Definitely not a requirement. Even min-maxing, a 5% margin of gain just isn’t worth the fuss. Nice to have, not imperative for doing well, or even being a top player.
It could be a 20% difference and it still wouldn’t be too noticeable with the emphasis on open-world gameplay. Groups can become so big that the % of your contribution comes up to a lowly single digit.
That coupled with the enormous timesink doesn’t make ascended armor and weapons all too appealing. I only have the accessories back when the game wasn’t going on three years.
Should they put more of an emphasis on challenging and/or instanced content, that’s when I’d become a bit more concerned about GW2’s max stats.
My bigger concern is what the treadmill in the expansion is going to be, assuming ascended was essential to the game and that most who want it already have it.
(edited by Smith.1826)
Now you’re just spreading false information. All you had to do was buy a starting amount of, let’s say 100 tickets, which are extremely cheap to come by btw, and let the automated process do its thing.
It was extremely unlikely that the amount of tickets would hit 0 because the wins normally offset losses, depending on what ring you chose to sit in. if you’re after the unlucky title, you’d likely have to spend more, but granted you started with the lucky title first (for which, sitting in middle ring was usually the best) you’d have plenty of tickets to tackle the unlucky title. And again, much like its counterpart, the points can be obtained through many different activities and items.Then there are the double lucky/unlucky title point weeks, and the points you obtain from retaining lockpicks, retaining items when salvaging, from special festivity items, and many many others. Honestly, double weeks have sped up those title grinds a great deal.
Lastly, what’s the point in complaining over something as unimpactful as titles? You quote my entire post, yet only respond to the most irrelevant part of it. At least edit out the parts you aren’t addressing to add more clarity and readability to your posts.
More to the point: What is the point? Why are we comparing GW1’s grind to 2’s?
The reason I am is because so many Guild Wars 1 players talk about how this game is more grindy than that game, when in fact it’s differently grindy.
GW1 was certainly grindy – perhaps moreso – but it had a very different reason for it to exist than how it does in GW2, and for me that’s the more pressing concern.
Now you’re just spreading false information. All you had to do was buy a starting amount of, let’s say 100 tickets, which are extremely cheap to come by btw, and let the automated process do its thing.
It was extremely unlikely that the amount of tickets would hit 0 because the wins normally offset losses, depending on what ring you chose to sit in. if you’re after the unlucky title, you’d likely have to spend more, but granted you started with the lucky title first (for which, sitting in middle ring was usually the best) you’d have plenty of tickets to tackle the unlucky title. And again, much like its counterpart, the points can be obtained through many different activities and items.Then there are the double lucky/unlucky title point weeks, and the points you obtain from retaining lockpicks, retaining items when salvaging, from special festivity items, and many many others. Honestly, double weeks have sped up those title grinds a great deal.
Lastly, what’s the point in complaining over something as unimpactful as titles? You quote my entire post, yet only respond to the most irrelevant part of it. At least edit out the parts you aren’t addressing to add more clarity and readability to your posts.
More to the point: What is the point? Why are we comparing GW1’s grind to 2’s?
Honestly, at this point it amuses me a lot more how there was the same sort of grind (barring Ascended, which you don’t need short of high level Fractals) in GW1 and that game was okay.
Seriously. Gamer Title Track, Legendary Defender of Ascalon, and Legendary Grandmaster Cartographer.
GW1 didn’t have cash->gold. It had a lot of questionable ideas but still no cash->gold, so the grind was moreso an incredibly poor man’s endgame.
(edited by Smith.1826)
I’m with Rapthorne on this. I’d like to see more symmetrical armors in the game. And more armors that look like actual armor too.
I’d throw mad amounts of money if you could customize left/right pauldrons and gloves.
A bigger question would be whether or not they decide to implement a new race. If so, I would go as far to say that a race change feature would be guaranteed.
The premise is wrong. Guild Wars 2 needs no “end-game”, because Guild Wars 2 simply has “game”. Other MMOs have numerous maps and activities that become obsolete once you outlevel them. Content is called “end-game” if it is still relevant at max level.
In Guild Wars 2, all content is still relevant at all times. There could not possibly be more end-game content than this.
Now this I’m with you on. This quest for mythical end game, created by other games to convince people they’re actually progressing has never ceased to amaze me.
“New game+” is my favorite form of ‘endgame’, and is a step and a hop away from replaying a game on an increased difficulty. Hard mode in GW1 was fairly basic and artificial, but it still did a pretty good job. I’d be intensely intrigued for them to see something similar applied to the open world, some sort of setting where you take more damage but receive increased rewards is a simple basis for this idea.
I think ANet wouldn’t be too keen on this because it seems they value heavily on the idea that “any build is viable”. In addition to balance, that’s the impression I got with their decision to lock weapon bars.
I’d rather have this than an inspect feature, though.
What needs to be toned down more than anything are particle effects. If there are more than a few players around it can get so cluttered it is hard to tell who is using what depending on the classes and can make it hard to see dodge ques.
Quoting for emphasis. The player cosmetics the OP is on about are nothing compared to particle FX, especially since Mega Server was shoved down my throat.
At this point, after two years, I even question if it’s possible.
I do as well. If Anet were totally transparent, my guess is we’d be told that the game engine won’t support a slider, kind of like it doesn’t support multiple players stacking conditions in large events.
Good god, are you me?
What’s in a name? A lot, in my opinion, and since the get-go I’ve never found “Guild Wars 2” terribly appropriate, as I don’t feel that lore and setting is really enough to warrant that “2” at the end of it.
At the end of the day it may just be a name, sure, but I find it a tiny bit disrespectful to the original. Nowhere near as bad as Dungeon Keeper at Syndicate, though (which funnily enough were both Peter Molyneux games).
I actually liked Dungeon Keeper.
I love Dungeon Keeper!
Dungeon Keeper, on the other hand…
What’s in a name? A lot, in my opinion, and since the get-go I’ve never found “Guild Wars 2” terribly appropriate, as I don’t feel that lore and setting is really enough to warrant that “2” at the end of it.
At the end of the day it may just be a name, sure, but I find it a tiny bit disrespectful to the original. Nowhere near as bad as Dungeon Keeper at Syndicate, though (which funnily enough were both Peter Molyneux games).
Native controller support, as well as alternate control schemes/options, would be more than welcome.
There are two ‘mods’ – Combat Mode and Immersive Combat Hud (I think?) – that highlight how well GW2 can play as such. One of the ‘main’ issues with them is that they requires the game to automatically target an enemy on keypress, so using leaps as an escape mechanic near enemies is a no-go.
(edited by Smith.1826)
What needs to be toned down more than anything are particle effects. If there are more than a few players around it can get so cluttered it is hard to tell who is using what depending on the classes and can make it hard to see dodge ques.
Quoting for emphasis. The player cosmetics the OP is on about are nothing compared to particle FX, especially since Mega Server was shoved down my throat.
At this point, after two years, I even question if it’s possible.
Can’t say I like ‘em, so I chose that option. I think I would’ve been more fine with the poll saying “yes/no/indifferent” since it’s fairly self evident that anything can be fixed with slight and solid changes.
I think part of the backlash of this patch comes from an overall discontent with part of the community, who was looking for a reason to attack.
I don’t see any reason why the answer needs to be so deepset. People got pretty upset about the trait changes and quite a few are still complaining about it, or have left the game over it.
This patch looks like more of the same: Trying to improve the experiences for newbies at the cost of what veterans have grown to love.
I think the discontent over stuff like this tends to look very sporadic and temperamental for a couple of reasons. 1) Most of the people who are genuinely angry about it are just going to leave. They aren’t going to stick around complaining until the end of time. 2) The people who stick around may just give up after a bit and give it some time – you only have so much energy to get bothered about things in your life.
Traits were in no way connected to newbs, but to statisfy certain specific group of whiners (and unfortunately they listened to them)
no one asked for trait locking.
some people suggested they should make NEW SKILLS that you could get through gameplay, opposed to only being able to pay 25 skill points (like the universal toxic heal) and that could act as horizontal progression.They then decided to apply this to traits instead, because traits are easier to create. (some dev actually said this in an interview or something)They decided to apply it to old existing traits, and not just new ones, as a surprise twist, but most likely because they felt leveling needed more progression.
it was not a requested feature.It was requested feature because a lot of people whined that reading a manual is crap and they should make it like GW1 skill hunting (becasue that was “awesome”)
It was a requested feature because a lot of people whined that "character is “complete” at level 30 and theres nothing after that"
That one WAS direct from feedback of the “community” and falls on back of the “community”
Enjoy.
It’s worth noting why GW1 skill hunting was “awesome”, and it was because there was plenty to unlock.
On the other end, GW2 trait unlocks were “awesome” because you could progress however you’d like. The issue was finding out how much there was to unlock, leading to a lot of “wait, that’s it?”s.
(edited by Smith.1826)
My concern is less with ‘ascended’ in and of itself and more the fact that they were willing to introduce more vertical progression, with ascended being the precedent.
The second part to that concern is determining “how much is too much”: I wouldn’t be too encouraged to work towards a set of gear that’s 5% better than my previous, but what if it’s 10%? 15%? 30%? How strong would a new tier of gear have to be for it to warrant itself above “fluff”?
Things may currently be stabilized and there may not be any need to introduce more VP, but I don’t have access to their metrics. I’m certainly not going to complain if they keep at as is, but I’m also not going to be terribly surprised should they decide to add more onto it.
(edited by Smith.1826)
Sans ascended gear, there’s nothing you need to grind. But should you want any particular reward, you’re gonna hit some grind.
It’s also the main thing driving their F2P business model: There’d be little incentive to buy gems if the rewards were fairly painless to get.
It’s still a step in the right direction, but still grind.
As has been hinted, the biggest issue is drawing a line to determine the difference between an ‘outfit’ and a set of armor.
I would certainly call the cook’s outfit an ‘outfit’, not so much the ceremonial plate, though.
It is rather interesting to see some people here that I seem to recall complaining about SAB and talking about how it didn’t fit in GW2 now complaining about the (apparent) “permanent” closure of said thing.
First, see Phys’ earlier post. Secondly, that’s not terribly relevant in the least.
Huge thumbs down. Just sell a ‘portable’ Adventure Box, please.
Chaos axe was a symbol of what? Anyone could buy one. It’s not like they were soul bound. People used to sell them in LA and later on in Kamadan.
They were thus a status symbol of “I have money and need to spend it on something shiny”.
Seems to be the standard in F2P games. If a sub-fee game, replace ‘money’ with ‘time’.
Regardless, my mouth would indeed salivate at a ‘perfect’ req. 8 Chaos Axe, but I was just as happy to grab this bad boy.
Can someone please tell me again why they are hurting the beginning of character creation?? Just the thought of making a new alt makes my skin crawl!
Imagine if Skyrim (or any Elder Scrolls game) was changed to where every skill tree required a specific quest to be completed every 25 levels in order to keep progressing it. It -might- make the progression more ‘meaningful’ to a few, but it’s open-endedness and freedom gave it plenty of meaning. It’s sad that leveling in GW2 has lost some of this.
What needed to be done was not stretching out the current progression, it was adding more to it. If this new “progression” was based in entirely new content with entirely new abilities, this would be a very different thread.
Whoops, wrong term. Meant ‘target lock’.
??? No clue what you’re on about, but /shrug
How can a static combat system feel close to an active one? That doesn’t make sense in any language I know.
Well for starters, I don’t find WoW entirely static. Maybe it’s a YMMV thing, but playing a Warrior tank was always a very active and satisfying experience in managing mobs, threat, and mitigation.
I’m not going to argue that GW2 isn’t more “active” than WoW, but it’s still grounded in familiar MMO gameplay. Bodiless blocking, skills-on-the-go, and other common MMO mechanics (fears, roots, invisibility i.e. stealth) are features I’m all too familiar and tired with – all on top of a standard MMO control scheme. I can sympathize with it being “the standard” but I’m getting a bit irked with having to hold the RMB for so long.
100% personal opinion: Being able to use skills while moving seems a bit counter-intuitive in a game with target lock…
(edited by Smith.1826)
??? No clue what you’re on about, but /shrug
I remember being rooted in WoW quite frequently. I’m pretty sure I played other professions though. But saying my profession didn’t root me, when pretty much all the other ones did isn’t really representative of the game.
I can’t recall any melee classes/specializations putting any emphasis on rooting. If not then especially not now. Maybe enhancement Shaman? Wasn’t much a fan of them though, so I don’t know much about the specialization.
Maybe I didn’t use melee professions. But no one ever claimed WoW had active combat. Ever.
Er, is there a point where I said it did? I did say that GW2’s combat feels closer to WoW than any other action RPG, and “skills on the go” helps in driving that feeling home for me.
I remember being rooted in WoW quite frequently. I’m pretty sure I played other professions though. But saying my profession didn’t root me, when pretty much all the other ones did isn’t really representative of the game.
I can’t recall any melee classes/specializations putting any emphasis on rooting. If not then especially not now. Maybe enhancement Shaman? Wasn’t much a fan of them though, so I don’t know much about the specialization.
And I find the amount of movement in GW2 to be just as non-immersive. More importantly, it’s what makes the game feel closer to WoW to me than any other action game or RPG.
Ehhhmmm .. what ? The movement makes you feel like a game where everything
roots you … why other games that root you are better than a game that roots you ?
I can’t remember anything that ‘rooted’ me on my War in WoW, maybe Slam pre-Pandaland. Otherwise it was disco-time.
I’m not a big fan of the ’attacking on the go. Otherwise it is indeed fluid and satisfying, but…
GW2 camera and targeting is still kitten.
Hopefully by GW3 they can drop this archaic targeting/camera system for full action combat. I’m not asking for a TPS, but manual aiming of skills, soft lock targeting of skills (such as mass effect did with powers) and so on. I’m aware ESO has this, but I’ll wait for that to go f2p/b2p before trying it.
I agree with this. I wish I didn’t have to ‘mod’ it to play more like this. Neverwinter has spoiled me in this regard, it controls and plays real well for an ’action MMO".
NeverWinter is also another example of being rooted while attacking.
Are you saying it’s a bad thing? Because it’s a big part of why I found it’s combat so satisfying. Making the right call between attacking or moving can be very rewarding.
Another good example of being ‘rooted’ while attacking are the Souls games, Dark Souls and Demon’s Souls. A great example is the Monster Hunter series, going so far as to not rely on a target lock, leading to an interesting skill ceiling as seen in these few vids here. (may contain foul language, though).
I’m saying it’s a bad thing. lol
I’ve been in real fights in my life and not moving while doing stuff is how you get hurt. Just saying.
But that’s just my opinion of course.
To bring it back to videogames, I’d say it depends on how it’s handled, such as shooters having a difference between ‘running and gunning’ and standing still to take careful shots. Dark Souls 2 broke some ‘new’ ground for itself in being able to shoot while moving, but it’s balanced out by having an increase in draw speed while doing so.
No one seemed to ever mentioned Dragon Nest. It has the most fluid combat system from the action mmo genre. It has an overall better combat mechanics than guild wars 2 but it is instanced. The developers however are making a sequel which will make it open world while retaining the combat system
Sadly, aesthetics are a pretty big point for me when it comes to MMOs, and the overall look of it is not the most appealing. But I have seen some people play through it, admittedly does look kinda fun.
Speaking of Nexon games, is Hurk released for Vindictus yet? I wanna look into that now…
I am bringing it back to video games. Having to stand still while fighting just isn’t at all immersive to me.
And I find the amount of movement in GW2 to be just as non-immersive. More importantly, it’s what makes the game feel closer to WoW to me than any other action game or RPG.
I’m not a big fan of the ’attacking on the go. Otherwise it is indeed fluid and satisfying, but…
GW2 camera and targeting is still kitten.
Hopefully by GW3 they can drop this archaic targeting/camera system for full action combat. I’m not asking for a TPS, but manual aiming of skills, soft lock targeting of skills (such as mass effect did with powers) and so on. I’m aware ESO has this, but I’ll wait for that to go f2p/b2p before trying it.
I agree with this. I wish I didn’t have to ‘mod’ it to play more like this. Neverwinter has spoiled me in this regard, it controls and plays real well for an ’action MMO".
NeverWinter is also another example of being rooted while attacking.
Are you saying it’s a bad thing? Because it’s a big part of why I found it’s combat so satisfying. Making the right call between attacking or moving can be very rewarding.
Another good example of being ‘rooted’ while attacking are the Souls games, Dark Souls and Demon’s Souls. A great example is the Monster Hunter series, going so far as to not rely on a target lock, leading to an interesting skill ceiling as seen in these few vids here. (may contain foul language, though).
I’m saying it’s a bad thing. lol
I’ve been in real fights in my life and not moving while doing stuff is how you get hurt. Just saying.
But that’s just my opinion of course.
To bring it back to videogames, I’d say it depends on how it’s handled, such as shooters having a difference between ‘running and gunning’ and standing still to take careful shots. Dark Souls 2 broke some ‘new’ ground for itself in being able to shoot while moving, but it’s balanced out by having an increase in draw speed while doing so.
No one seemed to ever mentioned Dragon Nest. It has the most fluid combat system from the action mmo genre. It has an overall better combat mechanics than guild wars 2 but it is instanced. The developers however are making a sequel which will make it open world while retaining the combat system
Sadly, aesthetics are a pretty big point for me when it comes to MMOs, and the overall look of it is not the most appealing. But I have seen some people play through it, admittedly does look kinda fun.
Speaking of Nexon games, is Hurk released for Vindictus yet? I wanna look into that now…
(edited by Smith.1826)
I’m not a big fan of the ’attacking on the go. Otherwise it is indeed fluid and satisfying, but…
GW2 camera and targeting is still kitten.
Hopefully by GW3 they can drop this archaic targeting/camera system for full action combat. I’m not asking for a TPS, but manual aiming of skills, soft lock targeting of skills (such as mass effect did with powers) and so on. I’m aware ESO has this, but I’ll wait for that to go f2p/b2p before trying it.
I agree with this. I wish I didn’t have to ‘mod’ it to play more like this. Neverwinter has spoiled me in this regard, it controls and plays real well for an ’action MMO".
NeverWinter is also another example of being rooted while attacking.
Are you saying it’s a bad thing? Because it’s a big part of why I found it’s combat so satisfying. Making the right call between attacking or moving can be very rewarding.
Another good example of being ‘rooted’ while attacking are the Souls games, Dark Souls and Demon’s Souls. A great example is the Monster Hunter series, going so far as to not rely on a target lock, leading to an interesting skill ceiling as seen in these few vids here. (may contain foul language, though).
There’s loads of content out there that I’d love to have more of a reward incentive to revisit. It did work real well in D3, as well.
Whenever I see one of these threads I’m reminded of how insanely easy this game is. You’re basically saying, “I want to craft the best weapon in the game! I should have no resistance in accomplishing this goal.” and if you actually make the legendary you’ll just quit. There was nothing challenging to do in PvE, getting the legendary was the hardest thing.
Challenge is fine. This isn’t much of a “challenge” and is far more an annoyance. Of course, it wasn’t either things for my Guardian when my server was ripping WvW a new one. Having two explore the same map three times was a big annoyance, though.
I wouldn’t call it griefing but it still doesn’t make much sense. Either both dungeons and WvW should be included in 100% map completion or neither of them do and they should have their own seperate titles.
Yeah I wish I had the choice to choose some male animations for my female human warrior. Norn female animations are a lot tighter, though. I may just level one up in the meantime, already got a load of skins.
I’m not a big fan of the ’attacking on the go. Otherwise it is indeed fluid and satisfying, but…
GW2 camera and targeting is still kitten.
Hopefully by GW3 they can drop this archaic targeting/camera system for full action combat. I’m not asking for a TPS, but manual aiming of skills, soft lock targeting of skills (such as mass effect did with powers) and so on. I’m aware ESO has this, but I’ll wait for that to go f2p/b2p before trying it.
I agree with this. I wish I didn’t have to ‘mod’ it to play more like this. Neverwinter has spoiled me in this regard, it controls and plays real well for an ’action MMO".
At this point, I can’t say that I would mind, especially when the game already endorses cash>>gold.
Cash for Gems, Gems for Gold.
The distinction is important because that is what allows other people to turn Gold into Gems, thus NEVER having to pay Cash.
Regardless, you can still give the developer RL currency to receive the game’s virtual currency. In my book that’s “pay2win”.
At this point, I can’t say that I would mind, especially when the game already endorses cash>>gold.
endgame is in dark souls II, its really well designed, it basically is the fact that the game scales in difficulty the higher you get, and that enemies eventually get killed off till the new difficulty. You also have an extremely high leveling potential.
So essentially you have non stop leveling
difficulty increase the more you play(better drops, more exp)
rare(that actually change playstyle) items to hunt, that you can specifically target
many different builds.
And more fun designed fights that dont take forever
I guess I don’t really consider this “endgame”. I’ve usually associated it with the point where you rush to reach max level and say “alright, so where’s the good content?” In the Souls’ games it really boils down to just beating the game over and over – which, obviously, is very strong in the Souls series.
Perhaps my idea of the term ‘endgame’ is colored do to the association with typical MMOs, and I don’t think it does the Souls games much justice. Maybe my perception of MMOs has grown poorly due to so many unpleasant gaming experiences that I just don’t like the terminology :P
I’m not sure at what point did this topic turned into Dark Souls vs Guild Wars 2… But I don’t think it is on-topic
You’re absolutely correct. I just couldn’t allow such a ridiculously false post to stand uncorrected.
ON-topic: That being said, I find myself playing Dark Souls 2 FAR more than Guild Wars 2 (which at this juncture is roughly 0 hours a week) despite it being a single player game with no “endgame” save the arenas. Why? Because it’s actually fun and there’s tons of builds to experiment with.
Sans (maybe) the PvP, the Souls series has zero “endgame”. What it does have is loads of replayability. New Game+, the huge amount of variable and viable builds, the open-ended character and story progression, and the rewarding combat are just some of the major facets that give the game inherent longevity.
Honestly, I’m not too big a fan on the idea of “endgame”. I just want a really solid and replayable game – and unless you find the rewards enticing, I find GW2 to lack a lot of it. To be fair, I felt the same for GW1, but it had loads more due to the amount of customization.
PS and off-topic: The new Dark Souls 2 DLC is well worth it, if you’ve yet to grab it.
At the moment I don’t think it’s that high on the priority list, but I’d imagine it certainly would be should they introduce a new race. They’d stand to gain way more from it in that instance.
Even though I agree it’s a great improvement – especially since my two mains are a War and Guard – I am still bummed that it all has to be throttled by the cash shop.
Why do people need a carrot? I play games for fun. If you need constant rewards, then playing games isn’t for you…
I wouldn’t dismiss the ‘carrot chasers’ and extrinsic rewards so easily, since GW2’s income is based heavily upon both.
Because I live in Australia and the amount of people doing content when I was awake was limited. I had little choice but to accept the meta or never do end game instanced stuff. Not like you can take your heroes and do the Deep or Urgoz’s warren, or even the Underworld. You need a party. Finding one was really hard during off hours.5
Not to sound crass, but I don’t think that’s a good enough reason for accepting the meta. The point of GW was to do it with friends and/or guildies. It wasn’t ever meant to be a single-player experience, there’s other games for that. Nor was it meant to be a “meta” build game, although it kind of did turn into that. The blame was both with ANet’s skill creep, title hunting, and skin farming, and the community in general.
If a pseudo-MMO like GW didn’t have the population you needed to do content the way you needed to, then you have to find one that does. But dumbing down a game known for its higher learning curve and competitive pvp to better serve a casual player base is not the right answer. Just make a new game if you’re going to do that.
A good enough reason for accepting the meta? LMAO! What is this some sort of great moral dilemma of the times. I hadn’t been able to complete UW on my own. I wanted to see it. It was worth accepting the meta to see it after months of trying to find people to do it without the meta. I don’t need an excuse. I don’t need to justify my actions.
I wanted to do the content, it was the only way to get the content done. So I did it. I promise you I didn’t lose a wink of sleep over it.
While most of my pug ‘metabreakers’ were solved with Monk henchies (and after NF, Mom heroed), a huge issue with GW1 was the lack of a proper LFG feature. Finding people to play with meant standing still in an outpost, not playing the game. And you needed 8 people for a huge majority of it.
A global party finder would’ve helped the game tremendously. The only saving grace the game has is that you can at least experience all of PvE solo.
Dumbing down the game wasn’t so that I’d have people to play with. It’s eight years later. These games are much more expensive to make. They’re on a much larger scale. You need more players to play them to even break even.
That’s the business reality. It’s sad that it’s the business reality but it’s like Hollywood adding more starring female roles in Lord of the Rings to attact female viewers. We don’t get to pick and choose the situation in which companies exist. If they want to make games today, any sort of ambitious MMO, you need to bank roll it, and that means you need a business plan. You have to sell that plan to investors.
What Guild Wars 2 did is what WoW did. They simplified the genre to reach a bigger target audience. In some ways Anet was remarkably successful. In some ways it was a dismal failure. But I’m not convince you’ll find anyone willing to risk a huge investment in time and money for a smaller audience.
Not one thing is wrong with streamlining the game, and making it more accessible is always a plus. It’s when that results in a loss of depth thats the problem. They have the potential to increase it tenfold throughout the game’s lifespan and I’m sure at some point they will, but all I can do is wait.
Look, no company with an IP is going to keep the same world and lore and change the title…
Something like “Heroes of Tyria” or “Guild Wars: The Living Story” seem far from offensive in this regard. We knew what to expect out of GW2, of course, so I don’t see an issue in really ‘driving’ it home with a title that helps reflect that.
Yes that I agree with. But if they named it that, do you really think it would have made that much of a difference in perception? Because I don’t. People would still compare it.
I think people will be upset no matter how good the game is. Regardless, I think it would help. Maybe not much, but it would make more sense.
Look, no company with an IP is going to keep the same world and lore and change the title…
Something like “Heroes of Tyria” or “Guild Wars: The Living Story” seem far from offensive in this regard. We knew what to expect out of GW2, of course, so I don’t see an issue in really ‘driving’ it home with a title that helps reflect that.
Honestly, at this point, I’m just convinced that Guild Wars 2 didn’t need to be titled “Guild Wars 2”. The class/ability names and the setting are all that is has in relation to it’s predecessor, and for a game that’s certainly not enough.
There’s nothing wrong with wanting a new game and audience, but then I definitely don’t see what they’d want it called Guild Wars 2 – unless it’s implied that GW2 would end up very differently if it wasn’t?
My other problem is that I want to support ANet, but I don’t want to support the payment model. I still recommend it, I still think it’s worth the box price, I just don’t agree with the methods a free-to-play model introduces.
And yet I play this game almost exactly the same way I played Guild Wars 1. I mean yeah with jumping puzzles, and all, but really the whole way I play really hasn’t changed that much.
As do I, but given that I do the same with many other RPGs (especially MMOs) as well, I’m not sure how that prevents it from taking on a far more appropriate title. We’ve gone to great lengths in other threads to establish the huge difference between the two games, a gap big enough to warrant it a more specific and non-misleading title.
Honestly, at this point, I’m just convinced that Guild Wars 2 didn’t need to be titled “Guild Wars 2”. The class/ability names and the setting are all that is has in relation to it’s predecessor, and for a game that’s certainly not enough.
There’s nothing wrong with wanting a new game and audience, but then I definitely don’t see what they’d want it called Guild Wars 2 – unless it’s implied that GW2 would end up very differently if it wasn’t?
My other problem is that I want to support ANet, but I don’t want to support the payment model. I still recommend it, I still think it’s worth the box price, I just don’t agree with the methods a free-to-play model introduces.
(edited by Smith.1826)
I’ve pretty much learned to cope with it, but I’d really like there to be more FoV + Camera options. That and more control over my mouse sensitivity would be great.
Leveling through GW2 is the best part of the game. Even though the trait reset killed most of the open-ended appeal to progression, it’s still a pretty decent experience the first run through.