Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dreikki
|
New Guild Wars 2 Interview
netniwk
Kashrlyyk
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vinraith
That sounds, quite simply, awful. "One persistant world" is bad enough (I've kept hoping, in the crazier parts of my head, that they'd abandon that stupid idea), but PvP intrusion into PvE... well we've already amply demonstrated what a bad idea that was with Factions haven't we?
... |
Quote:
| The nice thing about this form of PvP is that going out there is always better than not going out there. |
tmr819
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vinraith
And "no party management" is not moot, not at all. Playing a single character in a world scaled for a single character is considerably less interesting than playing a party through an area scaled for a party. The level of skill interaction and interplay, the tactical possibilities, everything is markedly better in the latter set up. One of the things that made GW interesting was that SP and small group (2 or 3 real people) players didn't lose out on the more interesting combat dynamics created by an 8 player party.
|
Kashrlyyk
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kaldak
Notice that comment at the end that they'll keep GW1 alive as long as people are still playing? Thats pretty awesome, and should put an end to all those fears of GW1 dying.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Inde
That's interesting they waited so long to release the interview.
|
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vinraith
It's definitely more friendly to the casual player, it's just a hell of a lot less interesting IMO.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vinraith
In the end it's not so much that I think GW2 will be a terrible game, it's that everything we seem to be hearing strikes me as being a downgrade from the equivalent in the first game. From my perspective, they're simply going the wrong way.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dreikki
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tmr819
I could not have said this any better. In GW1, one can run the same mission or dungeon in so many varied and interesting ways, experimenting with a wide variety of party/skill configurations. From what little I have heard of GW2, I think I am really going to miss that flexibility.
|
Rexion
I love the ideas they have in mind. Here is what I commented on the article. Yes I am the one that wrote a life-story's worth of a novel for a comment.
Quote:
|
I like where the creators are coming from. I personally am just hoping that when the release of GW2 comes out that the community goes into a respectful era again. Who does not miss the nice community back from Mid to End 2005? If they added more random-joining content (missions and PvP) then grouping will not be impossible. It is hard enough to find a group for HA, thank you elitests and cookie-cutter lovers, and for Missions, thank you crappy builds. So if they added a few peices of random-joining content, all those problems will be solved. Though there is the fact that you might be monk-less or you will find the, not-so, occasional newbie. I like their idea of World PvP. It might bring a very interesting feeling of War. I can't wait to see what will happen when you have an Asura vs. Norn war, or Dwarves vs. Charr type of thing going (that is, if that is how it will work). World PvP will give a great sense of fighting for an area. This will make farming for items and such more interesting. We all know that you must go to a certain area to fight a boss to get a certain item. Well, if that place is taken by someone, you'll have to fight for it to get it and said item. World PvP will be a great addition into making Tyria feel like a real world. I will be part of GW as long as I can emotionally and physically take it. I don't need to become addicted because I'm not paying per month. This game allows me to come and go as I please, and that is why I like it. Thank you to the creators. I'm excited for GW2. |
Drop of Fear
the world pvp seems very promising... not sure how they'll handle the instanced vs persistent pve maps tho.
ensoriki
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vinraith
That sounds, quite simply, awful. "One persistant world" is bad enough (I've kept hoping, in the crazier parts of my head, that they'd abandon that stupid idea), but PvP intrusion into PvE... well we've already amply demonstrated what a bad idea that was with Factions haven't we?
|
You mean alliance battles, Fort Aspenwood and Jade quarry?
lol those do very little.
You never have to do them, ever.
Your just ranting for the sake of ranting.
semantic
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fril Estelin
Probably not, but I read no piece of information so big as "there won't probably be H/H in GW2". Do you remember where you read that?
..) |
Configuring heroes and doing missions with them has been fun. I've enjoyed it and continue to do so when I feel like playing. But it's been a year of that now, and it's hardly the end-all of RPG gaming. It has been a good mechanic for a LONG time, though (Bard's Tale anyone? I bet Gaile has been faced with: [99 Berserkers and 99 Berserkers and 99 Berserkers and 99 Berserkers]).
That's primarily a single player RPG mechanic, though. I know, I know: "it's fun so why remove it?" Well, there are other things that are fun. I'm looking forward to seeing how the people that came up with THK and Dzagonur Bastion handle persistent areas and sprawling PVP maps. Then when I feel like setting 4 separate skill bars, I'll load up GW1 and do THK or something.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Master Knightfall
Ummm dude that's what was said about "Auto Assault" as well and NCsoft pulled the plug on that game this past August 31st. ...
|
![[M]agna_[C]arta](/static/static/../Img/avatar118311_19.gif){kind=avatar}
[M]agna_[C]arta
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fril Estelin
Sorry, my bad! I meant Archlord and RF Online. (I wanted so much to play EVE that reading RFO made me think of it) Post modified.
|
I suggest Level-Up-Games they have a fre RF there, I think.
But not much people there well there is much but not party much.
You''ll only see 1-4 people fighting with you, sometimes they'll never even talk to you^^.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ensoriki
This Bad Idea was not demonstrated to me because I never saw it.
You mean alliance battles, Fort Aspenwood and Jade quarry? lol those do very little. You never have to do them, ever. Your just ranting for the sake of ranting. |
I really wish I could play it XD!
Fril Estelin
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by semantic
The lack of H/H in GW2 has been specifically mentioned (to be replaced by optional single companion NPC). I'll leave it for you to look up if you like, but you can trust me on that.
|
Thanks!
ensoriki
1 companion and a pet (if your ranger)
Sweet GW meets Nostale!
Sweet GW meets Nostale!
semantic
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fril Estelin
Not that I don't want to trust you, but where was this mentioned? An online article? Paper article? Official GWiki? Fan forum? Somewhere else? Any idea anyone?
Thanks! |
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by semantic
Pretty sure it's the PCG article.
|
Fril Estelin
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by semantic
Pretty sure it's the PCG article.
|
Saraphim
I know I'm probably in a minority, but I like persistent play. If I'm bimbling around in WoW and see someone struggling I can heal them or jump in and give them a hand. I almost always get a thank you or /salute emote, even from some of the alliance players if I've helped them bring something down. I never attack first, but if they've already hit I'll jump in if I think they can use the help - can't heal or communicate properly because alliance language shows up as gibberish in the chat window.
Obviously I'm on a pve server
I've got a lot of faith in Anet, I've never managed to play a game for so long and get so much enjoyment out of it, for so little money. I'd be prepared to pay2play if the pve content was more substantial, but I'm weird like that.
Obviously I'm on a pve server
I've got a lot of faith in Anet, I've never managed to play a game for so long and get so much enjoyment out of it, for so little money. I'd be prepared to pay2play if the pve content was more substantial, but I'm weird like that.
Omega X
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Drop of Fear
the world pvp seems very promising... not sure how they'll handle the instanced vs persistent pve maps tho.
|
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Omega X
Most likely the same way as other MMOs. Persistent maps, instanced dungeons.
|
OH I gotta put this in the other thread!
Balan Makki
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Saraphim
I know I'm probably in a minority, but I like persistent play. .
|
Arena Net is notorious for spoiling their players.
Balan Makki
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Omega X
Most likely the same way as other MMOs. Persistent maps, instanced dungeons.
|
sindex
I think I rather wait until some of the key features have been clearly defined, before I really get interested in GW 2 (not to mention some screenshots). Many of these concepts can easily be changed in these stages of production. My guess is some “new” info will be released around the time of the next E3 conference.
Whirlwind
The fact that they said they want to make gw2 so good that people will forget about gw1 and move on pretty much does it for me. Not to mention the fact i can barely log in to gw1 anymore its getting really worn out. I log in to work on stuff for my HoM thats about it... for gw2
Mac Sidewinder
Other persistant world MMOs handle the amount of people online at the same time by having to have seperate clusters of servers. Meaning that if you are on one cluster you can't interact with someone on another cluster. This keeps too many people from being in one place at the same time.
Lord of the Rings Online (in beta) only had 3 servers so in the persistant world you literally lined up to do quests. It was funny and sad at the same time. People standing in line to kill the boss and when the boss respawned it was the next person's turn.
I'm interested on how they are going to solve this type of problem, if they are going to have the possibility of everyone being in the same persistant world at the same time. Either the maps are going to have to get ALOT larger or people are going to be standing on each other's heads.
Or maybe most of the persistant world will be in the form of PvP and most of the instanced part will be primarily Pve.
Lord of the Rings Online (in beta) only had 3 servers so in the persistant world you literally lined up to do quests. It was funny and sad at the same time. People standing in line to kill the boss and when the boss respawned it was the next person's turn.
I'm interested on how they are going to solve this type of problem, if they are going to have the possibility of everyone being in the same persistant world at the same time. Either the maps are going to have to get ALOT larger or people are going to be standing on each other's heads.
Or maybe most of the persistant world will be in the form of PvP and most of the instanced part will be primarily Pve.
Winterclaw
Quote:
| If I am a low level character, I could help protect a trade route. If I am a high level player, I could try to take a key fortress. |
Quote:
| So the Hall tracks the Titles that you’ve done, the Campaigns you’ve completed, the Heroes you’ve collected, the Mini Pets you’ve gotten. Your high-end armor and overpriced, ugly, gwen-only weapons instead of the ones you've actually been using for a few years and like. |
Balan Makki
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Winterclaw
Thank you anet for not making GW2 sound any less horrid than it is already shaping up to be. And I'm so glad ganking will be added to GW2. Now all we need is making the sequal equipment based. You know, because it sucks that if you are the same level as the other guy and have the more expensive item and you don't have an edge in combat.
|
I personally hope they do away with levels completely.
Operative 14
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mac Sidewinder
Other persistant world MMOs handle the amount of people online at the same time by having to have seperate clusters of servers. Meaning that if you are on one cluster you can't interact with someone on another cluster. This keeps too many people from being in one place at the same time.
Lord of the Rings Online (in beta) only had 3 servers so in the persistant world you literally lined up to do quests. It was funny and sad at the same time. People standing in line to kill the boss and when the boss respawned it was the next person's turn. I'm interested on how they are going to solve this type of problem, if they are going to have the possibility of everyone being in the same persistant world at the same time. Either the maps are going to have to get ALOT larger or people are going to be standing on each other's heads. Or maybe most of the persistant world will be in the form of PvP and most of the instanced part will be primarily Pve. |
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mac Sidewinder
I'm interested on how they are going to solve this type of problem, if they are going to have the possibility of everyone being in the same persistant world at the same time. Either the maps are going to have to get ALOT larger or people are going to be standing on each other's heads.
|
Nevin
It always excites me to hear about a new interview, then my hopes are let down when I realize its not really about new content. God damn these filler press conferences!
Redfeather1975
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bryant Again
They could probably make it so when you go for a quest, it becomes instanced. They have a lot of those already with GW:EN.
|
Abnaxus
Edit - moved
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Redfeather1975
I'd like it that way. Then in quests you could still have named npcs that follow you, objects you can carry and all that jazz.
|
tmr819
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Saraphim
I know I'm probably in a minority, but I like persistent play. If I'm bimbling around in WoW and see someone struggling I can heal them or jump in and give them a hand. I almost always get a thank you or /salute emote, even from some of the alliance players if I've helped them bring something down. I never attack first, but if they've already hit I'll jump in if I think they can use the help - can't heal or communicate properly because alliance language shows up as gibberish in the chat window.
|
WoW has a lot of nice features, but GW1 is far superior, imho. My hope is that GW2 will incorporate the good stuff from WoW (such as an Auction House, for example) and other MMOs of that ilk, while keeping what's distinctive and good about GW1. What I have heard thus far, however, has not been particularly encouraging.
That said, I still think any MMO that inherits even a little of the GW1 style is going to be worth playing. GW1 has been so good and so much better that even if GW2 isn't as good as GW1 it will still be much better, I am confident, than most everything else out there.
Now, if GW2 offered players a choice of playing in instanced ("classic GW") or noninstanced (persistent) servers, that would really be groundbreaking. Obviously, I would choose the instanced version in a heartbeat.
Kityn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tmr819
I can agree with you in part. Persistence has its positive aspects. I have played WoW extensively and know what you mean about the random positive player-player interactions. However, "kill stealing", "boss camping", "resource competition", "class discrimination" and a host of other such problems are also inherent in a game like WoW. No one ever takes your kill in GW1, you never have to camp a boss waiting for a respawn, no one competes with you for materials, chests, whatever (GW1 does not have crafting per se, but I imagine GW2 will...), "unpopular classes" can always find a group (with heroes/henches if nothing else), if you feel like soloing you can do most everything in GW1 -- but NOT in most MMOs, etc., etc.
|
Boss camping, loot stealing, kill stealing ect ect will not happen in GW2, because the areas that have such will be instanced.
Also has been stated in previous interviews that GW2 can be soloable. You choose wether or not to group.
My opinion for the high or no level cap. I see it as a built in Hard Mode. Higher the level you are and the more players in your party the more difficult the instanced area will become. This seems to be the only logical choice. How else could the same game be soloable and beable to handle large number of players at high levels?
Hookecho
sounds a lot like another NCsoft entity....City of Heroes/Villians. Persistent zones and instanced maps/areas. Also sounds like they are taking a page from the CoH/V games when it comes to levels on a team. In CoH/V you can sidekick some up to one level below you and the mobs tend to con (con = level in CoH lingo) to the team leader or to the highest lvl on the team. In order to get xp and drops etc...you must be within 5 (I think its 5) lvls of the highest toon in the party. Or.....if your a high lvl toon, you can exemplar down to 1 lvl below whoever Ex'd you. In this way mish-mashed team lvels can work out and everyone gets to have fun. The way the skills work in CoH/V is so completely different that I am sure they are not going to morph that model...in CoH/V you dont have anywhere near the amount of skills and and you slot them with enhancers and once that is done your pretty much locked into that skillset unless you earn a respec to remake/re-choose your skills and enhancers. I have alway liked GW's skill mechanics better (not the actual skill mechanics....but the way you can adjust or load on the fly in a town)
Anyway, sounds interesting....
heck I may have just described WoW...I dont know as I have never played that...but i do see a lot of CoH/V influence in what they are saying about GW2
Anyway, sounds interesting....
heck I may have just described WoW...I dont know as I have never played that...but i do see a lot of CoH/V influence in what they are saying about GW2
Mac Sidewinder
Instances automatically adjusting to the number and level of players is the way DAOC dungeons work. This actually works out really well. Allowing a single player or 8 players into the same instance and adjusts the difficulty level accordingly. Now that I would like to see in GW2.
Saraphim
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tmr819
I can agree with you in part. Persistence has its positive aspects. I have played WoW extensively and know what you mean about the random positive player-player interactions. However, "kill stealing", "boss camping", "resource competition", "class discrimination" and a host of other such problems are also inherent in a game like WoW. No one ever takes your kill in GW1, you never have to camp a boss waiting for a respawn, no one competes with you for materials, chests, whatever (GW1 does not have crafting per se, but I imagine GW2 will...), "unpopular classes" can always find a group (with heroes/henches if nothing else), if you feel like soloing you can do most everything in GW1 -- but NOT in most MMOs, etc., etc.
|
Quote:
| WoW has a lot of nice features, but GW1 is far superior, imho. My hope is that GW2 will incorporate the good stuff from WoW (such as an Auction House, for example) and other MMOs of that ilk, while keeping what's distinctive and good about GW1. What I have heard thus far, however, has not been particularly encouraging. |
Quote:
|
Now, if GW2 offered players a choice of playing in instanced ("classic GW") or noninstanced (persistent) servers, that would really be groundbreaking. Obviously, I would choose the instanced version in a heartbeat.
|
And before I get called a WoW fangirl, although I enjoy it I still prefer GW. I wouldn't have been playing for so long if I didn't.
Servant of Kali
Very nice interview. And yes, I like innovation.
Amen.
Quote:
| But the ultra competitive players do not want that, they want to immediately have access to everything, they want to win or lose entirely based on their playing skill. |
semantic
One of the ways I think GW specifically can benefit from persistent combat areas is in the way certain classes are viewed. Classes may be very different in GW2, but imagine if there were persistent zones in GW1. A standard group of tank/nuke/heal might be having trouble dealing with some boss or group when along comes a helpful Mesmer who <<sound of trumpets>> saves the day (or at least helps out in an obvious way). Chances are the people in the tank/nuke/heal group still won't understand exactly how the Mes helped, but there's a decent chance they'll go away thinking "I don't know what happened, but as soon as that Mesmer showed up the Dragon folded like a tent."
The biggest reason classes like Mes don't get included in the fixed 8-man groups of today is the vast majority of players don't realize what they contribute. In a persistent area, Mesmers (or 'creative builds' in standard classes) don't have to get picked in order to show their worth. They can simply walk up and start dishing out the hurt. Then later, when people are forming groups for instances, some of them will think, "you know, what we really need here is someone to do whatever it was that Mesmer was doing".
To take that further, in a game whose strength lies in the complexity of the interactions between its many, many skills, open combat areas will give players much more freedom to showcase what they've learned to do with those skills, and others more opportunity to learn new tricks and create variations. This will significantly speed up the learning process for the playerbase as a whole. Now, dedicated players rely heavily on wiki and forums to expand and share their knowledge. In GW2, it should be easier to learn and innovate by playing.
The biggest reason classes like Mes don't get included in the fixed 8-man groups of today is the vast majority of players don't realize what they contribute. In a persistent area, Mesmers (or 'creative builds' in standard classes) don't have to get picked in order to show their worth. They can simply walk up and start dishing out the hurt. Then later, when people are forming groups for instances, some of them will think, "you know, what we really need here is someone to do whatever it was that Mesmer was doing".
To take that further, in a game whose strength lies in the complexity of the interactions between its many, many skills, open combat areas will give players much more freedom to showcase what they've learned to do with those skills, and others more opportunity to learn new tricks and create variations. This will significantly speed up the learning process for the playerbase as a whole. Now, dedicated players rely heavily on wiki and forums to expand and share their knowledge. In GW2, it should be easier to learn and innovate by playing.
sterbenx2
so AGAIN they try to "encourage" (force) RPers to play PvP! Even by Jeffs own comments he should know that these are two VERY different groups. grr
What I see happening is world when A vs B. A wins and all those FoTM PvPers head over to world A. As a result of this world A wins more often. Since world A is winning more, the RPers move over to world A because the world defense has benefits that RPers don't want to play PvP to maintain. What we end with is one world that dominates ALL worlds. RPers don't give a crap if the PvPers are winning because of wiki builds, they just want a world open to whatever they want to do. WTH?
Not saying this is etched in stone. Just from what I know of our community as it is and the statments made by our boys in the interview.
What I see happening is world when A vs B. A wins and all those FoTM PvPers head over to world A. As a result of this world A wins more often. Since world A is winning more, the RPers move over to world A because the world defense has benefits that RPers don't want to play PvP to maintain. What we end with is one world that dominates ALL worlds. RPers don't give a crap if the PvPers are winning because of wiki builds, they just want a world open to whatever they want to do. WTH?
Not saying this is etched in stone. Just from what I know of our community as it is and the statments made by our boys in the interview.
Mordakai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sterbenx2
so AGAIN they try to "encourage" (force) RPers to play PvP! Even by Jeffs own comments he should know that these are two VERY different groups. grr
What I see happening is world when A vs B. A wins and all those FoTM PvPers head over to world A. As a result of this world A wins more often. Since world A is winning more, the RPers move over to world A because the world defense has benefits that RPers don't want to play PvP to maintain. What we end with is one world that dominates ALL worlds. RPers don't give a crap if the PvPers are winning because of wiki builds, they just want a world open to whatever they want to do. WTH? Not saying this is etched in stone. Just from what I know of our community as it is and the statments made by our boys in the interview. |
Without knowing how it will work it's hard to say, but I'm thinking that these World v World "PvP" events will be more fun than anything required.
But, yeah, I'm against any kind of "world reward" that punishes people who don't want to PvP.