Thought it came out sooner in August. Was either 2 or 3 months old. Its still good, and its barely in it's infancy which is why the amount of bile towards it is so surprising.GrandmaFunk said:
how is guild wars 2/ is it worth getting thread?
- Thread starter ramboondiea
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Every MMO ever. Honestly, MMO fanbases might be a cross section of some of the worst people in all humanity. The level and volume of whining about each and every element of each and every game beggars the imagination.IamShmgeggy said:
The great thing about Guild Wars is because there's no commitment. You don't have to make sure you play it enough to make it worth the monthly payments, you buy it once and you're done (unless you're talking about something else). I just play til I feel like it's grindy then take a break, then jump back in when I feel like it.Bhaalspawn said:
OT: I judge games by looking at the gameplay footage, I can't tell you if it's to your taste but I enjoy it.
I just don't get it lol. If you like something, how does it hurt someone else? (with the exception of BDSM, cuz that hurts when you like it, or it hurts because you like it... something like that)BloatedGuppy said:
I enjoy Guild Wars 2, and i had a good run with World of Warcraft, and Everquest 2 and Aion and DCUO and others that i used to play. But then again, to each his own i suppose.
MMOs tend to occupy so much time that you see the same kind of tribalism with them as you do with sports franchises. It's not enough that your game of choice is good, but all it's competitors must be RUBBISH! The degree of attitude polarization and bias in the MMO space actually blows away what we see in discussion for single player games, which is bad enough. Anyone who thinks The Escapist can be hard to read in this regard (Phlakes, I am looking in your direction) wouldn't last 10 minutes on a new MMO forum.IamShmgeggy said:
You can absolutely play it own your own. All the open world exploration and the fights coming with it is cool with that. There are those Dynamic Events of varying scale - from, say, a trading caravan needs an escort to the good guys attacking the bad guys' stronghold. Those usually require a combined effort, but the beautiful thing is that there is no whatsoever need for any grouping. Players just hop in and hop out again and normally enough people are doing those events. You may, you will eventually run into situations where you just have to leg it (sooo, I wonder what's in this cave here - aww, spidey spidey, come her.. Oh, hello, MotherOfAllSpiders, I was just... uh... bye!), so.. do something different then and come back later.ramboondiea said:
(Notice how I left out anything Dungeon related. See comment somewhere above)
cheers for the info, and I'm guessing that dungeons require a little bit of co-operation, although that is to be expected ha, i just didn't want to run into a dead end due to lack of contacts but I'm sure I will cross that bridge when I get to it.purf said:
also for the record I wouldn't run from the mother of all spiders, I wouldn't have noticed her and would be dead, i feel its important to share that information ha
Dungeons are a mess, so as the one part of the game that REQUIRES formal grouping they are easily avoided unless you desperately want one of the skins. The ability to cooperate with other people without having to formally join a group is probably THE major revolution GW2 has brought to the genre.ramboondiea said:
Just a note, but the "Guild Wars" in the title is in reference to something from the lore of the first game. There was guild vs. guild PvP in the first game as well, but the Guild Wars were a story thing and they are no longer going on in GW2.ramboondiea said:
My main comment on the game, apart from what BloatedGuppy has said (I usually agree with him on GW2 stuff), is that the lack of endgame is a great thing for me, and it was an intentional part of the design. They want you to play the game for a while and have a fun time while you're doing it, rather than grind for a long time so that you can reach max level and then start having fun, and then they want you to do one or more of the following things: do the same with another character and have a very different experience from your first playthrough (by choosing a different class, different zones to level in, and different story choices), do PvP and WvW, do the optional grind required for unique armor/weapon appearances, or just stop playing and wait for new content (like the current Halloween events, or the major update they have planned for next month). All those options are perfectly acceptable for this game, since it has no subscription fee.
People don't say "I loved this single-player game until it ended and now I hate it because there's nothing to do," so it weirds me out that they say the same thing about GW2. Just because it's an MMO doesn't mean it has to be a second job.
Cheers,BloatedGuppy said:
but out of curiosity in what ways are they 'a mess' they don't work or they just badly made or something? also if the dungeons need avoiding how does that game progress? is it just through those wide open events things?
well if that the case, I have got to say its a pretty misleading name then, in fact it was my belief about the whole guild thing that stopped me getting the game at launch ha.EmperorSubcutaneous said:
would you mind telling me where i can find information on that next month update, been googling to find out what it is and cant seem to find anything on it.
and yeah i have seen people complain about that end game thing, but it seems pretty strange to me, mainly because they say this after playing something like 300 hours of the game getting to 80, then saying there is nothing to do, surely they have had plenty to do in those 300 hours?
Yep, and I actually think it was a really bad choice to call it "Guild Wars 2." With the handful of former GW1 players they brought onboard just from the title, we also saw: former GW1 players who hated GW2 for being so different from the first game, a bunch of people who didn't like GW1 who then ignored GW2 because they thought it would be more of the same, and a bunch of other people who passed on it because they thought they would have to play GW1 first. I have no proof, but I think their choosing the name "Guild Wars 2" caused them to sell fewer copies than they would have if they'd chosen another name like "Heroes of Tyria" or whatever. (And then people who played the game would be called Hotties. HA. Anyway.)ramboondiea said:
There's no information out about next month's update yet, apart from the fact that it's going to be big. They like keeping quiet about stuff until they have all the details worked out, and then they're quiet about it some more so they can surprise us.
Well, keeping in mind this is my opinion (although the dungeons were generally ill received) they're just not well designed. Part of this is laziness (mobs just hit harder and have a ton of hit-points, which is a cheesy way to implement difficulty), part of it is that the very concept of tuned 5 man content does not play well with a classless game that employs generous level scaling in every other aspect of its design. The word "clusterfuck" is one that leaps most immediately to mind. If you're in a very skilled, well geared group who know one another well and cooperate with great coordination, you can do clean clears. If you're just nutsing around with PUGs and doing them as they become available, you can expect to die. A lot. Since the game standardizes loot, there are no purples or whopping upgrades to be had, you're really just in it for armor skins, which take many runs of the same dungeon to acquire. So your risk/reward curve is blown.ramboondiea said:
They're not horrible...we're not talking early Warhammer Online "dungeons" or anything here, but they're a pretty hard step down from the careful design seen in more PvE focused games like the paradigmatic WoW.
So I'm guessing the game also suffers from sub-par grouping mechanics then? i thought this game strives on clusterfuck fighting, at least that how all the PvP stuff looked, but can these problems be contributed to teething problems of a new game? especially a pretty expansive game? also you are comparing the dungeons to those in a game that has about ten years under its belt (i should point out i know very little about wow, so hat game could have been perfect from launch and I wouldn't have a clue so correct me if i am wrong with that) are those dungeons a fundamentally flawed system, are or they likely up for future fixes?BloatedGuppy said:
I don't think the design of the game lends itself to an optimal tuned experience, no. It's built ENTIRELY around a very flexible scaling system, so this is hardly a surprise. It it possible the game could get tighter as time goes by? Yes. Do I expect it to ever be a top tier dungeoneering experience? No.ramboondiea said:
The question of "group mechanics" is also a question of content. If you're doing a level scaled boss, or putzing around with a friend, the group mechanics work perfectly fine. If you're trying to tune an encounter so 5 and only 5 people can do it, and maximize the challenge for them, then being unable to account for things like aggro mechanics, healing, resource management, etc, makes that incredibly difficult. The result is a bunch of fights that are either extremely over tuned or under tuned, and everything feels messy as a result. I killed one boss by circle strafing him for 10 minutes with everyone else dead. The pinnacle of encounter design this is not.
Fucking Trahearne.CriticKitten said:
I hate him more than Zhaitan. Zhaitan never did anything but roar occasionally and sound cool and look good in concept art. Trahearne ruined the whole story.
If you haven't seen it yet, they just teased what the November content update will be: a one-time event that opens up a new zone [https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/releases/november-2012/].ramboondiea said:
"Grind" as in killing random enemies for experience points? And no quests? Did you miss all the heart quests and dynamic events or something?Zeren said:
I'm confused.