Guild Wars 2

JamesKBarley.6087:

I think most people thought (once again) that Anet was to copy all that we’ve already seen and experienced in other (mmo)rpgs that is : once you reach a certain level, you come to a choice of specialization of your class, with a treelike chain of skills to be added from each choice.

Pretty sure that anyone expecting that either is a straight up moron, or never actually played GW2. Expecting multiple options because the word used heavily implies options is not the same as people thinking ANet will bring in trash from other unrelated sources, just cause.

No one should have expected trees, and crap like that because that doesn’t fit into the game, at all.

I also immediately thought secondary class, and was hoping to be able to recreate my Ranger/Necro regen supreme build from GW. But that’s not actually what we’re getting either. We’re getting something entirely different, with phantom choice at an undisclosed period of time in the future.

Ardenwolfe.8590:

I get the feeling people are finally seeing the ‘expansion’ for what it is: a big, Living Story update you’re going to pay for.

That’s not entirely fair. I don’t think this will ultimately live up to anyone’s expectations, and if this were at least one other NCSoft company I won’t mention the entire thing would have been a free addon to the game, it is legitimately more than just a Living Story update.

So far, other than the new class, we’ve seen everything this ‘expansion’ gives in patches and updates in some way, shape, or form.

I know that’s not a popular thing to say, right now, but when ‘specialization’ is one route and other ‘specializations’ will be added, patched, later . . . I can see the writing on the wall.

Can’t blame ArenaNet. Package it as an expansion, people celebrate, and give the company more money for something they could’ve gotten for free.

It might not be entirely fair but, again so far, it’s entirely accurate.

Has anyone though about the reason someone would prefer ranger to druid is because they are different instead of druid being better?
I mean druid may get access to Staff but loose the ability to use Greatsword or Longbow?
they get 1 ellite, 1 healing, some utility but loose too 1 ellite and 1 healing and some utility?
That would made perfect sense why its called specialization, you can keep being a ranger or change to druid, but that doesn t mean the druid is better, it is simply different and has a different role!
They always talked about specialization not upgrade!

I wonder what the community reaction would be if they do one specialisation per class this time then release another expansion with another specialisation per class.

Personally, I’m not bothered either way, I am just intrigued.

Svarty.8019:

I wonder what the community reaction would be if they do one specialisation per class this time then release another expansion with another specialisation per class.

Personally, I’m not bothered either way, I am just intrigued.

I could see a specialization pack in the gemstone in the future. No need for a whole expansion when you can sell as an account upgrade in the gem store. You heard it here first!

Specializations, as i see it, are similar to a profession change and not just a tacked on list of abilities (traits, skills, and weapon choices) for your character. With this in mind, you would actually have 2 choices when HoT is released (using Ranger as the example):
Ranger and Druid with Ranger being the default

So now the question is, what exactly is different between the ranger and the druid?
The only thing we know right now is that the druid has access to Staff as a weapon choice, has a new trait line, and has some new skills. Who’s to say that the druid doesnt lose access to other weapons that the ranger can use?

For example i will list a potential idea of how the ranger vs druid ideas might work based on what is unique to the specialization (this is only an example, please do not argue about the specifics of the example):

*Ranger:
-Unique weapon choice(s): Greatsword, Axe
-Unique Traits: Beastmastery Trait Line (and by extention, pets), F1-F4 bar with pet actions, Greatsword or Axe Traits
-Unique Skills: any relating to pets, Greatswords, and Axes

*Druid
-Unique weapon: Staff
-Unique Traits: Druid trait line (no name given yet), F1-F4 bar with druid actions (most likely healing/plant based), Staff Trait(s)
-Unique Skills: any new druid skills, Staff skills (for all we know, they might give the druid different weapon skills for other weapons as well)

The ranger has unique access to a pet traits/abilities, Greatsword, and axe while the druid has unique access to Staff and druid abilities/traits.
(example finished)
——————————————————————————-

In the example above, the Ranger and Druid would be played different from each other, yet still share many things in common. That is how i see this being implemented: 2 choices instead of 1.

EDIT: beaten to the punch

Walhalla.5473:

Well I think, they want to look how well these new Specilizations will be received and what they really add to the Gameplay, so they are trying with just one per Class, but if this is working, I can imagine more Specs in the Future.

Also just One Spec for each Class doesn’t mean, that this has to be just a little change. It depends on how Anet is going to implement them. Doing it right, it could be more like double the Classes, doing it wrong, well, just a few new Skills, nothing more. We will see how well it is going to be implemented.

I know many are pessimistic about so many things but as this is written it seems like the entire class, traits as well, will be rather different from the base class, not just a new weapons and some utility/heal/elite skills, practically instead a new class.

Kal Spiro.9745:

Astralporing.1957:

Kal Spiro.9745:

Ugh, that’s not a specialization, that’s just a continuation of the class. Without at least two per class, there’s no choice and nothing “special” about it. All Rangers are Druids, woopy.

Actually, no. One of the interviews strongly suggested, that there would be reasons why someone might want to “disable” a specialization and go back to playing pure class (and that you will be able to switch in and out of specs). They also seemed to imply that, while specializations add new things on top of base class, they also take things away (as well as possibly change the whole playing style). They are not supposed to be stronger than their base classes, just different, thus presenting more options. And of course they have already said there will be more specializations in the future. Just not in HoT.

I would like to see that specific interview. I haven’t heard anything to that effect yet, and that would go a long way to alleviating mine, and presumably others frustration on this matter.

Not sure sure if it’s the one he was talking about, but this on appears to say just that.
http://www.pcgamer.com/guild-wars-2-heart-of-thorns-interview/#page-2