Guild Wars

[MD!]

I'm rather conflicted over whether to buy Guild Wars. (Currently $15 for the Trilogy and $10 for Eye of the North.)

On the one hand:
-it looks beautiful
-no subscription fees
-I've heard the mechanics are relatively strategic and interesting
-minimal grind

on the other hand:
-it's an MMO, and as a rule I find MMOs extremely tedious
-no jumping
-probably a lack of fellow newbies to group with etc.
-even at sale prices, I really shouldn't be spending money on games right now

Basically, what I'm looking for is a wonderful world to explore. Repetitive combat bores me, and I tend to prefer as much directness and freedom in the controls and physics as possible, which is why the lack of jumping is a worry. I played the trial a while ago and was still not sure. The world looked very nice but it wasn't clear how much actual exploring would be possible, and I didn't get to do anything mechanically interesting, but it was very early days.

Any advice?

[Skalpadda]

The basic mechanics of the combat won't get that much better, but setting up different abilities can be quite interesting. I found the questing in Guild Wars to be rather "meh", it might not be grindy in the traditional sense, but it's very formulaic unimaginative MMO stuff, over and over.

I guess if you're not super interested in the game and weren't wooed by the trial odds aren't very good you'll like the full thing enough to motivate buying it.

[Giaddon]

I played the original Guild Wars to the end when it first came out. If you're the kind of gamer who is bothered that there's no jumping, Guild Wars is not for you. Really. You click on an enemy, and your dude will attack it. You click an ability and you'll do it.

In terms of exploration, most areas are set up as hubs that lead to linear paths, if I remember correctly. That said, the areas are pretty.

I really enjoyed it. I thought the classes were interesting, and building a suite of abilities to take into the field from a larger "deck" of available abilities was really fun. But if you want to feel in direct control of the character, you'll probably be frustrated.

[MD!]

Thanks guys, I appreciate the balanced advice! Sounds like it's probably not for me. I'd be prepared to put up with some frustration if the payoff was worth it, but if there's not much actual exploration I think I'd need to be actively enjoying the mechanics to make it worthwhile, rather than just tolerating them.

[Olero]

MD! Have you tried the free trial yet? It gave me enough motivation not to buy Guild Wars (the massive ammount of "Fetch me this, escort that person, kill x of those" quests they gave me at the start was very off-putting. Not a good way to sell your game for sure!)

[soldant]

I played it all the way through when it first came out as well. Enjoyed it back then but I can't get into it now and honestly I can't recommend it. There is a very linear progression with very little exploration (actually pretty much none), it isn't an open world like traditional MMORPGs (since it uses extensive amounts of instancing to keep costs down), and the quests are pretty uninteresting. To its credit it does a better job at having a storyline than other MMOs but it's still kind of grind-y regardless. There are AI companions that fill out the roles of other players which are at least somewhat decent enough to play through the game so a lack of other players isn't usuallly a problem.

But yeah, wouldn't recommend it today. It was great back in the day as a more action-oriented, free persistent game, but it's not in the same class of games as something like WoW. GW2 looks good though!

[arienette]

I been playing it on and off since the beginning, still really enjoy it. It's very different to most things out there and especially with Nightfall and Eye of the North the quest design was great. But if you go in expecting a traditional MMO you won't find it, it's much happier doing it's own thing. I'd recommend anyone try it, but if anything start with the later campaigns. Nightfall and Eotn both have better design, more interesting challenges and more in the way of exploration.

[lunarplasma]

I've played Guild Wars for a while now (and recently got some 5th Birthday gifts) so here is the view of someone who has played a lot of the content:

PROS:
* No subscription fee!
* You can re-spec your character if you feel like it, for free
* New content is still being added (Guild Wars Beyond, to tie in with GW2)
* It isn't a click-fest, and positioning can still be quite important (body-blocking, for instance)
* You can solo the entire game, with a fully customizable NPC party
* Your performance is not determined by your ultra-rare expensive phat lewt, but by your choice of skills in your skillbar
(and how/where/when you use them!).
* Instant travel to any hub from anywhere
* It streams content, so if you don't have to download absolutely everything before you can start playing.

CONS:
* Quests can be quite boring
* Can actually feel quite grindy
* Can get quite lonely out in the wilderness, due to the instanced nature of explorable areas
* Some voice acting in Factions is bad to a legendary degree.

Overall I'd say it's different from every other MMO out there. However, given the criteria you've given for what sort of world you're looking for, I think it isn't likely to be your cup of tea. Still, worth a shot, I would say.

[Lightbulb]

Its not an MMO its a coop linear RPG.

The best part for me was the Guild vs Guild (clan matches) but I doubt theres much action there these days.

Wait for GW2. :)

[arienette]

@Lightbulb

It's an online game played multiplayer by a massive number of people, what more do you want? The definition of MMO is so loose these days it's still the best fit term.

[Lightbulb]

@Lightbulb

It's an online game played multiplayer by a massive number of people, what more do you want? The definition of MMO is so loose these days it's still the best fit term.

Counter Strike is an MMO? Quake 2 was an MMO?

No clearly they are not.

An MMO needs to have a way for many players to be in the same area. 8 player coop is not an MMO by MY definition.

---

On a side note I hate the term MMO anyway. I always prefered PW (Persistent World) which for me is the crux of what an MMO should have - a lasting world which players can affect. Of course not all MMO's fit the PW template but I feel the best ones do...

[amandachen]

Well, you can get large gatherings in towns. But most of the fun gaming in GW is in small groups within instances, yeah.

[Batolemaeus]

Actually, the original definition of an "mmo" is that it is a persistent world.
It's just that everyone slaps "mmo" on anything because wow made millions and thus surely anything that gets called an mmo will make millions too. I wish I was joking there..

GW therefore is not an mmo. It's a cooperative pve game with a very elaborate lobby, though. And a pretty well designed one too, for the most part.

[Lightbulb]

@Batolemaeus I agree entirely.

It also a competitive PvP game - which I hope GW2 has some of too.

--------

However to answer the original question: I really loved play GW, but I wouldn't play it today. If you don't like the MMO style fighting its not for you. I played it for hundreds of hours but I eventually grew bored of it. But then I grow bored of all games eventually...

[winterwolves]

I played GW a lot (with all expansions!) but it's a bit boring later on (and grindy!). A thing I loved though was the possibility to solo using NPC. If only other MMO had this options (like EQ1-2... eheh). Probably I'm the only one who likes to play solo MMORPG though!!

[Aurelia]

It's only grindy if you want to get the titles that grinding rewards. You can still play through the main part of the games without doing the repetitive stuff, and now you can have 7 heroes (after all the fingers-in-ears-nope-never-nevar! shouting from some people *cough* Gaile *cough*) it's even easier to get to the endgame.

*waves to Lightbulb from Heroes of Talia leadership* :)

[winterwolves]

Now you can have 7 heroes!? woot... I might actually dig the box of the game and reinstall it then! :)

[squirrelfanatic]

Yeah, setting up your own 7 "man" rape-train is pretty funny. I am by no way a PvP elitist, but PvE has become even less challenging. But maybe that's fine. Most people will have completed most parts of the PvE content anyways, GW2 is on the horizon (if only as a tiny, tiny spot), so now is the time for quickly blasting through your enemies to see the stuff you have missed out beforehand.

[Lightbulb]

It's only grindy if you want to get the titles that grinding rewards. You can still play through the main part of the games without doing the repetitive stuff, and now you can have 7 heroes (after all the fingers-in-ears-nope-never-nevar! shouting from some people *cough* Gaile *cough*) it's even easier to get to the endgame.

*waves to Lightbulb from Heroes of Talia leadership* :)

Long time no see!

Not been on in so long! Really should did it out - never did finish the second or third games. 7 heroes sounds pretty good actually!

Hmmm...

and I just bought so many other games in the STEAM sale but no EoTN!