Results 41 to 60 of 414
24-07-2012, 07:41 PM #41
In the beta weekends, WvW had quite a few captain hindsights and armchair generals already. I can imagine the majority of rage will be generated here rather than structured PvP, because if there's anything easier than complaining about a noob, it's complaining about a zerg of noobs.
Here's the wiki entry for WvW: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_PvP
I haven't played DAoC (for more than an hour, anyway), but WvW certainly is building on the system it had.
Last edited by Malawi Frontier Guard; 24-07-2012 at 07:44 PM.
24-07-2012, 07:55 PM #42
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
24-07-2012, 08:17 PM #43
i would love gw2 to the ends of the earth if it gave xp for killing things. there's something tremendously deflating to me when i spend a long time killing something i shouldn't kill and it gives me 15 xp.
i suppose, really, i just want asheron's call back. where you hunted for xp and quested for items (specific, set items).
24-07-2012, 08:31 PM #44
So kill things near hearts..?
Kill things that are part of events.
Why would you waste time killing something for no reasons unless you find it fun in and of itself?
24-07-2012, 09:13 PM #45
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
I wasn't paying attention to the numbers at all really but I remember in the second beta weekend I ignored the map and everything and just went exploring. I killed things if they were in the way and I gained I think four levels just from that, it was pretty cool. I think gw2 is a game that you can just easily get lost in for quite a while.
24-07-2012, 09:35 PM #46
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
- Toronto, Canada
Of course it's less realistic and cohesive but isn't it better than the alternative? In most other MMOs you have a very narrow window of opportunity to play with your friends - basically they must be +-5 levels from you. In GW2 you are guaranteed to play with your friends, be challenged, and contribute equally without your buddies berating you for levelling up without them.
24-07-2012, 09:40 PM #47
- Join Date
- Jul 2012
After playing 3 BWEs, I find this game overly enjoyable. After playing WoW and quit cursing and ranting about it, I feel that Guild wars 2 has been the game that I've been searching for long. It just got everything in it that I like and there is no monthly sub, like wow had. And I can never really get that money spent on basically "nothing". Playing a bit more then 1½ year is quite a sum in the end, expansions excluded. Anyways, enough of WoW. I treat this game like any other game, at checking on what content you get from just the initial purchase, you get alot of content. I know you can't really compare, but price-wise yes. I like witcher 2, but only ended up playing it once through, roughly 30 hours of gameplay, maybe 23 hours, dont remember (will return someday). And comparing to the hours I will probably spend on Guild wars 2, is alot more, due to the high amount of content.
My only "beef" is that I hope, overall that the game won't go soft. As in difficulty level. BWE1 was alot harder then BWE3, starting zone-wise. I like a challenge. And if you like challenges, there are also plenty of that in the dungeons. So hard, it was almost silly, but very enjoyable! Too bad playing just for a weekend is just not enough for good dungeon play, a lot to learn and soak in. Then again, starter areas should be at least somewhat "easy" to get you used to the game. Can't wait for the higher level areas.
Playing WvW with an organized group was great fun. Even when getting stomped was good experience. I remember this epic fight, where there was alot of players in one keep trying to defend it from a horde of enemy players. We had alot of siege built up so we managed to even keep out a huuuge amount of players. It got so intense that the enemy players build a trebuchet where our arrowcarts didn't reach with their range. Of course we got that one down at some point, at least so that I remember, but that had to be done manually, by foot. But to our surprise, they had build up 2 other trebuchets much futher away behind us. And we couldn't really do anything about that. So eventually they broke the keep's backwall and rushed in like ants. We fought bravely for a few mins and even manage to keep them at bay for some time with our arrow spewing beast machines. In the end, we lost the keep.
BUT, that was not the end of it. We came back later, took the keep. Set up siege and hold it for hours and hours. This time, we had alot more arrowcarts, 7 in total. AND 2 catapults, 2 ballistas and 1 trebuchet. Now that was some crazy stuff I can tell you.
If you still have doubts about the game, ask yourself, why not? There is not subscription and you get a lot more content than what your money is worth.
24-07-2012, 10:54 PM #48
But who says that must be the case, why isn't it more that of a choice of 5 you need to go to 2 to get the requisite levels (unless you supplement that xp with stuff from crafting / WvW etc)? If anything its forcing you to see more of the world which is a good thing.
For me it actually creates a much more coherent and integrated world. Viewed from the perspective of a level 80 player going back and killing those level 10 guys (if you ignore the actual numbers - which are clearly not relevant from a story/lore context) then you are fundamentally more powerful - you have learned from your experiences - but those guys are not trivial - which makes more sense, no guy wearing chunky armour and wielding a giant sword should be trivial.
To put it another way - think of the ridiculousness of most MMOs where you have lets say a "Giant Panther" who poses a major threat to you at level 10. At level 40 you come across an "Enraged Giant Panther" who is a reskinned version of the level 10 one. Why should it be that you can now go back and 1 shot the level 10 one?
Where I disagree with the choice they have made is in not naming enemy players in WvW. Its much more satisfying to know who you're killing and likewise if a group of guys brutally slaughtered you on your own its very satisfying to be able to come back with some mates and teach them what for
Of course the cynic in me says they'll do both, but I can hope..
24-07-2012, 11:07 PM #49
Any game that's "forcing" people to play in a specific way is doing it wrong. There is absolutely no downside to giving enough XP so people don't have to clear two starter zones just so they can move on to higher level areas. Especially not one that went out of its way to make lower level content relevant (I'd understand the concern in WoW where you can easily, massively outlevel a zone if you just follow its quest chain these days).
And no it wasn't an issue of not realizing there were events active. There were simply times when there were absolutely no events active in my alts' level range. The only solution to that was doing something completely different which some people may not want to do or just running around clearing more hearts (boring) and gathering stuff on the way. Or moving to a completely different zone hoping to catch an event there, which shouldn't really be considered a solution.
The game may not be about levelling, but levels still act as gatekeepers for new zones and the personal story so I don't see what's wrong with giving players the option to level up as they like, instead of "must do 90% of all XP content and/or go somewhere else and do lower level content to catch up".Stealth Mode!
24-07-2012, 11:29 PM #50
Hmm -- maybe a lot of the differences come from whether or not you think of MMORPGs as primarily an activity that lets you hang out with friends, or as an activity that lets you encounter strangers. If the former, obviously level scaling is a good thing. If the latter, it will make the encounters a little more flattened out across the board. I most always play as a chatty lone wolf rather than a guildie or even a devoted groupie. So that would color my outlook a bit. =P
However, I quite agree with your points, Timofee, about it being ridiculous when a giant panther twice your size suddenly turns "grey" and hits you for zero damage or can't even land a hit anymore at all. And I don't object to newbie zones still being relevant in later levels! I've always thought an MMORPG where five or ten level 1 characters were a match for a max level character, would be kind of great; you'd have to find other things besides merely combat abilities to make levelling up exciting (gaining reputation in the world, learning new utility skills or ancient secrets that don't directly apply to killing giant panthers, etc) and it would make it worthwhile to travel in packs even with people of various levels of experience.
But it sounds like GW2 goes only part of the way there, and is something like this: "High level zones exist. You will get destroyed there as a newbie; eventually you will get SUPER STRONG and be able to go there! However, this SUPER STRENGTH will mysteriously disappear when you go back to your old stomping grounds. You will be about as strong as people who, if they followed you to another part of the world, would be way weaker than you. Unless you were fighting other players, in which case those people who followed you will now be as strong as they can possibly be, barring a few abilities." But if I have misunderstood that, please correct me :) I just can't be bothered to look up details when I'm so busy theorizing. ;)
As for no names in PvP...that's sad, but not surprising. Solves the rotating-server-matchmaking complaint, though =) it hardly matters who you're fighting if you can't even speak to them. (I was sad about this in DAoC too, but the RvR was still pretty fun, so it's not a total loss).
I am not really concerned with GW2 in general though; I don't think I will play it because it seems to have the usual immodest MMORPG outfit syndrome; but I like talking about the design of games like it, nevertheless. =) It sounds like the sort of thing that I could have lots of fun with (especially considering the stuff I've read here about how the exploration is actually pretty worthwhile) as long as I didn't expect it to fulfill any of the expectations I generally hold for MMO's. There are, I suppose, room for many types of worlds in the world.Support for my all-pepperjack-cheese food bank charity drive has been lukewarm at best.
24-07-2012, 11:36 PM #51
Problem G: Common foments to guild drama.
- There is no such thing as a "casual raiding guild." There is only a "font of drama." There is no such thing as an "interguild raiding collective." There is, again, only a "font of drama." The former inevitably splits up when the more active raiders become frustrated with the slow pace of progression due to the more casual players - they don't show up often enough, they don't care about specs or gearing properly, they're not reliable in a pinch, etc - and usually either exclude and/or purge them or quit en masse to join or start a hardcore raiding guild. The latter is the former writ large, where the active raiders of several guilds get together to run dungeons quickly, and whose success attracts their less-active guildmates, who then pressure them for raid invites. Again, the core tends to ditch the chaff. And that's never fun. In GW2, you never have to choose.
25-07-2012, 12:10 AM #52
If you're argument is that you're human you should be able to just do human zones - what are you going to do at higher levels when there's no clearly defined human zone. Additionally a significant part of the lore is about the 5 races coming together, I don't therefore feel its unreasonable for you to have to go to Charr lands.
In that context you would fight the higher level guy and he would provide a solid challenge.
Go back and fight the chap from the beginning of the game and he still poses a modest threat but its obviously your prowess has grown - you have more skills and your considerably better equipment allows you to 'hit harder'
Now assuming that you're unable to force the low level mob to fight the high level mob (and thereby expose the differentials used in the game mechanics), then there remains a good sense of progression without making the original content trivial. You could argue this is more akin to real life
To pick on the analogy of football: its why crappy non-league teams can still sometimes beat the Man Utd's of the world because actually the different between your average footballer and a world class footballer while definitely there, is actually a fairly small margin - yet the differentials we assign in terms of monetary amounts is astronomical
I think the method used in Guild Wars does achieve this sense of progression quite well but the very fact its a game betrays it somewhat. e.g. I am level 40 he is level 1, you might not think you are 40x better but the difference in numbers, unconsciously or otherwise, gives you a definite sense of being vastly more powerful than before. However if we left all the damage/hp etc the same (but its was still invisible in numeric terms) but renamed the levels to be 21 and 20 the perceived difference immediately becomes a lot smaller, simply because 2 numbers have changed.
Last edited by Timofee; 25-07-2012 at 10:49 AM.
25-07-2012, 12:23 AM #53
look at the things that give you exp. I hit level 30 over the weekend, and all I did was get distracted and wander around!
25-07-2012, 03:59 AM #54
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
It's interesting to hear folk worry about the endgame. City of Heroes didn't really have a proper endgame, for the longest time (I believe the most recent updates have focused on adding more max level power progression and content, however). Even without it the game retained plenty of players- given that it was released before WoW it has proved one of the more enduring MMOs. I put this down to three things:
1. The combat is consistently entertaining. The powers arewell designed and the player feels strong.
2. The sidekick system meant you can always play with your friends, no matter the level difference. Teaming is easy and rewarding.
3. The extremely flexible character creation and its wide range of powerset choices meant there was always another character you wanted to try out, so you tended to have a ton of alts to play.
It sounds like GW2 is going hard for having interesting combat and making sure its easy for anyone to play together. I think this bodes well for longevity. If just playing the game is fun, and there's always something more you haven't tried, people will keep playing. No subscription should help with that.
25-07-2012, 07:55 AM #55
25-07-2012, 08:26 AM #56
25-07-2012, 08:32 AM #57
25-07-2012, 12:54 PM #58
25-07-2012, 01:17 PM #59
25-07-2012, 01:34 PM #60
Curse you all. I will buy this game and my incredibly large backlog will stagnate. :(