Players. GW. And WoW...

Ok, i dont get why people say "Dont do that, thats like making another WoW!"
"Lets add an auction house" "*** No thats like WoW...." I don't get it. People seem to forget the main feature that makes Guild Wars, Guild Wars... Guild Wars is unique no matter what we add. Guild Wars is I think. the only successful MMORPG that has NO subscription fees, at all....

Long story short. I get tired of people saying we are making another WoW.... Personally, if i could play a higher tech, free version of WoW, i would love that. No other game has as many advanced network features that GW has....like the patching.... Patches only like 1mb at the most....come on!

Does anyone agree with me?

mentioning wow here = insta flame war

At the base, all RPGs are pretty much the same.

But in terms of gameplay wise, GW and WoW are drastically different. Also, a lot of the things that are supposedly making "GW INTA WOW" aren't WoW exclusive: Races aren't new, neither is a Z-Axis, nor persistancy.

Those kind of comments just come from poor people who cant afford to pay for WoW so they flame over it. :P

Adding an auction house to GW does not make it more like Wow...

It's a nearly necessary feature in an online RPG these days

I whole heartedly agree.

I think the goal of Arenanet is to give Guild Wars 2 content that players enjoy, not only from guild wars, but from others to create, forgive the term, "The Perfect Game", while still maintaining the Guild Wars Edge. World of Warcraft has aspects that players like, as do all games. I have no problem with combining elements of all games to bring togther playstyles that everyone likes. World of Warcraft and Guild Wars are not the first to use these, and won't be the last. I wish people would realize this when they say that that idea is stolen from another game. That game stole it from another game, and the chain continues.

In fact, I'd be very angry if Guild Wars 2 was a clone of Guild Wars 1. If you want to play Guild wars 1, then play Guild Wars 1. Guild Wars 2 seeks to improve, and if you're against improvement, then you stand in the way.

Six Words: You get what you pay for.

I don't think anyone is asinine enough to argue that GW has more content than WoW.

Well I don't know about you, but I'll take Quality over Quantity any day. I'd rather eat a good apple than a hundred rotten ones.

It's not that the apples are rotten, it's that they're oranges.

No one ever said that in this thread.

The OP just mentioned that people should get over the idea that if WoW, or any other game has it, it's rubbish and the all general idea that GW should not implement game structures that have ever used before. I agree with that point.

The bit I do not agree with is:

I don't see why people refer to WoW as a staple that is the focus of being mimicked, nearly everything i saw in that game i have already seen scattered amongst several other games, they just managed to pile them all together at once.

Well I won't argue there, but it's just that I like Apples more than Oranges =P

But again, there are people that like both, and I admit, when put together in a bowl, they're alright. I don't understand why people are so against this concept.

Ain't nothing wrong with that. I do have a problem, however, when people complain about an apple being a bad orange.

I'm still amazed a game with so amazingly shitty graphics (even considering it's a four year old game) as WoW could hit it big.

Then again, so did SIMS.

Yeah, I am too.

It's less that you've posted a bad screenshot and more that you've found one of the most godawful UI set ups I've ever seen. That's entirely user-made crappiness. He's having fun, though, so I guess you can't mess with that.

Here's my favorite pic from the Black Temple I took a few nights ago:

Whoops, okay here's the right one:

Because good graphic doesn't always equal good gameplay?

GW players, of all people, should know that.

Yeah. Warcraft III worked great with the cartoony style, being low poly and a top-down view RTS. In an MMORPG, graphics like that are just SCARY. Everybody's armor looks like plastic too, and the trees look like caramel.

Now admittedly, there are SOME aspects of WoW lots of people would like to see, and they wish GW would get them so it would be closer to what kind of game they would want to play. I am sure there is SOME aspect of WoW everyone wants in GW. The question still remains if ANet can pull them off and remain original, though.

Anyway, one thing that made GW such a big hit is that it was unique from other MMORPGs. Many suggestions to GW are not just for WoW, it's in plenty of MMORPGs already. Many people stereotype the MMORPG standard as WoW. Just because GW doesn't have something does NOT mean it's WoW!

Is it possible that - gasp - graphics don't matter?

High-fidelity graphics present a barrier to entry. Those who think that GW has high quality graphics, take a look at, say... Bioshock or COD4 or one of these latest greatest titles. BTW, can you play them? At 50 FPS?

Content suitability for target market determines the success of a given title, and the success of that title is limited by the same market's size. Thanks to WoW, we now know that EQ-esque market is worth 1 billion a year. Virtual worlds market (SecondLife, There, Entropia) is worth 100k subscribers per month. WW2 turn-based strategy has some 100k customers world-wide.

Online Guitar Hero game however has playerbase of 500,000 concurrent and between 50 and 120 million subscribers in China alone.

Then why eat oranges?

On topic of GW: If GW2 is WoW clone, it doesn't get a second look from me. WoW isn't a bad game, it's huge with everything for everyone. Unfortunately, the only thing it has for me is boredom. To tears.

Because...He's not? Guild Wars (deh apples) offers features that are entirely different than that of WoW (oranges.)

I have a different problem. As for me, I chose to eat the apple, and thus I pretty much only care about the apples in the basket, but people just have to keep telling me how the orange is so much better, although I already have a biased perspective to this issue as I chose the apple in the first place. To make it worse, when I try to search information about more ways to eat these apples, I have more people telling me that I should eat an orange instead. Can't I just enjoy my apples peacefully?

If anyone is going to make a free version of WoW, let it be Blizzard.
I played WoW and EQ2 long enough that I'm looking for something different.
I prefer that other developers offer different things.

Meh as long as its good and free, and the PvP isn't bad, I'm fine. I don't care that much as long as those conditions are met.

Comparing Gw's to WoW and saying they are alike is saying that a guy playing baseball could do the same thing as the guy who invented(or maybe discovered would be better word?) penecilin.

- The most true comment I've heard in months.

WoW mentioned. /me casts "Summon Zinger"

God, people who mention GW and WoW in the same sentance are like people who think every FPS ever made is a ripoff of Halo. I especially enjoyed people saying that games like Mass Effect (a 3rd person RPG) are a "Halo rip off."
Just like you can't copyright space, aliens, and guns, you can't copyright dwarves, elves, and magic.

Exactly!! The poor JUST play GW, but, the RICH & FAMOUS play WOW AND GW.


WRONG! We'll take a lil survey to prove how wrong you are:

Question 1: Does GW & WoW provide a central meeting place for players to meet and group up beyond the group max size?

Answer: Yes to both

Question 2: Does GW & WoW provide quests and missions from inside these meeting places for the players to gain and do?

Answer: Yes to both

Question 3: Are the prefixes for GW & WoW MMO?

Answer: Yes to both

Question 4: Does GW and WoW have grind for achievements, titles and character progression?

Answer: Yes to both

Question 5: Are there NPC merchants to trade with in the towns/outposts of both games?

Answer: Yes to both

Question 6: Does GW and WoW offer up UNIQUE loot on a level scale to their maximum levels ALLOWED by the perspective games?

Answer: Yes to both

Question 7: Does GW and WoW offer player trading amongst one another for profit and gain or even loss at times?

Answer: Yes to both

Question 8: Are GW and WoW RPG's in the sense and definition of what RPS's are ONLINE (not related to what an actual RPG is as per tabletop DnD)

Answer: Yes to both

Question 9: Can you SOLO efficiently and well in GW and WoW?

Answer: Yes to both

Question 10: Can you SOLO ALL the content in both GW and WoW?

Answer: No to both (you can't solo any of the epic level dungeons or missions from start to finish even in GW you are limited to certain areas).

So, you see good man that they are more than equal already in style and play. There is no apples to oranges needed to be applied. Their only difference lie in their character advancement levels and the advancement of loot stats above those character level advancements. As for one having something the other does not, doesn't make them apples and oranges, a handful of features in one vs the other also doesn't make them apples and oranges. To be uncomparable they must not have ANY features that can be compared to one another and as you can see above I have listed at least 10 and there are plenty more. WOW rules as the supreme game of choice by the MAJORITY of gamers who play these online mmo's. There's no arguing that, if you try to argue it then you are just showing what a fool you really are. WOW cannot be defeated with it's 10 million subscribers and that's subsribers not just people who purchased the game which is well beyond 10 million. GW is just a puny wannabe and that is why GW2 will have MORE features like WOW, but, still will not be WOW. Nightfall and GWEN have shown their direction they were heading for GW prime and GW2 will just enhance that direction and vision even more....towards WOWlike.

This is why I never once gave WoW even a second glance. I never got beyond the graphical style to even consider anything else it might have going for it. Monthly fee had nothing to do with it in my case.

I do admittedly wish GW wasnt quite so ultra-realistic, and did actually bring in a little more fantasy, perhaps looked a little more epic, perhaps a la some of the concept art. Minor issue though, since for me, comparing GW to WoW visually is no contest. Wouldnt play WoW if it was free.

I"ll take you up on that. Dollar for Dollar GW wins, value for content/dollar ratio GW wins Real big. Re-playability GW wins wins hands down. Access to content--GW wins beyond a doubt . .

Because of level segregation of both content and players -- WoW loses. In WoW, because of levels, you are limited to a very small part of the Game world, in GW the entire Game is useful and playable. Lots more content if you ask me.

Why you even troll here still, Zinger, is truly one of the Internets greatest mysteries. You need to find something useful to do.

I don't think it's ok to pathetically TROLL about other games on GW webboard either, so there.

Apples, oranges, it's not that I don't like them both, it's that I don't want to be caught with stolen goods, and the oranges are stolen goods, taken by the greedy hands of Blizzard from the people who worked so hard creating the WHFB IP; Games Workshop, and then renamed and edited just enough to avoid outright copyright infringement while still leaving no doubt as to where they got it from.

No choice but to chop this up.

Sounds kinda like a chatroom, just like what they have in Diablo, Starcraft, Dawn of War, Titan's Quest...

By "meeting places" I'm going to assume towns? How is this different from any other offline RPG?

As stated by the devs, GW is a CORPG.

In Guild Wars the grind is nothing but for vanity and to "show off." In WoW the grind is required to see more content. Huge difference.

Just like every single other RPG.

True, but keep in mind the other big, glaring difference: Gear in GW is capped, in WoW it is not. Each patch adds more powerful gear than the previous. In Guild Wars, a guy in Droknar's Forge gear is just as powerful as someone in FoW armor with a crystalline sword and an eternal shield.

RPS=Wha?

Bear in mind that most of the areas in WoW are tailored to be soloable. No such area in GW exists. Right there is the difference.

I also noticed you left out a couple of the more important questions, so I'll add those in for you:

Question 10: Are both games played in a persistent world?

Answer: Yes to WoW, no to GW.

Question 11: Do both games provide what is known as "endgame content" for my character?

Answer: Yes to WoW, no to GW (not really a bad thing, it was never made for endgame.)

Then you're going to disappoint a shitload of people.

There is yet another huge difference between the two that can't be answered in simple "yeslol/nolol" terms, and this is the MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT of the game, and that is the gameplay: The missions, the bosses, the quests, the combat. WoW focuses on a "tank and spank" method of fights and the like, GW puts the challenge into how well you set up your build.

But the most important of all: WoW has a heavy reliance on gear. GW has a heavy reliance on skill. That is the most fundamental difference and what truly sets a divide between the two and sets the gameplay apart.

...But it's winning.

- I love your reasoning here. Oh wait, what reasoning? And also whatever happened to Guild Wars endgame in that Access to content GW wins beyond a doubt. Last I heard FOW/UW require some stupid favor to activate what no single player can influence. Deep/Urgoz? Belong to faction grinding alliance or buy scrolls to receive the privilege to stare at the empty lobby room. Epitome of content access!

- Entire world - only closed doors between places! At least Prophecies had some sense of exploration when players were less fed places where they had to go. You gotta have some standards for these kinds of things.

Oh boy, this thread is full of.... well idiocy. Please refrain from arguing about two entirely different games. It makes you all look foolish.

- Are you implying that gear and skill dependence are mutually exclusive? Or that GW even *is* about skill which seems to be the most popular mantra on these boards? How many different ways to use Searing Flames there are, which would be the bare minimum conditions under which game could be said to be about skill? Pick up max armor at Consulate Docks, buy health and minor runes, capture Searing Flames at Turai's Procession and you're set to conquer anything and everything PvE has to offer. Rest is nothing but micromanaging and tweaking your heroes, collecting bits of cash to buy them runes and collector weapons.

So true. Might as well compare GW to Halo, Tetris, Super Mario Bros, and Need for Speed while we're at it. After all, they're all video games, right? Let's all discuss why Mario makes so much more money than GW. Obviously GW is doing something wrong and needs to be more like Mario.

QFT, if only PC games magazines and young people would realize that too, than maybe we would get good gameplay and good graphics and not just blinding graphics.

I like how you make this last part sound so easy when it is in fact the most challenging aspect of the game: Putting together the team build that works. "A SF build is nice, sure, but how well will it benefit my party? Would it be better to bring X profession instead because it provides more ample counters to the monsters in the Y area?" Of course this is a bit of how it's looked at from a new player before they get better and find more broader builds - then you get into Hard mode and things become challenging again.

So does Golden Axe, but I'd play that for HOURS on end.