Guild Wars 2

Gulesave.5073:

Ahem.

NPC’s getting weapons does not mean we will get them. Nightmare Courtiers have been using whips since launch, and we still can’t use those outside of environment weapons.

Also, things seen in cinematics or art do not always cross over into the game proper, e.g. horses.

There’s a big difference between a random artwork piece not fully representing the game, and an in-game cinematic not representing the game. I’m sure they would never use horses in cinematic pieces.

Quality > quantity.

I’d rather have one rare and useful item every once and then, say, 2-3 per day or week, and feel extremely satisfied with it, than getting spammed with clickable junk that spams more clickable junk that overloads my intentory with valueless runes, valueless skins and valueless materials. You can’t even sell them when they are sellable, because of how common they are.

When you have items like Mawdrey II, that consume massive amounts of “precious” materials for even more junk, and players are satisfied to transform overly common non-tradeable junk for tradeable junk, then you know the reward system in this game is not doing something right.

The logo’s art and font is also stolen from Final Fantasy.

nGumball.1283:

GW1 wasn’t an MMORPG, comparing it with GW2 makes as much sense as comparing WoW to older games in the franchise.

But GW1 has gotten a lot more content you’d typically find in a MMO, than GW2.

pdavis.8031:

Because the LS has only been around for about a year, while a traditional expansion generally takes about 2 years. The LS is fully capable of releasing all that stuff, but instead of getting it in smaller chunks, you’d rather get nothing for a long time, then everything all at once. Which, going by other games who rely on expansion content, leads to a lower player base during the off times, then peaks at when the expansion comes. The LS bite sized chunk way at least keeps players playing on a more regular basis.

FFXIV:ARR does both. It is getting its first expansion before GW2, and we’re talking about a game which was released long after GW2, and it gets monthly(?) patches with plenty of new story missions/ classes/ dungeons, etc.

Chances are, they are currently working on expansion-like content. Their communication policy just happens to be terrible, so we’re all left in the dark, much like what happens with games on minimal support.

Jerus.4350:

DiogoSilva.7089:

Basically, the stat system is broken in this game. It’s a stat system taken from trinity mmos, applied to a game that relies on non-scaling active defenses.

GW1’s attributes would have worked much, much better in GW2. In GW1, you could directly increase the duration and effectiveness of your buffs and debuffs with specific stats, making players having to choose better more support, more control or more dps.

Not really, it’s simply a matter of complexity. Defensive stats serve the purpose of being a safety net for people who don’t have the ability or simply don’t trust their ability to perfectly avoid the damage using their skills.

That’s a perfectly fine situation.

Sure, most will wear zerker, and the overall stat system is simply a slider on offense vs defensive potential with minor changes on how, but I think that’s fine. WIth the level of power within our weapon/trait/utility choices I think it’s fine to leave some elements pretty simple. I mean it’d be a whole other multitude of balance issues if they allowed gear to empower buffing and what not.

Is it necessarily the best, naw, but I think it’s fine and it probably made the developers lives a whole lot easier.

But this stat system is not “simple”. It promises a lot more depth than what it actually delivers.

If Anet ever wanted defensive stats to exist for the sake of tutorial purposes, then we would have 3-4 different combos at most, scaled by risk/ reward. Instead, Anet treats its stat system as a very serious form of horizontal progression, yet most of the combinations are clearly pointless.

Basically, the stat system is broken in this game. It’s a stat system taken from trinity mmos, applied to a game that relies on non-scaling active defenses.

GW1’s attributes would have worked much, much better in GW2. In GW1, you could directly increase the duration and effectiveness of your buffs and debuffs with specific stats, making players having to choose better more support, more control or more dps.

Andred.1087:

GW2 does not need an expansion, and making one would be tantamount to saying “that thing we’ve been doing the last 2 years? yeah, that was a miserable failure.” Which isn’t even true; LS has been very successful, all things considered, and releasing an expansion would only be a step backwards.

Not to mention, if they release one expansion, everyone will be expecting more, and more, and it will be an endless cycle of people being kitteny about lack of content, which is no different than things are now, except you’d be paying for every release, instead of getting it all for free.

Why not get both an expansion and living world content? Isn’t that what other MMORPGs, like FFXIV, are doing?

Ardenwolfe.8590:

It like you guys aren’t even trying. This is from March of last year. Another voice, outside their president, confirms:

No Guild Wars II expansions are currently in development, game director Colin Johanson explained to IGN, noting this may not always be the case.

“Expansions are definitely something that we’ll potentially look at in the future,” Johanson said. “We don’t have a timetable on it. We’re open to it, but I think our major focus as a studio is making the living world concept as strong as possibly can for the players that we’ve got.”

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/no-guild-wars-ii-expansions-in-development/1100-6404829/

This is like watching you guys lose it because someone told you Santa Claus doesn’t exist. Seriously, show us quotes or proof of an expansion in the works and near release for 2015.

Otherwise, you’re kidding yourselves.

But they were already working on secret projects by then. It’s perfectly possible that those projects might have been converted into full-blown expansions in the meantime, especially when Colin later said they were still unaware if their expansion-worthy content would be released in expansion format or not.

Also, the LW team consists of about 20 people. Anet has over 300 employers. Can we call that a “major focus of the studio”? It is not.

I’m not saying that there will be an expansion next year. And we certainly don’t know if their secret projects will be released in expansion format or not. But it’s clear that they are working on something big.

Lothirieth.3408:

Ardenwolfe.8590:

My apologies, but speculation and ‘reading between the lines’ isn’t proof nor evidence to a counter-argument.

I’ve provided proof their president said the opposite of what you’re hoping to hear. If anyone would like to provide proof for the opposite argument, I’m all ears.

Otherwise, all you guys have got is wishful thinking.

No you didn’t. That quote you posted did not say ‘never’.

It was also made 1 and a half year ago, when Colin had already stated that they were having teams working on secret projects. So something was already underway, and all Mike said was that they were not “focusing” on an expansion yet (which is PR speak to say: “don’t think about it now”).

I would say if the original OP thinks DPS is the only role in this game – there is still a lot to learn like the majority of players out there.

And to say GW2 doesnt use support and control to survive in the meta just shows how little you know about the actual meta.

And why is the majority of the playerbase unaware of how the “game works”?

Because the game itself is unaware of its own meta.

• Most of the content in this game can be beaten by DPSing bosses while throwing some random support skills every once and then.
• The stat system in this game does not works well with the combat, yet the game keeps throwing at us new stat combinations disguised as “horizontal progression”/ “more build-diversity”.
• The professions were not designed with the current PvE meta in mind, but with pvp’s, considering how many builds rely on condition damage, healing, point bunkering or stunning/ KD-ing.
• There are pretty much no tutorials explaining the “intended” pve meta and how it works.

The “elite” players might understand why support and control is important in GW2, but that comes entirely from their own experience and not with GW2’s intended design, which keeps trapping and misguiding players over and over.

Here’s the things the community has been asking for:

• More pvp game modes;
• More professions;
• More weapon skills unlocked per profession;
• GvG;
• Guild Halls/ Housing;
• More WvW features and depth;
• More explorable maps;
• More challenging content;
• Mounts (=divisive, but requested nonetheless);
• Raids;
• More dungeons;
• Precursor scavenger hunting and crafting;
• Expanded story;
• Etc.

Here’s what the Living Story Season 2 is delivering:

• More maps;
• Story;
• Cosmetic grinding.

I thought the same the moment I read the description.

The rewards are backwards, yes. The first midseason episode started with a good and interesting body part acquisition, and then later patches downgraded it to mindless RNG. :P It’s like what the community always wished for, but done backwards.

So, when Anet gets to reveal the Dark Knight, it’ll have its roots on ritualists. That’s good to know.

IllegalChocolate.6938:

My suggestion is to not push the subject too aggressively due to the fact that you are in your own limbo and simply let him be with his own devices. If he buys it, good for him, and then you can show him everything you’ve experienced in the game. If not, don’t think about it too much, let it be.

To be honest, if no expansion is announced at the season’s finale, I’ll be the one that needs convincing.

I just had a talk with a friend about this game. He has yet to play it, as he needs a better rig, and I’m not sure if he’s interested in it anymore. He talked about how everyone he knows stopped playing or talking about GW2, and that I was the only one left. I wanted to convince him that GW2 is a decent game, nonetheless, but it’s hard to say anything when all we’ve gotten was a few living world story chapters and feature/ convenience patches for the whole year.

So then I came back home, and it turns out that we’ll have to wait over a month to get the next two story instances. Great, isn’kitten

It’s poorly paced.

You can understand why a mid-season break needs to happen, but this is the second time season 2 is getting a break, and it comes right after two cliffhangers with only one episode left.

It’s poorly paced.

You can understand why a mid-season break needs to happen, but this is the second time season 2 is getting a break, and it comes right after two cliffhangers with only one episode left.

I was hoping they would end this year with a bang.

If someday Anet adds sub/ advanced classes to GW2, I hope each subclass has its own, unique profession mechanic.

The cool thing about professions like dervish and paragon, and if we look at other games, the cool thing behind many of the classes/ champions/ heroes in mmorpgs/ mobas, is their unique game mechanics.

FFXIV, for example, added a Ninja job with an unique Ninjutsu mechanic, where skill input order determines the effect. This is completely unlike any other skill in that game.

GW2’s professions fill most of the archetypes, but their core F1-F4 gameplay mechanics are just a small sample of the endless possibilities that could be designed. For that reason, it would be interesting to see Anet to think of a lot of new core mechanics, especially when some existing ones are as boring as signet-shouts (I’m looking at you, virtues).

GW2 class mechanics already cover GW1 classes.. but in a very vague, unsatisfying way.

Playing a guardian with shouts is completely unlike playing a paragon. Both have shouts and burning, but paragon is long-ranged, has an unique echo mechanic and a very diversified list of support skills.

Playing a cleave guardian is also completely unlike player a dervish. A dervish has very diversified list of enchantments to be stripped and attacks to strip them out, while guardian merely has 3 fixed signet/shout skills under high cooldowns.

Likewise, playing an engineer is nothing like playing a ritualist. With a ritualist, you would have a wide array of spirits to protect your party or to shoot at the opponent, coupled with interesting spirit-swap positional skills and other long-range spells. With engineer, turrets are nothing more than some utility skills that are, usually, secondary to your profession mechanics.

• Heavy-armored;
• Mobile;
• Long-ranged spellcasting;
• Higher focus on control/ offense than support;

Basically, a heavy-armored spellcasting profession that would be the opposite of a guardian.

Malchior.5732:

DiogoSilva.7089:

Malchior.5732:

tl;dr Either Zerker is meta, or something else will take its place. Going against this is pointless.

Or, you know, they could always design combat to require roles.

The zerker meta exists because any party setup is meant to be viable, and when any party setup is meant to be viable, players simply pick the fastest one and stick with it.

A trinity would also have the same problem.(I know you didn’t say trinity, but bear with me) Even worse actually. Suddenly, I can’t play X class because Y is a better healer and Z is a better tank or the party alreayd has too many DPS roles.
It wouldn’t solve the problem most people complain about.

I think GW1 did it really well. Minion masters (to overwhelm opponents or to make them target random pets), control builds (with massive crowd control), healers, protters (damage mitigation), nukers, etc. The most optimal parties always had all of them, and there was at least 1 useful build for each profession.

EDIT

• Prot Monks, ER Infuse Elementalists (using prot monk skills), Ritualists, “Imbagon” Paragons;
• Minion Master Necros, Minion Bomber Necros, Signet of Spirit Ritualists;
• Panic Mesmers, Illusion Mesmers;
• Fire Elementalists, Mark of Pain Necros, any melee cleave builds;

4 different roles right here, and that list doesn’t even includes the classic “tank” role (which was kind of niche in GW1).

Malchior.5732:

tl;dr Either Zerker is meta, or something else will take its place. Going against this is pointless.

Or, you know, they could always design combat to require roles.

The zerker meta exists because any party setup is meant to be viable, and when any party setup is meant to be viable, players simply pick the fastest one and stick with it.

Wait, that was Mamnoon Lagoon?

I like the idea, but have some issues with it.

The “glow” feels weird to my eyes. I agree with the above poster on that. I also wish it wouldn’t take forever. It should have a timer, as well as disappear faster than what it currently does when you put your cursor on it.

For now, I have it disabled as well, but I’m hoping to see it polished someday.

Do you find a game to be immersive when it treats you like a guinea pig in an experimental lab?

Innovation is interesting, but quality and polish should still have the highest priority. I want to be immersed in a RPG game, like a normal reader who wants to enjoy a fun book, not like an academic who wants to review an essay.

There’s also two different types of innovation, based on my observation.

• Innovation for the sake of innovation, or “trying to re-invent the wheel”, where there’s a high risk of failure (an innate characteristic to all attempts of being innovative) for little gain (when it works, chance sare, it’s not going to be any better than what other games already offer, just a bit different).
• Innovation as an evolution, when the developers and the playerbase want to move away from old, archaic and flawed mechanics in an attempt to bring something better. It’s the kind of innovation that strives not only to be different, but to be superior.

I see something like guild missions to be placed in the first kind: an attempt to offer “endgame” content that is different than what other games offer. It was underwhelming, and would require a huge amount of resources to evolve it to the level of already existing and evolved models in the market.

I see something like dynamic events and lack of trinity to be placed in the second kind of innovation: even though dynamic events have several flaws that traditional quests do not, and even though the removal of the trinity has failed, they were born out of the desire to change things for the better (a more seamless exploration, a more dynamic combat), and players will keep requesting them until a game successfully pulls them off.

If NCSoft has talked about an expansion, then it’s because an expansion or expansion-like content is in the works. Or do you people seriously believe that GW2’s publisher has no idea of what Anet’s plans are?

People “missing” include the original director (Eric Flannum?), writers, among others. The living world team’s size also happens to be around 20-30 people, only. So they are clearly working on something big in the background. Even NCSoft has talked about it several times.

Vayne.8563:

There’s a certain type of immersion that can happen no matter what you’re doing. You can get immersed in anything. But games have too many balls to juggle to be as immersive as other forms of storytelling.

Maybe GW2 and MMORPGs aren’t the best examples. But taking control of and/ or help characters in battle, being able to equip and customise them, and chatting with them, while at your own pace, with a great soundtrack on the background, and inside an artistically and mechanically enjoyable world, leads to a very immersive experience. Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, among other single-player rpg franchises/ games, are generally great examples of that.

Vayne.8563:

Matter of opinion. Not even the best game, to me, is as immersive as a good book. And no game, in my opinion, can touch a great book.

I’m not even sure most games can equal really good movies for immersion, because there’s almost always something stupid happening in a game, having nothing to do with the writing.

This is particularly true of MMORPGs.

By immersive, I meant about being inside the world and interacting with it. Obviously, quality has a huge factor in it. But you can have a decent/ mediocre story (by book standards) in a game to rival the level fo immersion a good book can offer, as long as the gameplay (and how it interacts with the soundtrack, graphics, story, etc) is successful at making you feel inside the world and care about the characters.

“Games aren’t books.”

No, they aren’t. Books/ words use and work out your imagination. Games put you right into the world, and allow you to interact with said world and its characters through enjoyable mechanics.

Gaming is the most immersive form of storytelling. We, as gamers, have all the rights to wish for quality storytelling in this medium.

Justin ODell.9517:

Saiyan.1704:

He can join the game. It’s just an automatic -3 (loss) for him.

-3 to -1. Depending on their odds of victory.

And that is clearly a problem with the new system. Instead of offering motivation for a DC player to log back into the game and try to push a victory, it does the opposite. It effectively tells them to screw up. In other words, temporary 4v5 situations turn into full time 4v5 matches. It makes an existing problem worse.

Xista.7391:

Just take WoW for example. Nearly 10 million players. The PvP is crap. If you knew nothing about WoW, you’d be absolutely lost. I played PvP for ~5 years, and I still can’t follow arena streams. Yet their streams get 10s of thousands of views.

Any other MMORPG PvP doesn’t even compare. Rift, Wildstar, ESO, 100x other that came out in the past 5 years….

GW2 is by far the best MMORPG PvP out there. But it’s only small, because GW2’s PvE population is small. If the game had the playerbase of WoW, we’d totally be esprorts.

How does GW1 fits in your theory?

It’s possible that new weapons for necro might have torment-inflicting skills.

Justin ODell.9517:

That said, I think character swapping mid game should be discouraged. Does anyone have an opinion on that?

Definitely agree with you. I never found that “feature” to be fair, and now that profession plays a role in the matchmaking, it would become even worse.

Although I’m talking far ahead in the future, the day we get a build template feature, if coupled with no profession swapping, it would force the meta to branch out a little. Different specialized builds for each profession would become viable for different situations, but some of those would be negated if you simply could change your profession at the mid or at the beginning of a match. For example, solo players want a bunker guardian for the mid point, but the team has gotten no guardian. So one of them can improvize a bit, and load a mid bunker template for their profession, which might not be as good as the guardian at its role (aka, currently not viable) BUT the only and best option for a situation like that.

@Demus, it can be solved with a build template feature. Players would be able to load different builds for different situations before a match begins, and thus adapt to the situation at hand. It would even change the meta a slight bit, because Plan B builds would become viable.

@The issue about disconnections,

Basically, I think we all found a good argument about it. The intended system that will come out at December will not solve the problem with DCs, it will make it worse. The game should motivate the DC’d player to come back to the match and save it. Instead, the new system will make any DCs even more punishing to the team than what they already are, by transforming 1-min DCs into full-time AFKs.

Chaith.8256:

Why are you gonna stress about a few minute timeout? It’s not the same kind of dishonor. It’s not even going to be like the 30 minute ‘deserter’ debuffs across many mmos/mobas.

You’re right, the debuff duration is short. That kind of makes my issues with it not very significant. My suggestion was just to make it a bit less disrupting to the average player, but I guess it won’t be that big of a deal. It did scare me at first, though.

Anyways, I’m very happy about the changes overall.

EDIT

Many players have no sympathy for people who queue and do RL stuff without leaving queue, after all the 4v5’s that others have been forced to endure.

I didn’t want to sound very negative, and I do agree with everything you said. The timeout is short enough, so I don’t see it as a problem anymore. I just didn’t understand it clearly at first, and got a bit scared. For some reason, I was thinking that declining a match would drop my ranking as well.

(However, I would just like to add that, sometimes, the queue pops up right before you have time to cancel it. :P But as I’ve said, that doesn’t seems to be as much of a problem as I thought it would be.)

lordkrall.7241:

Why queue up for a match if you are not going to join a match though?

Usually because of a sudden/ unexpected change of plans.

Isn’t that why check-ready pop ups exist in the first place?

Evan Lesh.3295:

DiogoSilva.7089:

Are you saying that if a ready check pops up, and for some reason out of sudden I decide to cancel my match by clicking the “cancel” button in the prompt, I get immediately “dishonored”?

Yes, this is how it works. Otherwise people would just grief the queue over and over. The amount of dishonor you get for declining the match is minor, so it really shouldn’t affect well-intentioned players. We’re talking about minutes here, not days like in the old system.

I understand the idea, but it does seems a bit too stressful to “well-intentioned players” compared to how some other games do it.

Is it possible to get a compromise? For example, why not having dishonor only kick in if the player declices a match two+ times in a row, and/ or too many times a day?

Evan Lesh.3295:

You only get dishonor if you decline the match-ready prompt.

I’m not sure if I understand this clearly. Are you saying that if a ready check pops up, and for some reason out of sudden I decide to cancel my match by clicking the “cancel” button in the prompt, I get immediately “dishonored”?

If that’s how it works, then I disagree with it. One of the things I like the most about match-ready check boxes, is that they are the last opportunity for me to change ideas. Maybe I forgot to do something? Maybe a friend just came online, and I did not have enough time to cancel my queue to add him into my party? In games like League of Legends, situations like those offer perfect opportunities to cancel a “match found” pop-up before any sort of punishment kicks in. But by your post, it seems like canceling it will punish you.

Justin ODell.9517:

glock.6590:

Yeaa same here…. I play on a very crappy internet and PC, hopefully arenanet can tell if its DC or rage quit. Like giving 5 min to come back would be reasonable, that’s what it takes to reset the PC and stuff.

Sorry, but if you leave for any reason you’ll get dishonor, no matter the length of time. Even the shortest interrupts can have significant impact on the quality of the game for the other players.

Unfortunately there is no real way that I’m aware of to detect real disconnects from someone ripping out their Ethernet cable and setting it on fire in a fit or rage induced passion.

As usual though, if there is good reason too, we’ll take the time to look at this again. I can’t promise any we’ll take any action though.

Penalties for disconnecting has made me stop playing other pvp games in the past. It so happens that my internet connection, for some reason, likes to interrupt itself once or twice a day, for a few seconds long. If this happens (and it will happen) every time I’m working hard for my ranking, and see all my effort wasted and heavily penalized due to random, second-long occurrences, then I’ll have no choice but to stop pvping. :/

Even the shortest interrupts can have significant impact on the quality of the game for the other players.

But here’s the biggest problem: this system might and WILL contribute to that negative impact on the quality of the game.

Assume the following case: a player gets DC’d.
Situation A: No disconnection punishments. Player comes back, and works hard for the team to get the best score possible. The team might hold their scoring advantage, they might still make a comeback, or perhaps get a close lose.
Situation B: Dishonor kicks in. DC’d player knows this, and loses their motivation to log back into the game. They already know their effort for the remaining match will be useless, because they’ll get a loss in ranking no matter what. So they don’t even bother. If the team was holding a scoring advantage, they will probably lose it. If the team was having any hopes for a comeback, they’ll probably be unsuccessful at it. Their lose will probably not be close to victory at all. Everyone loses.

I hope I was clear on my point. Can you see, Justin, why this new system might contribute to the negative impact of a DC? Because it gives to the disconnected player no motivation to come back and work hard for the remaining match.

The new system is, thus, making a problem worse than it is.

A DC’d player who comes back (quickly enough) and works hard should actually be rewarded for that. It’s good behaviour.

Arachnid.4062:

Duo queue is already possible with the current team queue system. What do you mean?

Just as solo queue is possible with the current team queue system. Both aren’t very fair currently with the existing matchmaking.

Roe.3679:

The matchmaking will adjust for the loss of SoloQ. I mean, how many people solo join to teamQ? This will even that out so they play where the belong and more premise teams play other premades.

I like soloQ too but if this is implemented well it won’t matter.

But will it work well? Seems like a very complicated thing to acchieve.

At least duo queue can be a thing again.

I’m generally very excited about this, but I’m afraid that I’m still fed with the 2-years old conquest mode and the never-ending known issues with the meta. However, the day a new game mode is added, I’m sure pvp will be much sweeter to me with all the December changes into account.

(However, playing casually with friends in unranked queue might be fun).

nekretaal.6485:

Solo Q is getting removed. We like Solo Q, so the thread is valid.

There just aren’t enough players in team Q to avoid the organized team vs pug scenario. Good matchmaking would only help if there were a lot more players. And even if getting rolled by an organized team happens every 5 matches instead of every three, that still sucks.

Yeah, I agree. The system should be really strict on this, to the point that solo players should only be matched with premades after long queues, and the skill ratio should not be equal (aka, premades should be of a lower skill level than the solo players they face against).

Unranked queue is awesome for those that want to play “serious” pvp (aka, not hot join) without being stressed out by rank loss. Players will choose it for several reasons: to experiment builds, to learn how to pvp, to play with friends, to enjoy pvp without having enough confidence in their own skill, etc. Hot join, in comparison, is just mindless casual fun.

However, I’m seriously worried about the removal of solo queue. The original team queue was really bad for solo players, so I hope the system is very strict on picking players, and equally strict on making sure that skilled solo players are only matched with premades of a lower skill level. Still, it’s going to be a gamble, so the risk is there for the pvp experience of those players suck.

So, from what I’m getting:

- Practice Mode will be Hot Join skirmishes;
- Improved matchmaking;
- Improved dishonour system;
- Map selection;
- Ladder system;

Nothing mentioned on:
- Balance changes;
- New game modes;
- Improved rewards;

Seems like it’s be a much needed update on infrastructure, but I’m afraid the pvp experience will remain the same (conquest, same maps, same meta).

The third AA attack (the whirl) applies chill. The whirl itself is also interesingly animated, and there’s a green glow on swinging.

I’m almost sure this is a new weapon coming for necromancers.

About the animation being “nothing special”, I’d say it’s slightly more elaborated than guardian’s and warrior’s (not sure about ranger’s). Sure, mesmers have a very unique AA with greatsword, but they’re rather the exception than the rule.