March 14 - Gamespy Article

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/guild-wars-.../695508p1.html

-Talks a bit about controling towns and outpost
-Confirms 12 vs 12 PvP

Sounds great. As long as there aren't scorpion looking things popping out of the ground every ten steps like Prophecies, I'm sure I'll enjoy Factions quite a bit.

12vs12 Niiice.

If there are ANY kind of scorpion in Factions I will demand my money back.

That is one creature they RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO WAAAAAY too often.

So... does this mean only 12vs12 pvp for control of cities? Or for missions? Cause I want to see some massive battles for towns... not lame 8vs8 stuff.

heh, according to CGW, no scorpions, but you'll learn to hate the assassin mobs that have replaced them

Lmao!!!

IMO, the worst part of Prophecy was that section (in Maguuma?) where Scarabs came from underground, AND spiders came from above. You could be walking around, no blips in site, then BAM be totally surrounded.

"Game over man, Game over!" -from Aliens

Assassin mobs aren't bloody Devourers. That's enough for me.

And yes, Jungle ambushes sucked much ass. Expect more of same in Factions with all the ninja-style freaks crawling around. If they don't come popping out the woodwork with depressing regularity, I will be disappointed.


...



And now, it is Rant Mode Time.

Alright, I did NOT hear Gamespy say that the best skills were in alliance-specific elite missions. I did not. I absolutely refuse to believe Anet would further its betrayal of the little man by not allowing goddamned skill caps to be evenly distributed. And yes, this time there is confirmation that Elite missions are only for the top-end alliances, not simply the controlling faction. If these Elite missions contain skill caps, then less than one percent of the playing population of the game will be able to obtain them. Not to mention that even the hard-assed ub3r l33t alliances will only get caps from the towns they specifically control, which will number only one or, maybe, two of the twenty or so available. One would have to not only shift one's allegiance between factions to get all the skills, one would also have to carefully regulate one's internal reputation so as to change the city they control and thus unlock new Elite missions for themselves.

This, I refuse to believe of Anet. They could not possibly be that colossally, blindingly, unwaveringly stupid.

I do have a horrible suspicion about the state of the game come Factions though...

Controlling alliance member: "Running Elite mission, 20k per person."
Joe Schmoe off the street: Damnit damnit DAMNIT! I don't want to pay twenty grand to play a single lousy mission just once, but I can't play it at all if I don't so...

ArenaNet, you are foul, despiccable and unworthy of my respect and possibly my continued support if you go through with this. You claim to create games for casual gamers? Well, not even the hardest-ass hardcore player could keep up with this untenable system. You will destroy the heart of this game and only the already ridiculously rich/arrogant ultra-elite PvP Guilds will benefit, while more than ninety-nine percent of your player base is Red Engine Go-ed straight in the ass. You think you'll lose players over the slots issue? No way. You have not seen angry until you see what will happen when the knowledge of this towering injustice sinks into players.

I would love to join one of these Guilds and become the best player I can be, but you know what guys? I can't. Because I already have to be the best player I can be to join any Guild worth joining. And now you punish me, and heavily, for it. Well ya know what?

Red Engine Go you too.

Well, I don't think that will happen, and based on how you read the Gamespy article I don't think that's what they meant either. They said, that's where the best skills will be dropped. So you can translate that a number of ways. 1) There will be bosses down there with elites to be capped (which, in campaign 1 there are skills that can be capped from more than one boss, so..) or 2) that's where the most experienced players will drop their mad skillz owning the elite mission (which is more the angle I think they meant when saying it). Keep in mind too, this reviewer wasn't sure if there would be a preview event of the game, so his credibility is a little shaky already to me.

I agree though, if that is what Anet decides to do it will be a colossally bad idea, enough to make me stay away until they fix in an update due to abnormal amounts of player complaints. At least they do listen to players though, so, we'll see.

This whole alliance thing really has me scratching my head. I just don't see how it will work fairly. I also haven't really seen a reasonable explanation of it, or how just what kind of rewards belong to elite missions. In the current campaign I am okay not doing TOPK or SF if I don't want to. Yeah, that's were some of the best drops are (and Underworld too) but I don't need those items to play the game. Skills and access to towns I absolutely do need. So as a casual gamer, am I gonna get screwed if I don't belong to an all-powerful alliance? I don't get it, and I feel that Anet hasn't really offered a good explanation yet either. Oh well, wait and see I guess.

Yeah, I'm a little confused myself as to how a certain faction controlling a city or mission area will benefit that faction. Maybe they have some sort of morale boost if they own that particular territory that a mission is in or if they own a city and the opposing faction has to pay a certain tax when they purchase something.


Also, does anyone know for sure if you can change factions or if you choose your one faction and thats all she wrote.

You're right, you did not. You saw them speculating about where the best skills would be. Gamespy. Speculating. I think this is a very clear case of them not knowing what they're talking about. At all. The guy writing the article almost certainly does not play the game outside of the previews, and has to review a ton of MMOs. He applied the typical MMO formula to his speculation - special area = special skills, right? Despite A.Net's blunders in this area before, they've learned from their mistakes. I'd speculate that whatever special things await in those elite zones, they won't be exclusive elite skill caps. See the current 'elite' areas, the Fissure of Woe and the Underworld, for some idea of what's likely in store there.


Yeah, I saw that, and I'm really skeptical of that system if it's true. *IF* this is true, that only a controlling *alliance* can access a challenge mission, and *IF* there are 20 cities with elite missions, and *IF* a given alliance only controls one city, and *IF* each alliance has the full 10 guilds, and *IF* each of those guilds was filled to the brim with 100 members, that gives a total of 20,000 people access to these 'elite' missions. Under a best case scenario. With over a million copies of the game sold, and very likely even more with Factions coming out, that's less than 2% of the population with access to even a single 'elite' mission. If you thought the favor system was bad (and yes, I think the favor system is pretty freaking bad) you haven't seen anything yet.

I simply cannot imagine a system like that remaining in place for long if those zones are supposed to be the best PvE content. With over 98% of the population worldwide completely shut off from *any* top PvE content, the public outcry would be deafening.


I'm extremely skeptical at this point. I do know that A.Net has a lot of talent, and that they could potentially pull something like this off. At the same time, this is not an easy project by any means. Even on the most basic of levels, I'm interested to see how they intend to create dynamic borders through PvE that actually represent some conflict. Game theory is not on their side, this is not PvP where people have real world stakes involved. It's players against a system that ostensibly only rewards one side at a time, and in that environment everyone zergs the first side to show a position of power out of personal self interest.

Similarly I don't see how you can match alliances up against each other through PvE to see which *alliance* controls a city. Maybe I'm grossly overestimated the scale of things here, but shouldn't there be an awful lot of alliances looking at a given city at a time? Again I'm not willing to pass judgement until I've seen the system in practice, but right now, I'm skeptical.


If what that article said was truth, and not just speculation, then I'd have to agree, Factions looks like a game that's truly for the hardest of the hardcore while everyone else shouldn't even bother coming. Given their target audiences (casual players and those attracted by no monthly fees in particular) that style of gameplay would be an unmitigated disaster. A.Net makes mistakes like any other developer, but making one that colossally stupid is not something I'd expect from *any developer*.

We'll see how it plays out.

Peace,
-CxE

I think they said that gaining favor with one faction or another takes time and a good number of missions. If that's right, then winner-zerging would take a good deal of time, which might allow some balance to be restored.

As for the controlling-alliance thing, the only way I see that working is if the internal reputation required for access to a particular area is static and not competitive. Instead of having to be the top alliance inside a faction of, supposedly, over five hundred thousand players, you only have to have X Reputation in order to gain access to the Elite missions. Which is grind, and bad, and not good on many levels, but still light years beyond the whole Elite Players ONLY thing.

12v12 PvP is going to be freakin' ridiculous. 8v8 is crazy enough... and even crazier when you do it in HoH.... I can't even begin to imagine what 12v12 is going to be like.

more err7's, longer times to wait for people, noisy vent channels..gg

My understanding is that 12v12 won't be 12v12 in the truest sense, but instead 3 allied squads of 4. Global effects won't help allied squads, and you won't be able to see allied health bars or targets.

Otherwise 12v12 would be some pretty boring spiking contests.

Peace,
-CxE

Well, from the beginning, it has sounded like Factions would offer more of an Eve Online type of playing experience - not necessarily a good thing in a game designed for the casual player, as has already been stated here. I'm all for more openedness in games - the Fantasy RPG in particular, but with that openedness comes a multitude of problems - in essence a higher learning curve and more grind to get where you want to be.

The great thing about Prophecies was its structure - you can essentially run through the bulk of the game in a matter of days, or weeks, depending on just how much time you have to play in any particular sitting. While nice in some respects, the static nature does create some boredom. How interesting would it be to go back to Ascalon after playing the Frost Gate mission, and have the entire setting change to reflect the fact that Rurik is dead, and Refugees have left for Kryta?

I think this is what Anet is trying to accomplish with Factions - having the quests and mission you complete have a dynamic impact on the game world at large. While in theory this makes for a more interesting game playing experience - their way of doing it looks like it will limit the amount and type of content we can play at any one time with Factions - which was my biggest beef in regards to the slot limit imposed by Prophecies and carried over into the merged account status with Factions. By not being able to use all primes at any given time, there are certain prime specific quests and items that cannot be experienced. This will seem to have an even greater impact in Factions, as what you will be able to do will be inherent on whether you are part of a guild, whether that guild is allied with other guilds, and whether that allience is part of one of the Factions.

How is my game play going to be affected if I don't want my guild allied with anyone, and if I don't want to join a particular Faction, but remain a neutral party? What happens if I want to join a particular Faction, but some of my guildmates want to join the other Faction, or remain neutral? There are a lot of unanswered questions in regards to this new dynamic they are introducing that should have been answered long before the pre-order was released.

Dynamic game play is a good thing in any genre of the gaming world, however, I don't see how it will work in GW's basic design. If I can play only a limited portion of the content based on the alliances and Factions, then Anet's 6 x 100% math is even fuzzier than originally thought - unless all content (explorable area, items, quests & missions, skills & attributes, strategy) is accessable regardless of any alliances or Faction your account is a part of.

Hanok Odbrook
Real Millennium Group Guild
Truth * Knowledge * Peace

Devourers are the new Cliff Racers.

12vs12.........words....cannot..describe ;_;

12 v 12, multi-team format.....THE JOYS OF UNBRIDLED CARNAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also it's good because getting 8 people for a team is hard enough. 4 is easier

From what I've read from this article, people think that only one alliance can control a city at a time. From searching the internet and GW Guru, I've read that alliances are only smaller parts of the bigger picture. The alliances (10 guilds max) can choose whether to be in one Canthan Faction, or another (the alliance leader desides).

I've seen pictures of the world with its border of where the two Factions fight one another, and anyone on one of the two Factions that, according to the border, has control of an "elite" mission, anyone on any alliance on any guild has access to that mission. This also goes for any special event in the cities, as I have heard A.Net mention.

Anyways, I'm sure that A.Net has everything under control, and that everyone will have pretty much 50/50 access to all the missions, depending on how much faction your Faction can muster.

Heres the link to the picture of the border and map of Cantha:

http://img124.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cantha8kl.jpg

Why do I get the feeling that the 12v12 fights are going to consist of a few order necros and an whole mess of warriors. Pretty tough to match that kind of damage.

That's why they're broken up into teams of 4, both for party formation and scaling purposes. If they allowed 12 man party formation you'd see an environment dominated by global effects (Heal Party, Aegis, Order of Pain) and impossible to stop spikes. If each global effect and target call only goes to 4 people, things will play out in ways much more similar to normalcy.

Peace,
-CxE

*IF* that's true (and if the Gamespy article is remotely reflecting the truth, it DOES seem like that's exactly what they have in mind), Anet is going to dwarf one of the worst ideas in computer gaming history (the Worlds at War/Favor concept) by a system that's worse by several magnitudes. I'd also take a "let's give Factions a chance and see what happens" stance on it, but since Anet so far never actually agreed that the favor idea is a bad one, I am EXTREMELY sceptical right now. Creating exclusive game content for the most elite of all elite players and locking the rest of the game's population out of that content probably forever - I have no idea how the responsible people at Anet could even LISTEN to somebody coming up with such an idea.

What will probably happen is the strongest of the strongest guilds banding together and shutting off everyone else from those areas forever. With the favor system, access to UW and FoW was at least granted to less elite players on a random basis (some PvP teams from their territories winning HoH). An average player never has and never will be able to win HoH, but at least the favor concept didn't end in a total lockout from UW and FoW for those players.

I still hope the article at Gamespy is just a piece of fiction. I still hope that Factions will not end up being the most elitist computer game ever. I still hope that members of non elite guilds will be able to see and enjoy ALL of the new content and not only the "Underdog Section". I still hope that Anet is not going to make the mother of all colossal mistakes in computer game development. If I wouldn't have that hope, I'd actually cancel my preorder for Factions right now.

People have compare these elite areas to FOW/UW. Now while it's true that FoW/UW comprise about 5% of the games content it's also true that Fow/UW=95% of the money made in game. That's the real motivation. People hate Cartels, profiteering and being excluded. I suspect GWF will bring all 3.

The AN defintition of optional is an odd one as always. Something is not optional if you have no choice in it. It's enforced.

Now people call these areas a bonus area, and I guess if you want to complete the storyline they are, but if you look at the PvE metagame as a whole it is clear that in order to maximise money making potential, skill point attainment, create a PvE challenge they are not a bonus area at all.

It's true we have no idea how these areas will work, and it's true AN know more about game design than all of us put together. But somehow, something in me says this is a very bad idea. They did'nt listen and refused to act(or even tell us a way around the favor system that had been in game since the start) and I suspect they will refuse to listen now.

No one minds people getting victory parades, going to neat little places in town or even a small discount. It's the fact that a small group of people(20 alliances) who will get to 'Phat loot' that worries people so much. Even If they change daily the small guy in a small group of friends will be royally shafted. It would have been better to limit alliance size by population rather than number of Guilds. that way bands of small guilds could at least compete.

I have seen nothing, nothing at all to refute peoples worries, either from the community relations guys or in interviews. Sorry AN but 'it'll be cool' does'nt cut. I think this may be a make or break time for the Guild Wars Francise, and I really really hope it's not break.

This is just looking worse and worse....I have never before, and never will again, pre-order a game. I'd rather eat the cancellation charge, than be stuck with this 70 dollar nightmare in the making.



But on second thought.. I'm curious. If it turns out to suck, there are plenty of other games out there that can easily gain my interest over what I fear this game is going to be based on the article.. but what does it matter to AN, you buy the game anyhow, and even if you don't like it, and leave the game for good, they have already gotten your money... what difference does it matter to them if you come or go.

I have great faith in A.Net, I just read the article, I'm hoping they're extrapolating from limited info. That said, message to A.Net:

If you limit Elite Areas to a few, oversized/overpowered guilds, and exclude small friend based ones, I'll chisel your tombstones myself.

My suggestion is that A.Net dispel some of the speculation NOW. It's close enough to the release date that they can let us know what we're getting. A.Net thrived when GW:P came out because they were open and told us what was going on, they need to start doing that again.

The article dated from March 14. AN would have had plenty of time to come out and tell us "that article is BS, don't believe a word". They didn't, right? Maybe because it's exactly what Factions will be.

I say this : Just wait next weekend and everything will be clear. If everything is messed up, I'm sure ANet will notice it and fix this up. Just dont panic for now. We've only read interviews and unprecise previews. Let's wait for the real deal, I'm 100% sure we'll be happy with the result

Those were my thoughts, too. I don't think the content access is going to be limited to each alliance squad. Each alliance functions as a squad in the larger Faction.

...it basically sounds like the Favor system we have now.

Presently, our "Factions" are Korea, America, Europe. Our "squads" are top guilds.

In Factions, our new Korea, America, Europe will be the Luxons and Kurzicks. In Factions, our top guilds will become alliance squads consisting of 10 guilds. If one of those alliance squads take an outpost (check out the pics one member linked to in this thread), that outpost is available to the squad's entire Faction.

I've never heard of them saying that. So would these 3 allied squads fight beside each other, or on separate battlefields (which wouldn't be much of a 12v12 if you ask me)? If they do fight together, it wouldn't be too hard to get all 12 on one vent channel and coordinate a huge spike.

As I said before - just how much are we going to be able to divine from a 3 day test, especially when there are limited areas we will be allowed to explore in the game - and can't even do it with our current characters. Essentially, the bulk of the players will barely be able to get out of the tutorial area by the time the event is over. Only the power players will have much time to explore the allowed areas of Cantha, but we've already been told the elite areas will not be accessable. Not to mention the fact that 3 days is hardly long enough to get a decent judgement on how the alliances and Factions will work.

Well, don't you see the problem then, especially for the casual gamer - the player base GW is shooting for? There have been times where a week or even two go by before I log on and play at a time when America has favor. From the info I have thus far read, it's quite possible that a month or two could go by before I am lucky enough to be logged on at a time a mission or quest I want to do becomes available - that's just not a good gaming concept.

Plus, the question of neutrality remains - what content will be accessable by those who do not join alliances or a Faction? What about those players in a guild who would rather remain neutral or join an alliance or Faction other than the one their guild is a member of? Right now, Anet really looks like they're dropping the ball big time on this one.

Hanok Odbrook
Real Millennium Group Guild
Truth * Knowledge * Peace

Hm...intersting article. They didnt really sound like they knew what they were talking about, but who knows, thats why the have the open beta on the 24.

I wish I could remember where I'd heard this one line before, but "You're focusing on all the wrong details." Here's why.

How huge is the present map in GW? How many favor-based zones do we have right now? We have two. UW and FoW.

The land of Cantha is going to be a pretty good size, right? How many favor-based zones are we going to have there? Check out the map screenshot link earlier in this thread. Look at those blue and red lines. And some of those lines are encircling particular outposts, correct?

Realistically, then, given the feedback regarding Favor and UW/FoW--feedback which is based on the limited number of favor-based zones presently--how many favor-based zones can we expect to see in Factions? Especially when it seems pretty clear that there are multiple favor-based outposts?

I don't think lack of accessible content is going to be a huge issue. The only way for it to be an issue, I think, is if all of the top guilds in the guild ladder...all of them...ally together. But look at how the game functions now. The top guilds thrive on competition, right? What kind of competition is there when everyone's on one side, and that side is controlling everything? There's zero competition, and pretty much zero reason for even the top guilds to play.

That's why I don't see the concern for lack of accessible content. Unless Ensign comes in and confirms that iQ, Te, and the other top American guilds are in fact going to form one huge alliance with Korea, Taiwan, China, or Europe, or whatever, I think there's going to be plenty of fluidity regarding the lines in Factions.

I don't see your point about neutral players to be terribly responsible, either, because while having a rapport with your guild is desirable, if they're going ahead and allying themselves without the member's consent, or at the very least, without a majority of the guild's consent...why would you want to be in that guild in the first place anyway?

Or if a player wants to be completely neutral and independent? A sort of lone wolf? Is it so easy to exist neutrally today? Is one able to function fully in GW without being in a guild? I tend to view your point as similar to the "soloing the game" idea. GW--and its content down the road I surmise--is designed as a team game, as a guild game. Friends of mine used to want to remain solo, but they realized the importance and advantage of guild-based play.

That's not to say neutral players won't have anything to do in Factions, but the focus of Factions is on alliances, guild-to-guild conflict, etc.

$70? Hate it so much, you're buying the CE, eh? (If you're Canadian, I apologize)

Well, it matters to the extent that if no one buys Chapter 3, Guild Wars goes out of business. Because there are no subscription fees, GW needs to get people to buy the expansions, bottom line.

I've gotten my money's worth with Prophecy, I figure Factions is a freebie gift to Anet.

If it sucks, though, I won't be buying Chapter 3. And I'm sure Anet knows that Factions is a huge deal for them...

"Naturally, the hardcore alliances will get the best real estate. And the smaller alliances? Well, they can visit the cities held by their more-devoted brethren."

"So why would someone want to hold one of the more coveted cities? To get phat loots, of course. Roughly 20 of the cities on the new continent will allow their conquering alliance to embark on "elite quests" that are unique to them. These will be PvE missions of the most hardcore magnitude available, with rewards that, reportedly, will be commensurate with their level of difficulty."

My translation:

If your side captures a city, you will not be able to launch "parade style events" or visit "off limit areas" unless you are part of the specific alliance that nabbed it. However, you will be able to hit the mishes.

These towns seem to work on this assumption: if your side does not control it, you cannot visit it. Therefore, if you can visit it, there must be some sort of reward. In my mind, this means the missions are open to you.

Regarding neutrality:

"Your character's affiliation (and, by extension, your guild and alliance's) isn't a binary choice. Rather, you slowly accumulate reputation with one or both of the factions depending on the quests you perform. Thus, it's possible for groups of players to shift between the two groups, if the one they're affiliated with doesn't suit their fancy."

My translation:

If you want to be neutral, keep your "reputation" levels fairly similar and every little thing gonna be alright.


[All quotations are from the article at the head of this thread]
***

Having been one of the gamers _literally_ screwed over by Firaxis with the Civ 4 launch (bastards still won't refund me for the days I spent making their buggy piece of crap product playable), I'm leery of anything a game company sells these days. And Sid Meier has lost my business for good.

Anet, however, is doing pretty well. The GW launch was flawless (a nearly unprecedented event, even for a company backed by the considerable experience of NCsoft) and GW has since been well maintained. Plus, unlike most other games and communities I've been in, the designers really and truly do care about what the consumers have to say. That is downright freaky!

I'll buy their product, and I won't grudge them the cash for v.3 when it comes out... unless Anet looks to be going under...


EDIT:

Original Posting

I wouldnt get to worked up over this, the person who wrote the article sounds like that really dont know much about guild wars.

Notice how he says "the best skills will drop", well skills dont drop. I think it was more of an assumtion on the part of the writer.

The elite areas are special high level maps. Skill caps are in missions and pve maps

I heared the land mass of Factions is about 2/3 the size of the total landmass in Guild Wars.

quests will actually be more dense together that means no exploring



this from a rideo for games
http://www.gamingsteve.com/podcasts/...2006-03-20.mp3

It goes to explain the rpg in the game and how it works.

I think it might work I am really not sure, I guess there will be rpg after all.

What's wrong with wanting to log on and play the hour or two I may have one day in the UW and FoW? If I have done all the missions and finished all the quests, then it IS a problem to not be able to use the limited time I have to explore these areas. What you are saying is that I should just run around exploring territory I've already been over and should be happy about it.

Again, when I reach the point where I want and/or need to complete quests or missions in those territories or outposts, I get to waste the hour or two I have running around in circles. Unlike some gamers here, I actually like to complete the quests and missions in their proper order.


I would also find it highly doubtful that all of the top guilds would ally, but for the third time, that doesn't change the fact that I may log in the 4-5 times I have the opportunity to play the game over the course of a week or two, and may not be able to access the areas I need/want to access during those times, which ends up wasting my time.

I dunno, maybe because its fun being in the guild? Doesn't change the fact that one member may need to complete Lurzick quests while others may need to complete the other factions quests. So if the majority of the guild votes one way, the rest of the people in the guild are out of luck for who knows how long? No thanks.

So neutrality is a bad thing? In the history of the world, no one was ever neutral? I formed my guild on the basis of Knowlege and the persuit of peace. If we were a strictly a role-playing guild, there would absolutely no way that the guild would partake in another country's war or even think about choosing sides. The focus of Factions may be on the alliances, but I still have a right to play the game as I feel best represents my style and the fundamental ideals of my guild. To force me choose a side or else, does not benefit those players who would rather remain neutral and care not to participate in PvP, and that will end in a result that will not benefit GW.

Hanok Odbrook
Real Millennium Group Guild
Truth * Knowledge * Peace

I'm with Hanok Odbrook here. My friends and I (we basically only ever play with each other a rare couple hours a week) regularly get screwed on favor. We've had a huge percentage of the time we had set aside to play entirely evaporate because America didn't have favor, so, we simply couldn't do anything...

Some of them went back to WoW for the evening, while I loaded up Civ4 instead, since GW was out of the question.

No, taking up PvP play is not an option.