Guild Wars 2

I am absolutely primed for challenging group content which will bring my guild back to Tyria!

IndigoSundown.5419:

No, all they’ve done so far is create a game for players that hate raids and endgame gear progression. The players that love raids and endgame gear progression have nothing here, and are waiting to see it materialize.

No, I was correct in my phrasing. It’s MMOs. Players that hate MMOs love GW2. They’ve never delivered on the promise for players who love MMOs.

So, that’s where raiding comes in. The game absolutely needs some form of large-scale organized cooperative PvE progression. If it’s raiding, then fine.

FrownyClown.8402:

They have already achieved this. Just because one thing is similar to a traditional mmo does not mean it has become a traditional mmo. They should just make everyone a goat and we can fight over which grassland is the best to graze on. That isn’t traditional.

No, all they’ve done so far is create a game for players that hate MMOs. The players that love MMOs have nothing here, and are waiting to see it materialize.

Astralporing.1957:

Additionally, avoiding the term “raid” will mean far less people will get mentally locked into preconceptions taken from WoW raiding design.

But that familiarity is what would draw players to the game in the first place. It’s no mistake ArenaNet is using the word “raid.”

NoTrigger.8396:

a raid isnt “jump in, zerg it down, get the reward”
a raid needs planning, an organized and coordinated group of players, skilled players, tactics and lots of other stuff that would be just too complex for open world events.
it should take top guilds weeks to kill a boss for the first time. not a few hours or 3 days.

This, all day.

The issue with GW2 raids will be that players have been groomed in a way that they will be resistant a level of difficulty and required teamwork necessary to deliver best-in-class raid encounters.

There should be only 1 raid size (at least 20), and only 1 raid difficulty (freaking hard). It should required a practiced team of static team members to complete (no queueing). Find a way to make roles moire meaningful so that a healer can be a healer.

Make the environments and story spectacular.

Simple as that.

If done right, this may bring me and my guild back to the game.

AnthonyOrdon.3926:

I definitely agree that in-game world boss availability messaging is something that should be implemented and it’s something we would like to do.

One thing I’ve always enjoyed about map completion is the abundance of things to do in any order I wish. Events could sort of have this nature if we showed them map-wide. But even telling players about events that are across a single map can be tricky business depending on the nature of that event. A number of events can be completed well within the time that it would take to travel to it from even the nearest waypoint. Yet a good argument for showing them anyway would be a map such as Dry Top or the Crown Pavilion, wherein you might care about the state of the events even if you don’t plan on participating in them.

Do you think that showing all of these events makes the map feel cluttered? Would it make finding the information you care about more difficult?

I think events should just remain discoverable. The map completion is sort of already check-boxy enough in my opinion.

ArenaNet will refuse to tell us active player counts.

All they have to do is define an active player (say, someone who logs in at least every 2 weeks and plays for 30+ minutes). And then just tell us how many that is.

But they won’t because that number will be shockingly low.

So, you want WoW Garrisons!

Proper housing would probably get me playing this game.

It can’t come fast enough. It can finally put some structure and create actual team play opportunities, instead of spammy zerfests.

I feel if GW2 actually shipped with trinity roles, we’d be looking at an entirely different picture right now as far as popularity.

Phadde.7362:

It’s very reasonable to argue that adding an instanced alternative would make the Open World version suffer.

Why? They already have the open world event scaling technology in place, it would work as it ever does. Regardless of when the instanced version is released. And regardless of how many people are there.

Phadde.7362:

Instead, wouldn’t it make sense to release the instanced version (in a seprate part of the Mists so that it makes sense) a week or so after the original one has ended?

All they need is a little twinkly green thing like they use for personal story instances… maybe make it blue to indicate a raid instance entry point in the open world. Only visible to those in a group and have the option turned on.

Vayne.8563:

You split the playerbase and end up taking some of the people doing the open world event into the smaller raid event (because you’re not going to have an 80 man raid) and then if ten or twenty groups do this, there might not EVER be enough people to do it in the open world…and that’s a problem, because Anet wants this game to be about the open world. They’ve always said that.

But of those guilds aren’t doing the open world content anyway because it sucks, why does it matter?

I said it long ago before launch, many times since, and I’ll say it again:

The open world boss events should offer instanced versions that are tuned up for guilds. That way the open world encounters can remain open for players that just want to deal with them that way.

It’s clear ArenaNet wants to provide a challenge to organized groups, but the open world is not the place to do it as it will displace those who DON’T want that.

Instanced is better.

Rhyse.8179:

No. World events are world events. Dungeons are for instancing.

It really needs to scale in some way though, so that it can be done with fewer or more people as needed. Otherwise it will just end up as legacy content that everyone hears about but noone can remember ever actually doing.

That is precisely why it should have an instanced version for the guild challenge… and the open world easy mode version for the zerg – with vastly different loot tables.

They sure would. They would provide more of the experience large organized groups of players are looking for.

Jski.6180:

Open world by far you get to play with other ppl at any time with out needing to be consure with the 5 man limit. Its a question of mmorpg vs HUB games open world is an mmorpg instanced is more HUB game.

Well, let’s face it – you’re not really playing WITH other people at all – just playing along side them. They may as well be NPCs.

Instanced, large-scale group content for stuff like this is a much better experience.

There’s no reason they can’t leave open world versions of these bosses as they are for everyone – but then provide an instanced version for guild progression of the hard modes.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

People complained about getting too much content, so Anet slowed things down. This is a great disappointment for players like me who liked new content every two weeks.

I think like he said, that content was confusing because it was too fast – and ultimately lacking of depth and meaning because the next content patch was always just around the corner to take the focus off of the current one.

Twice a month… even once a month is simply too often.

I don’t think it’s an expansion… merely a Warcraft-sized content patch. Bigger but less frequent, which makes more sense.

Vayne.8563:

You can’t have a MASSIVE multiplayer game without masses. And if everyone walks away…no masses.

There are still people that play the game. The key to me is make more team based activities (raiding) for progression, instead of everyone clumping up and running around Queensdale with strangers.

imsoenthused.1634:

And what you are ignoring is that for many gamers, myself included, ascended armor is required by the the simple virtue of being BiS. So, again for me and gamers like me, the ony difference between ascended gear and grinding out those kurzick and luxon points is that getting the the points was something that didn’t take too long and that I enjoyed doing, while ascended gear takes way too long and I don’t enjoy doing it at all.

That really is your own personal play style choice though… what it comes to though, and why you’re frustrated – if you don’t like the game in the first place, then playing more of it to get your perceived “required” gear is going to feel even worse.

If you enjoy the game, and are simply playing more of it, then there should be no issue.

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

Why is this thread still going on? They already confirmed, it’s not happening!

It might happen in asia (even that is not is not set in stone yet) but not for the western version.

You really can’t ever say never. If it looks like it’s working to them in the east, it’s a simple matter of flagging it for the western builds as well.

Ashabhi.1365:

You have to understand that some Asian localities pay for their internet by the minute. Adding a VIP to allow them to maximize their play time is good business sense in those areas.

So, we’ve somehow switched around from a time where the west was sub-based and subscriptions were shunned in the east… to the point where now, the east prefers subs and the west will have none of it?

Call me confused.

I guess I just don’t understand the big deal with vertical progression… What’s fun about weilding the same sword you did in 2009? “Skins” don’t really represent progression, just choice.

Being “forced” to do something is entirely in the mindset of the player

Vol.7601:

Mods should close this thread already.

Outrage was created, you got a response that refuted it all, false outrage continues to ensue for nothing.

I’m not for or against any kind of VIP membership, but…

1) The image was in English
2) The “sub”/“fee” models are typically more Western-market models
3) Blizzard said the same thing when their in-game store was mined.

Personally, I think I’d welcome a fee-based (subscription) if it would result in more consistent larger content patches that also worked toward bringing new types of features and systems to the game like raids, mounts, etc.

TheDaiBish.9735:

nexxe.7081:

There would be more coordination, and if Person A taunted first, and was about to die, Person B could taunt it off, or the other Persons could use combos on Person A and heal him.

Except this tactic is already in the game in the form of stuns, knockdowns, knockbacks, and pulls.

Not the same, and since no one groups thanks to open tagging and shared resources, there’s no communication to pull this stuff off.

This is ultimately the problem with allowing players to acquire gold with real money… it’s part of the business plan, but not something I favor in my MMOs. It’s the main reason I don’t play the game.

Marcus Greythorne.6843:

killcannon.2576:

Hyperbole huh? Nah…just facts, sorry. There is no way in hell you could talk a WoW player into running something 71 times waiting for a drop.

Even back during Vanilla I only had to run speed Strat like 10 times to get the rare mount to drop for me.

Droprate Strat-Mount: 0,7% (760 out of 105334)
http://www.wowhead.com/item=13335/deathchargers-reins

no comment

That’s a different and rare type of situation. Normal progression in WoW for basic gear might be 7 times, certainly not 71 times.

Healix.5819:

Would you be happier if 1 ascended weapon dropped and everyone who participated got to roll on it? That’s why RNG can feel so bad.

Personally, I think they should have gone with a limited personal and traditional loot system, because people would feel more rewarded for seeing the possibility of winning an item, rather than not knowing. In the end, it’s the same thing rewards-wise.

This would be a great change… there should be a really good chance for it to drop, with everyone getting a chance to roll for it.

Something to be said for traditional loot systems. Across the board this would be a great change to the game. Eliminate personal loot.

ShiningSquirrel.3751:

Legendary armor and crafting to level 1000!
Mounts
Guild Halls
WoW style raids
Player housing
Open world PvP

Or maybe the elder dragons will return in force, rez the cities to the ground, and the game will be reborn from scratch!

If they managed to announce all of those things, it would likely bring be back to the game.

Valanga.5942:

killcannon.2576:

NDA

15 characters

Nope.
NDA has been lifted for level 1-15, i know because i’m betatesting it.

Anyway, game looks really good, engine runs already smoothly and i have yet to see major bugs.
Combat is really dinamic, fun and tactical, expecially for group content.

And this topic is gonna get locked, and i’m going to sleep so it’s a waste of time writing stuff down, just check on youtube, streaming videos are literally raining lately.

It’s not lifted for you; just the press. You just broke the NDA.

Not taking anything away from how cool SAB is, but it is definitely not an expansion. And if you look at the ridiculous selections across the board, it really has no credibility.

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

all “pay to win” arguments about guild wars 2 are invalid.

because you can buy gem store currency using in game gold.

The fact that you have a route to in-game gold via real cash is the issue that makes it p2w. It’s no mistake that Legendary items are not soul bound

Vayne.8563:

Behellagh.1468:

Well WoW was earning upwards of a BILLION dollars a year in subscriptions at one point and with cash flow like that, you can have TV commercials starting Capt Kirk and Walker Texas Ranger and Mr T and a Toyota pickup truck. In the 5 reported quarters for GW2 they have yet to break a quarter of that. Money matters when it comes to advertising and when you have Scrooge McDuck piles of money to swin in, it’s a lot easier to do.

Long before WoW was running those ads, it could afford to advertise heavily and it DID advertise heavily.

Lest you forget Warcraft 2 was wildly successful and WoW was piggybacking off that. Those who were actually there at WoW’s launch would remember what a complete and total disaster it was. The amount of server downtime was legendary. Why did people stay?

Because there was nothing else to play, because there was little competition and WoW kept advertising.

They made zillions of dollars later, sure, but they already had a huge budget for advertising even in the beginning. That’s what big companies can do that smaller companies can’t.

WoW did not advertise much at all at launch. Maybe the standard print ad in PC Gamer. It was… maybe 5 years before they started a real active campaign? Not until WotLK.

I was there at WoW’s launch and it was nowhere near as bad… the only issue I had? Loot lag… because there were so many players. And some login queues that lasted for months because there were so many players coming to the game.

WoW’s success was due to two things: 1) an incredible game and 2) incredible word of mouth.

Vayne.8563:

Wow is a game that was released to almost no competition with a war chest a mile high from sales of other games. They spent more money on advertising than Anet could hope to.

So this comparison is beyond meaningless. A game comes out with no competition, and a fortune to advertise and does well. No big surprise there.

If WoW was released today, no one would care.

WoW actually didn’t do much of any advertising at launch. And ArenaNet had quite a warchest based on all of those sales numbers.

The comparison is pretty sound, especially when coupled with Mike O’Brien’s pre-launch statements about beating WoW.

It seems like developers are afraid to stick to their original vision and let “metrics” dictate too much of what’s happening. I think it happened with SW:TOR (that ended up being a VERY different game than it was going to be.) and I think it happened here w./ GW2.

DrDivine.5378:

Zeldain.5710:

You said something about “more focus on teamwork” but this is likely why they are leaving. There’s actually no focus on teamwork to speak of, which WoW does very well.

It depends on what you mean by that. Sure, Wow has you fulfil roles like a tank, healer, etc. and with Guild Wars stripping that, players become a little more independent.

However, events and killing enemies becomes more player friendly as it gets rid of camping. You aren’t racing with another player to get the first hit on an enemy, it allows everyone to participate and get a share of the prize. Compare that to WoW, where only the first person that hits a spawn gets a reward.

But that competition is a great thing and what provides the actual social foundation to form friendships.

Here, in GW2, there’s no need to talk to other players ever. You can’t form friendships that way.

However, if you must band together in order to overcome a challenge or cooperate on an effort, that’s how friendships can start. It’s no guarantee, but without that starter it will never happen.

That’s what I mean by lack of teamwork here.

Malchior.5042:

Apps? See the API section of the forums where the community has grabbed the reigns and done the work on their own!

I must have missed the iPad app that you could log into and move your character through the world with Waypoints, as they were demoing in 2010

That’s the kind of next-gen experience I was hoping for, but a set of APIs doesn’t really allow for that.

This could have been a true next-gen feature in the MMO genre, the way it was being presented.

It stinks there’s not even a web-facing character armory, or anything.

The combat itself is not bad, but the class synergy with other classes is where it falls flat – nothing really matters. The boon/condition system is too insignificant, there are no real crowd control options for tactics, and there are of course no healers or tanks.

So while there may be fun in-the-moment combat, it doesn’t translate well to an MMORPG in my opinion.

You said something about “more focus on teamwork” but this is likely why they are leaving. There’s actually no focus on teamwork to speak of, which WoW does very well.

ShiningSquirrel.3751:

It is not a PC replacement by any stretch of the imagination. It’s a console, nothing more. I can put my Xbox on my desk and it is still only a console. As to running games from any platform, well that is true, as long as that platform is Linux or Linux, or maybe even Linux. It does not support the huge PC games library, which is already a major flaw. GW2 run s flawlessly on my PC on the highest settings. Why would I need more power? You can run an old DOS based game on an I7, but it is not going to make the game run any better. Since you are stuck on a Mac, I can see where you would want an alternative for gaming but those of us on Windows based PCs really don’t need another gaming OS, especially one that does not support 99% of the games available and never will.

Ok, just to be clear: My PC IS a game console running Windows. That’s it. It’s a full on PC replacement for me.

- I hate Windows
- Windows is inefficient for games
- Windows is bloated and does things I don’t need it to do
- Windows is a resource hog

Therefore, I want my desktop console to run SteamOS – a lean OS designed only for games.

As I mentioned, my Mac plays every game I want it to except for one – WildStar. But, if I could play all of those games on a dedicated desktop console than runs rings around a Windows PC, I’d gladly do so. I like to save my Mac for real productivity anyway – it’s what makes me my money.

You don’t understand just what an efficient OS could do for your gaming experience. If you have to use Windows for other crap, sucks to be you, but I promise your gaming experience would be hugely better!

ShiningSquirrel.3751:

Then your talking about a console, and like I said, I already have all the consoles I need.
If all it does is play games, it’s competing with the Xbox, Playstation and Wii not with PCs and in that case, it has nothing to offer that my other consoles don’t already have and more.

FYI, I downloaded and setup the current version of the Steam OS and after spending a couple of days playing with it, I am even more convinced it’s only going to be a flash in the pan and easily forgotten. It’s really nothing special at all and setting it up was a HUGE pain, far more then the average gamer is going to bother with before they get frustrated and give up.

I’m talking about a desktop console. A PC replacement. Far more powerful than the Xbox One or PS4 and always will be. Those consoles can’t hold a candle to the hardware I am running SteamOS on. It has EVERYTHING that your consoles do not.

This means that complex and deep games like GW2 or other MMOs could run on SteamOS without worrying about a console controller. It also means it will run games that are available on all platforms much better than any console.

ozmaniandevil.6805:

Try not to forget that the WPs are a gold sink in game. I doubt ANet is going to want to take those away.

I would also like to see data on zerg trains causing loss of customers.

Mounts could be the new gold sink.

ozmaniandevil.6805:

The open world is way too big. You know how many world bosses would get done if there were no WPs? None. I’m not wasting an hour running from one side of the Tyria to the other just to do an event. Ever. It would be over before I got anywhere anyway. Oh, or maybe I could just make 30 characters, one for each huge map, and park it there. That sounds like fun…. NOT.

It’s going to take a developer to stand in the face of players like this and build a world where travel matters, leaving them with their jaw hanging open in disbelief. Only then will they see that it’s actually better for them.

Yes… Waypoints definitely made the amazing world feel completely insignificant because you could skip over it. I think it;’s one of the factors that really contributed to my decision to leave the game.

Aeonblade.8709:

Zeldain.5710:

ShiningSquirrel.3751:

I have a PC and it does far more then Steam can ever hope to do so your argument is falling on deaf ears. Steam OS offers nothing that I would be interested in, absolutely nothing at all. I have no use for a light weight OS, I want an OS that can do something else besides play games. Dedicated gaming machines are actually a thing of the past.
Now people want something that can do more, something that can be a whole entertainment center. Steam is a leap backwards.

But I don’t want or need it to do other things – I have a Mac for that.

If it can a) turn on and b) play games, that’s al I need in my high power desktop console.

Your gaming experience would be better AND cheaper with SteamOS on your hardware instead of Windows – period.

I feel bad because this really doesn’t have much to do with GW2 other than hoping Anet ports to Steam, but it’s a good discussion.

Steam has terrible support and terrible optimization on their Steam gaming platform. It’s so bogged down with garbage, I don’t understand why anyone would subject their PC to those products.

Thinking the OS is going to be somehow better just blows my mind. It’s like assuming the next president is going to be better just because it’s the next president. There is nothing to base what the OS will be capable of beyond what the company says and you can’t trust a word that comes out of their mouths in my experience with them.

It’s going to automatically be better at the tasks they designed it for because it doesn’t care about all of the things Microsoft has to make Windows be able to do.

Beyond that, they get to ditch DirectX in favor of OpenGL which when optimized is far more performant. Less of your system resources such as RAM or HD/SSD space will be consumed by SteamOS.

It’s a win-win for gamers… unless you’re so entrenched with Windows that you are forced to use it for other things. But once we see some gaming benchmarks out of SteamOS, gamers will start to pay more attention… and there will be no way to get those same numbers out of a Windows box without doubling the price (or possible at all.)

ShiningSquirrel.3751:

I have a PC and it does far more then Steam can ever hope to do so your argument is falling on deaf ears. Steam OS offers nothing that I would be interested in, absolutely nothing at all. I have no use for a light weight OS, I want an OS that can do something else besides play games. Dedicated gaming machines are actually a thing of the past.
Now people want something that can do more, something that can be a whole entertainment center. Steam is a leap backwards.

But I don’t want or need it to do other things – I have a Mac for that.

If it can a) turn on and b) play games, that’s al I need in my high power desktop console.

Your gaming experience would be better AND cheaper with SteamOS on your hardware instead of Windows – period.

I feel bad because this really doesn’t have much to do with GW2 other than hoping Anet ports to Steam, but it’s a good discussion.

MrRuin.9740:

This. Why do people think Steam is going to replace Windows in one fell swoop?
SteamOS isn’t competing with Windows. Its competing with PS4 and XBone for living room space.
I am not a Windows fanboy, but why would I want to pay Valve for a duplicate system that all my other programs won’t run on? Why would the average PC user want to switch everything they have when Windows will play the games they want just as well as Steam and still do everything else the way they have been used to for the last umpteen years.
And as a go-to for putting the image on my TV…..anyone that knows how to plug a DVI or HDMI cord can do that currently now buying a $30 cord rather than a $500 box.
I’m not against SteamOS or the Steambox either. I believe it will find its niche in the living room market with the PS4 and the XBone, and of course amongst enthusiasts, but don’t believe it will topple Windows as the dominant platform for PC. At least not right away in one fell swoop like some people seem to believe it will/should. Maybe after a few/many years of market penetration and making a Windows —> SteamOS transition for all all tasks besides gaming for the average PC gamer. Enthusiasts and early-adopters don’t fall into the category of an average PC gamer.

Of course it wouldn’t happen over night, but, it could definitely happen for people who own Windows for no other reason than to play a game or two (like myself.)

I’m a Mac guy, and most of the games I want to play run natively on the Mac. The performance isn’t always as great as Windows… but that’s precisely the kind of edge that SteamOS would have over Windows – performance.

I want a desktop console… something that hooks to my Apple 27" Cinema Displays. Something that works with my mechanical keyboard and Naga mouse. But on my desktop, in place of my PC. This is where all of my good hardware is, not in the living room.

Despite what Valve is creating the SteamOS for, there will be a huge contingent that will use it to build destkop consoles, and I hope studios and publishers really jump all over it.

Since ArenaNet is just down the road from Valve, maybe they could work on being the first MMO on SteamOS

ShiningSquirrel.3751:

No, I do not. I have dedicated game consoles. Why would I need another one?
No gaming company is gong to stop producing Windows games and move to Steam. You go where the money is. Windows is the dominate OS and Steam is not going to change that. I find it mind boggling that people are pushing for ports when the OS has not even made it past the testing phase and may never even get off the ground. I wonder how many here have even bothered to download it and try to get it working?

Because THIS gaming console can exceed your wildest dreams of power – it’s a PC. And it’s a lightweight OS designed for gaming with NONE of the overhead (or legacy bloat) of Windows.

I am dying for the day I can put my self-built Steam Box on my desktop in place of my Windows PC. And that day is coming… faster than you realize.

It’s better for gamers!

OmaiGodman.2098:

If that monster hardware doesn’t have support for your light-weight gaming OS it’s not really gonna go anywhere now is it?

It’s generic hardware… SteamOS runs on your PC. Or the one you can build. That’s the whole point.

If studios start supporting SteamOS it’s better for gamers and curtains for Windows (hehe).