, is it an improvement? If not an improvement, is it at least an equally good alternative? Sorry to answer your question, with yet another question!

From my point, I don’t see GW2 is entirely innovative. They create rendition the features from other mmos and make in their own ways. GW2 isn’t trying to revolution anything for the genres , but I also don’t see people label it as another WoW clone like other recent MMOs.