What is your view of GW2 having a non-instanced explorable world?
Vargs
I don't like it. Not to say I hate the concept - I love WoW. However, I enjoy GW1 because it's different from other MMOs. Bit of a change of pace.
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Darksun
Anyways I think there is something you hit on with Anet/Blizzard and that's content. I think GW would HUGELY benefit from a big increase in items, weapons & armor & customization. Simply because of the fact that loot is always more interesting when it's more unique. Things don't have to be uber rare if you simply have more options as to what to get. Since GW is more limited in terms of power-level than WoW(which I like), the only other option is skins. Plus it's always nice to discover new things even at high levels. It's weird now for me to think that I've pretty much seen all the items in GW.
|
You can't get anything like that in Guild Wars. While it's cool that there's an easy cap for balance, nothing has that "epic" feeling to it. So what if you're wielding Mallyx's shield? It's no better than something crafted and Keineng Center.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Darksun
I just hope they don't skimp on content volume because they have multiple races now. ie: only 3 sets of armor now because they have to accommodate 5 races. That would suck hard.
|
I could be totally missing something, though. Maybe the iffier exceptions would be Charr (due to their hind legs) and Asura (due to their lolness?)
Bazompora
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bryant Again
Finding cool/rare loot is always awesome. One of my favorite defining moments in Morrowind was playing for 4 months, totally decked out in awesome gear, and walking into a random cave thinking "bah, just a normal bandit cave. There's the leader of them all- HOLY SHIT" and I saw the leader wielding Chrysamere.
You can't get anything like that in Guild Wars. While it's cool that there's an easy cap for balance, nothing has that "epic" feeling to it. So what if you're wielding Mallyx's shield? It's no better than something crafted and Keineng Center.?) |
) But yeah, you can't have anything like it in a gameplay revolving around balance.
However ... would it harm balance if there'd be "über" bundle items in World PvP, that would be in the lines of an enchanted Zweihänder or the Scepter of Orr (given that they can't be put away into inventory, nor brought outside World-PvP area)? I think it would add this epic quest for power, that has been missing so far in GW, to PvP, without tying it permanently to a character.
Redfeather1975
It's probably already been said but GW2 will have both instanced and non-instanced zones. Because each has it's strengths and weaknesses.
Both are cool when used together.
Both are cool when used together.
Mordakai
After playing WoW a little longer, I'm still enjoying it a lot, but one thing that bugs me about persistant areas is waiting for quest kills to spawn.
As I mentioned before, I don't think Anet would link quests to their persistent areas, but if they do, they really need to think for a way to avoid this.
There's also an upside for persistent areas: While waiting for a group for Deadmines, I was able to complete a few quests. It was nice to be able to play the game while waiting for a group to form, as opposed to just standing around a city...
As I mentioned before, I don't think Anet would link quests to their persistent areas, but if they do, they really need to think for a way to avoid this.
There's also an upside for persistent areas: While waiting for a group for Deadmines, I was able to complete a few quests. It was nice to be able to play the game while waiting for a group to form, as opposed to just standing around a city...
ValaOfTheFens
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bazompora
I think pay to travel is as casual player friendly as it gets, all the while still keeping incentives for more in-depth manners of play. You still get to travel swiftly, but the option that offers opportunities for social encounters along the road will be financially stimulated; It would only make sense should the devs try to avoid repeating GW1's social disaster in GW2.
|
Map travel hasn't stymied the social aspects of GW1 at all. Just go to any major town in the evening. People are there making connections with other players. Heck, in Pre I struck up a conversation with someone in Ascalon City and ended up with a new ally. One of the best parts of GW1 is that you can choose whether you want to be social or not. Also, not being social doesn't have a significant impact on gameplay, as it does for other games.
tmr819
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mordakai
There's also an upside for persistent areas: While waiting for a group for Deadmines, I was able to complete a few quests. It was nice to be able to play the game while waiting for a group to form, as opposed to just standing around a city...
|
What I always found in WoW is that, yes, I could quest while waiting for an instance group. And wait, and quest, and wait some more, and quest some more and level, and then -- ta-da! -- I'd leveled past that dungeon and all its associated quests. So I'd drop those quests and start collecting quests for the next dungeon...
By the way -- how'd you like Deadmines, Mordekai?
Bazompora
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens
Having played WoW I'm going to have to say that this just isn't true. In WoW, you either walk everywhere, pay for a Griffon(only to certain places), or get acquire a personal conveyance. While walking you hardly ever run into other players who want to stand around and chat. You certainly do see plenty of players but most of them are soaring above you on their mounts, no doubt laughing at you for walking. No one uses party search in WoW and so you either stand around in a town for an hour and pray someone with comparable skills comes along with the same quest as you and then walk for 10 minutes to get to the quest or you walk 10 minutes to get to the quest and hope you're strong enough to do it on your own.
|
I also don't expect GW2 to be WoW's twin, so it is likely they'll come up with their own measures to improve socialisation: in the context of a GW-based GW2, limitations to the insta-travel system would create more variations in social atmosperes, giving more players a chance to find the one that suits them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens
One of the best parts of GW1 is that you can choose whether you want to be social or not. Also, not being social doesn't have a significant impact on gameplay, as it does for other games.
|
Bryant Again
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bazompora
Unfortunately ... GW1's instanced world mostly just makes me choose between being social or doing stuff. Also, not being social just receives too much incentives gamewise.
|
Eldin
Pros
-More places to meet people.
-Potential for new party members, etc.
Cons
-How will quests that affect enemy spawns/the world work?
-Farming. Is it even possible now?
-More places to meet people.
-Potential for new party members, etc.
Cons
-How will quests that affect enemy spawns/the world work?
-Farming. Is it even possible now?
Bryant Again
In terms of spawning, I've already mentioned how they were doing a lot of quests in GW:EN: You'd see the NPC in the explorable or other area and you'd be mapped in your own world by yourself to kill a nasty.
Turtle222
i had a go to see how long i would last exploring gw...didnt last 10 minutes.
just walking around...7 enemy group....move some more....7 enemy group...move some more...noone to talk to :S
If i had someone to talk to then this would have been a more enjoyable experience. Hardly anyone just advertises in the main town: LFG to do some exploring!
That was Anet's plan though...pick up a group, go questing come back, pick up some more people who become friends, go exploring...now the four most used words in GW are "WTS" "WTB" "LFP" "Mission". Missions are the only thing left to do with guildies/friends/people in PvE :S. I bet noone has done a quest that they didnt have to do..except for the famous ones like sunspears in kryta, villany of galrath etc.
this is why i think its a fantastic idea to make it non-instanced. not completely, but for the explorable areas. It will breathe life into this game
just walking around...7 enemy group....move some more....7 enemy group...move some more...noone to talk to :S
If i had someone to talk to then this would have been a more enjoyable experience. Hardly anyone just advertises in the main town: LFG to do some exploring!
That was Anet's plan though...pick up a group, go questing come back, pick up some more people who become friends, go exploring...now the four most used words in GW are "WTS" "WTB" "LFP" "Mission". Missions are the only thing left to do with guildies/friends/people in PvE :S. I bet noone has done a quest that they didnt have to do..except for the famous ones like sunspears in kryta, villany of galrath etc.
this is why i think its a fantastic idea to make it non-instanced. not completely, but for the explorable areas. It will breathe life into this game
Molock
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vinraith
What utter nonsense. By definition, a persistent world forces you into contact with other players. They are moving about in the game world, attacking stuff you'd like to attack, completing quests you'd like to complete, and generally being in the way. There's no way to ignore them.
I find it bizarre that so many people want a persistent game world but leave local chat off at all times in GW. The people you're (rightly) ignoring are exactly the people you're asking to share a game world with. Have fun with that, I'll be playing something else. |
MithranArkanere
Lovely.
GW has the best 'average' things of all games.
NOw it's getting the best from other games I also loved, like Granado Espada (many things to lear from that game, yes, indeed)
GW has the best 'average' things of all games.
NOw it's getting the best from other games I also loved, like Granado Espada (many things to lear from that game, yes, indeed)
tmr819
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MithranArkanere
Lovely.
GW has the best 'average' things of all games. NOw it's getting the best from other games I also loved, like Granado Espada (many things to learn from that game, yes, indeed) |
countesscorpula
So long as I don't have to wait forever for monsters carrying quest items to spawn, it's no worry to me. I encountered that on the third day of my ten day WoW trial... lets just say I didn't bother going to day ten.
Edge Martinez
As long as we get to kill people and take their stuff, non-instancing sounds great.
Lonesamurai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Edge Martinez
As long as we get to kill people and take their stuff, non-instancing sounds great.
|
MithranArkanere
Hehe... GW will not fall in other game's mistakes.
No PK, no kill steal, no drop steal, etc...
It would make no sense if they didn't made something like that.
So I bet the only way you would be able to interfere with other people's fights would be only aiding with healings and buffs and such. Probably gaining some XP, but not sharing it with the other player.
No PK, no kill steal, no drop steal, etc...
It would make no sense if they didn't made something like that.
So I bet the only way you would be able to interfere with other people's fights would be only aiding with healings and buffs and such. Probably gaining some XP, but not sharing it with the other player.
Lonesamurai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MithranArkanere
So I bet the only way you would be able to interfere with other people's fights would be only aiding with healings and buffs and such. Probably gaining some XP, but not sharing it with the other player.
|
Hell, I like the idea of just randomly coming across a group having issues and if I'm a monk healing/protection buffing them and then just moving on and giving aid here and there... AS A MONK SHOULD DO
Or as a roaming Warrior, actually offering aid to those villagers in distress
oh god, I'm RP'ing
MithranArkanere
OH... that would be great!
To have random NPCs walking around the place.
Imagine it. Save a bunch of merchants from a troupe of grawls in rut.
Then they give you a discount based on how many merchants you saved.
Ding, ding, cheat ID kits. Lucky!
To have random NPCs walking around the place.
Imagine it. Save a bunch of merchants from a troupe of grawls in rut.
Then they give you a discount based on how many merchants you saved.
Ding, ding, cheat ID kits. Lucky!
The Fox
I would like instanced areas to have a MAX player count, so that when that max is acheived a new district is opened with another presistant area. When someone leaves a maxed out presistant district a new person could join.
This would be helpful to prevent an area from being overpopulated, so that level design can still be adjusted to allow everyone to have enough enemies to kill and eliminate the need of camping a particular boss or enemy spawn.
Anyone like this idea?
This would be helpful to prevent an area from being overpopulated, so that level design can still be adjusted to allow everyone to have enough enemies to kill and eliminate the need of camping a particular boss or enemy spawn.
Anyone like this idea?
Lonesamurai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Fox
I would like instanced areas to have a MAX player count, so that when that max is acheived a new district is opened with another presistant area. When someone leaves a maxed out presistant district a new person could join.
This would be helpful to prevent an area from being overpopulated, so that level design can still be adjusted to allow everyone to have enough enemies to kill and eliminate the need of camping a particular boss or enemy spawn. Anyone like this idea? |
Depends how the server system works,although I don't much see the point
Sir Tidus
I would love a non-instanced world! There r only 2 flaws with GW: lower level cap and instanced world. Take those away = GW2 = best MMORPG ever.
The Fox
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lonesamurai
So you want the world to be made up of persistent instances like the outposts in GW1 currently are...
Depends how the server system works,although I don't much see the point |
Basically, the point is to limit the amout of people per "square inch of map," so that the maps can always be designed to have something to do. If you want to link up with someone that you find, you can, but the areas wouldn't be so overpopulated that someone's ALWAYS running around in the same area as you/taking your drops/killing everything around/camping.Letting a player que up to a certain "presistant district" would make a way to have friends join you when someone left.
Bazompora
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MithranArkanere
Hehe... GW will not fall in other game's mistakes.
No PK, no kill steal, no drop steal, etc... It would make no sense if they didn't made something like that. So I bet the only way you would be able to interfere with other people's fights would be only aiding with healings and buffs and such. Probably gaining some XP, but not sharing it with the other player. |
It would make sense if gameplay would be alot more varying than GW1's.
Edge Martinez
I just wanna jack people for their shoes. See all the magnificent heroes walking into town, shoeless, and all the peasants are laughing their butts off, cause they know what happened. Edge Martinez stole my shoes!
Rene Saliere
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vinraith
Persistence is a deal breaker for me. All you have to do is turn on local chat in any major city to understand why I think being forced to play with these people would be an unpleasant experience.
|
*The reason we have Guilds and Friends lists is because we like to choose who we play with.*
I'm not interested in playing with middle schoolers who think toilet humour, simulated sex, and mother jokes are still funny.
I'm not interested in seeing my suspension of disbelief in my fantasy game ruined by people with names like Pwn3r X and Sh4d0w L3g0l45.
I don't want 'help' in the Explorables from lonely hopeless idiots who can't manage to make friends or get invited to teams inside an Outpost using - you know - polite conversation and shared goals to make their case.
Even in the most irritating Outpost I can turn off Local Chat and/or Trade Chat and reject the unsolicited Party invites, so don't tell me it's the 'online game experience get used to it'.
If there's any way under the sun that any Skill or tactic can be used to irritate another Player interfering in their play - wannabe Player-Killers will find it and exploit it. Examples in GW1: Ranger Spirits like Quickening Zepher or Nature's Renewal; deliberately breaking aggro from a designated tank; bringing mobs from all over the map to your party.
Again, I have to mention that these things can happen when creating a PUG from an Outpost - but at least we get a chance to exercise our discretion; for example 'T Ker 55 Hate Me Plz' might be a bad choice for the healing role in your UW clearance team.
And none of this has touched on the Players that are annoying by accident or stupidity.
NB: You might have noticed I haven't mentioned loot or experience sharing because I am aware these things could be managed. What Arena.Net will not be able to manage is the atmosphere of the game experience if we cannot choose who we travel with in Explorables.
Zahr Dalsk
Persistent world = Ouch, where did your sales go?
Rexion
I wouldn't mind an non-instanced world.
I played WoW and enjoyed being connected to everyone at once. It wasn't very laggy when I think about it at all. There were very little load times - just log in and going to another continent was about it.
The only problem that came with the world was everything was so far away and you had to run from place to place or pay to get somehow transported (which took 30 seconds to 10 minutes to do).
I played WoW and enjoyed being connected to everyone at once. It wasn't very laggy when I think about it at all. There were very little load times - just log in and going to another continent was about it.
The only problem that came with the world was everything was so far away and you had to run from place to place or pay to get somehow transported (which took 30 seconds to 10 minutes to do).
Meggle
I hate the idea of non-instancing GW, its what brought me to the game in the first place, with WoW you have problems with corpse campers...people who follow you around and killsteal/stalk you to be annoying...people who camp/farm quest mobs that make it hard as heck to do anything
and then higher lvl people who tromp around lowbie areas to kill you as soon as you go into a flagged area...i know most of my gripes revolve around PvP zones but im sure GW will have those and they will be just as much of a pain in the ass
/rallys for keeping the instancing
and then higher lvl people who tromp around lowbie areas to kill you as soon as you go into a flagged area...i know most of my gripes revolve around PvP zones but im sure GW will have those and they will be just as much of a pain in the ass
/rallys for keeping the instancing
Sir Tidus
Non-instanced world and higher level cap will make GW2 supreme. I also hope that they add non-combat related skills and activities, like weapon smithing, carfting, and stuff like that.
Rexion
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sir Tidus
Non-instanced world and higher level cap will make GW2 supreme. I also hope that they add non-combat related skills and activities, like weapon smithing, carfting, and stuff like that.
|
bigtime102
I love the instanced worlds in GW. Some say it feels lonely or whatever but you always got the option to group with people and make it less lonely without having to force it apon the rest of us. Kinda like pugs... some people like them, most dont and Im willing to bet the same crowd in favour or persistant worlds is the same crowd in favour of pugs. Im also willing to bet they are the minority.
Mark me down for instances with the option of non instances - a party - hey that option is already here! No need to fix something that isnt broke. The option has to be there, or I wont.
But if someone can tell me a good reason how a persistant world would be better than the current setup im willing to change my mind. But so far the idea of people invading my pve game just for the emmersion factor of seeing other people in my world isnt good enough. A better solution would be to make grouping and partying with others more dynamic. Because when it comes down to it thats all it is, a persistant world is a just one big group of people in your party, without your permission. I dont see any positives with persistance only negatives, not worth it imo.
Mark me down for instances with the option of non instances - a party - hey that option is already here! No need to fix something that isnt broke. The option has to be there, or I wont.
But if someone can tell me a good reason how a persistant world would be better than the current setup im willing to change my mind. But so far the idea of people invading my pve game just for the emmersion factor of seeing other people in my world isnt good enough. A better solution would be to make grouping and partying with others more dynamic. Because when it comes down to it thats all it is, a persistant world is a just one big group of people in your party, without your permission. I dont see any positives with persistance only negatives, not worth it imo.
Lady Lozza
I'm often on the fence when it comes to this particular question. However given the general "feel" of the community lately - and the general mechanics of GW (a game I've come to love), I'm inclined to side with people like bigtime102, I see no real advantages of persistant worlds.
Sir Tidus
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rexion
sounds like you want a WoW with GW-lore because that is exactly what it would be.
|
Lady Lozza
Tidus, some of us don't want to play WoW. If we wanted to play WoW we would be playing WoW.
GW is not WoW. I do not want GW2 to be WoW, because there are a number of mechanisms that makes WoW WoW that I (personally) am not fond of.
Since WoW, L2, EQ2 (and others) already exist, I fail to see why GW2 should turn into another of the same thing.
GW is not WoW. I do not want GW2 to be WoW, because there are a number of mechanisms that makes WoW WoW that I (personally) am not fond of.
Since WoW, L2, EQ2 (and others) already exist, I fail to see why GW2 should turn into another of the same thing.
Redfeather1975
Making the whole game non-instanced would be a huge mistake.
Parts of it are okay though.
The game needs areas with puzzles you can do, unique NPCs you can group with and a story that is personal.
I've never seen a non-instanced zone attempt those things without failing, or having a multitude of rules to keep them from failing.
Plus I hate magic monster respawns that poof right next to you when you are low on health or when you are backtracking so you gotta clear the area all over again. bleck.
Parts of it are okay though.
The game needs areas with puzzles you can do, unique NPCs you can group with and a story that is personal.
I've never seen a non-instanced zone attempt those things without failing, or having a multitude of rules to keep them from failing.
Plus I hate magic monster respawns that poof right next to you when you are low on health or when you are backtracking so you gotta clear the area all over again. bleck.
Aba
Quote:
| Tidus, some of us don't want to play WoW. If we wanted to play WoW we would be playing WoW. |
aint broke dont fix it
Rene Saliere
Hi, I have no social skills to make online friends and cannot put together a skill bar that helps or meets the needs of a team of real players - hence I cannot get a team of real players to accept me into their group for love or money.
Therefore, I suggest that Arena.Net forces you to accept me into your group by making it that you cannot avoid me in a 'fun' Persistent zone!
Therefore, I suggest that Arena.Net forces you to accept me into your group by making it that you cannot avoid me in a 'fun' Persistent zone!