Keep In Mind That GW Is A Very Young MMORPG

Flagship studios are essentially blizzard North renamed and under different owners with few personnel that are still the same- they ARE not the primary creators of Diablo. what's left in flaship studio is just bad writers, back up programmers, scripters, and artists that didn't make the move to Anet.

Anet has the primary creators of diablo- the main programmer, artist, and a few others

Don't say stupid things. This game has very little in common with Morrowind and the commonalitys are with most every fantasy or online game.

GW is an ok game. Its genra is entirly new and unique ATM. It has elements of FPS, RPG, and MMO games in it. It also has some new stuff included.

Until you begin to manually lead the distance on things like fireball, people really need to stop likening this game to a fps. The option for a first person perspective is available in many games that have nothing to do with first person shooter. Unique instanced worlds have about as much to do with a mmo as never winter nights does. Instead of a master server listing, you get the district system. The game has rpg elements when it comes to the pve segment of the game, beyond that there isnt much rpg in it.

I said that it has ELEMENTS of FPS games. I know that GW isn't much like an FPS but it has some things commonly found in FPSes in it.

If your post was refering to some of the other posts on this thread I can see how you would base this responce but as you quoted me I am wondering if you skipped some of what I wrote or didn't read the rest of the posts on this thread.

Baldur's Gate, Civiliazation

Whatever you want to think this game IS an MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game). It is certainly not a First Person Shooter just becuase you fight other players. Almost every MMORPG that has ever existed has had PvP.

This is, indeed, an action MMORPG much like the Dark Cloud or Knights of the old republic series, but being Massively Multiplayer. But then again, I have never seen a turn-based MMORPG before; this game is just like all the others.

What in the world makes people continually call this game a First Person Shooter ?

wow....some people are really dumber than life should allow them to be...can't we come up with a process by which we weed these people out of society?

she said it has FPS ELEMENTS not that it IS a first person shooter.

Almost every game in existance today has Player-VS-Player modes, and FPS games have co-operative modes too. There is no way at all that you could compare this game to an FPS in that manner becuase ALL GAMES HAVE PLAYER-VS-PLAYER.

Like the poster below said, let's just compare the game to the Sims 2 becuase you can swivel the camera or to a Strategy Game becuase you can use the mini-map to tell people to go and that if you set up the right camera angle you can get an overhead view

Would you liken the game to auto cad or 3d-studio because you can change the camera veiwpoints as you desire within the game? The interface doesnt define the genre or styles that it is similar to.

I wouldn't liken this game to an FPS...but I take great pride in the fact that I can read....and from what I read I can ascertain the fact that she didn't say GW was a FPS...she said some elements of the game make you FEEL like it's a FPS.

I wasn't saying that she was saying the game was an FPS and that "TEH GAME ISNT N FIRST PERSON" I was saying, and I said it several times, that you can't compare the game to an FPS just on the grounds that you can kill stuff, becuase you kill stuff in all games pretty much, (Except, maybe, Harvest Moon or some Puzzle Games) O.o

So, you can read, huh? Maybe we should weed you out of society.

Wow I have to agree in spirit. Some of you just don't get it. I think you guys only read what you want to read, not what actually is written.

There comes a point where it would be nice if you actually had a point to the topic. (Not you Algren...the rest of ya)

/rant off

if that is what you gained from what was said then I guess maybe we should weed me out of society...i'd rather not be here

Lest anyone forget, this thread, and all others, needs to maintain a veneer of civility:

So let us begin anew— remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate. ~John F. Kennedy

too bad counter-strike doesn't have auto select target, auto go to target, auto follow target and auto aim.

Did you, possibly, ever think that you were the one reading it incorrectly?

She says it 3 times that her grounds for saying that it resembled an FPS was becuase you kill and chase the enemy team.

Aniewiel, if I am taking your words out of context, then please correct me.

I say again, Sagius, keep a civil attitude in your posts and contribute something worthwhile or your posts will be deleted. If you two want to squabble, do it in PMs please.

I will be watching this thread and lock it down if the badgering of one another continues.

And, since it my words are the ones being picked upon: Algren is correct. It REMINDS me of every FPS that I have played. Not from their perspective (no duh, right?) but from the fact that team-based play where you try to anihilate one another's group is precisely what UT, Quake, HL and others do as well. Is it an FPS? NO but there are elements that are very much like them.

I would argue the same thing for the other side. It REMINDS me of RPGs as well. The character development and chasing down of quests in a cooperative manner with a group of like-minded players is like NWN, Morrowind, EQ and others I have played. Is it and RPG? NO! But there are elements that are very much like them.

Now, quit wordsmithing and picking on eachother and make a useful contribution.

uhm...counter-strike has auto-aim...

Umm..here's the topic in case anyone forgot

I believe...that what she was saying(tries to maintain composure)....compared to your typical RPG...like Final Fantasy...Guild Wars feels more like a Typical FPS than it does an RPG....take it for what you will...I don't feel the need to argue someone elses point any longer.

Let me restate my opinion. The game does not remind me of an FPS at all. It does, to me, resemble an FPS in that (in pvp) you have spawn points, you spawn at them at the start of the game and then you pull out at the enemy. This is obviously a minute aspect.

When you ingage with other players in Guild Wars you draw in close to them, you either slash or you throw a projectile at them, you use skills and wait for skills to recharge. You use proper timing and combonations of manuvers (Such as using Sever Arty, then Gash, ECT.)

In FPS PvP you see a player in the distance and you shoot at them, or you get up close to a player, hop and zig zagging around them, firing your gun madly at their chest.

The Action RPG really resembles this type of game to me, becuase in an action RPG there is no turn system except for the time it takes for you to hit, retract, and hit again (Much like what Algren stated in his first post). You use skills, wait for them and your mana, energy, force points to recharge and then use them again.

Some ARPGs would be like Dark Cloud 1, 2 and Knights of the Old Republic. Most MMORPGs don't use turn based systems anymore.

I would label this game, in my opinion, as an MMOARPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Action Role Playing Game).

this game is absolutely a MMORPG (or MMOARPG a variation of)....this CORPG crap isn't cutting it

I conceded earlier that action RPG was a better title.

MMOARPG? Another acronym to remember!

Erm.. but anyhow the CEO of NCSoft did took the gamble that we known as GW to target the MMORPG market. So regardless of your definitions, we all know how popular WoW is in China (latest figure as of today... 1.5 mil accounts in China alone). All the shareholders will know is MMORPG = Teh Kash, this new "MMOCRPG" or whatever newfangled trash the marketoids call it is currently looking to be "Teh Fl0p".

I can essentially imagine news of that report as a HUGE finger from Blizzard back at their ex-employees.

What will GW's future be like? I certainly hope they are not going to hide behind the "oh, we don't charge subscription fees" line of argument, because as far as I'm concerned, they can actually go full steam, and release an expansion every 3 months for $50, and if the content and gameplay is there, I will actually buy it (and essentially pay the same as I'd do for WoW).

So what will GW be like in the future?

A Counterstrike wannabe?

Or a truly unique experience?

As it stands now... it is just a jack of all trades, and a master of none. And that gets old really fast.

back to the original post
When I party I try to find a balanced group for the mission thinking to myself is there alot of casters if so lets get us some mesmers
is there alot of groups using bows from higher places come here my ranger friend bring fluffy if it wants to come along. Hmmm Necro very awsome indeed you good in blood curse or death
all classes have their pluses and their minuses
Its all about having fun
do you not hate when a thread gets hijacked

generik.

I agree with you that NCSoft has to decide where GW is going. They either have to decide that it will be a PvP game and drop the element of PvE to focus on the PvP needs. Or decide that it's going to be a MMORPG(MMOARPG CORPG MMORCPG MMOACRPG NCLSHDHSKDH whatever you wanna call it) and drop the entire idea of PvP to develop a more unique plotline and gameplay for RPGers....trying to be both is far too difficult, and as I see it the reason this game is going to fail in the long run.

You know what I hate people and the word Failure
Do you think that ncsoft thinks this game is a failure I think not
this game is getting bigger and better
more new people coming into the game
Why is it that people wish to see this game fail
who knows Human nature is wierd

***combined a double post*** ~Anie

the major reasons I bought this game, after quiting EQ, is the graphics, the female models, and the ability to play short sessions.

for me, I don't care if this game "fails" and nobody else plays it anymore. I'll still have a nice time looking at the backside of my female characters, fighting with henchmen. 75% of the time I find it more enjoyable to be with henchmen than with poor AI'ed human players anyway.

Yeap.

You might argue that WoW had a longer run than GW. But let's be honest with ourselves here. I never ever seen an advertisement for WoW on TV or anywhere... so how did all that 3.5 million gamers come to become paying subscribers?

Simple! Word of Mouth.

That works for WoW because of these huge communities that already existed from the D2/WC3 days. For GW, there is no such luxury.

What's worse for GW... is that it is actually starting to get awfully boring and old very fast. I have a neighbour who is on WoW for currently the 6th month, and he is STILL playing that game. Almost two months into GW and already I'm bloody sick of these nerf bats, and HOW STRANGE it is... the SHEER IRONY, that the most common mobs in the games are the classes that the fewest people play. Mesmers and Necros!

I don't farm, but I can imagine that for such a boring game it might be interesting to be able to go out and kill a whole bunch of stuff. It is legitimate money mind you, duping gold and items... that on the other hand is a different story.

If a friend were to ask me.. "So, how is this GW game you have been playing?". I guess my response would be "Oh, it gets boring and old really fast". And I definitely wouldn't lie to a mate to cover ANet's shortcomings. As it stands, it is not deserving of that sale.

You might argue further that why gamers are so particular about the need to play GW day and night for months on an end...

Well, I don't see games like.. Quake having an expansion every 6 months. Doom and Halflife are different stories, since they probably will have 1 expansion and that's it. GW is unique in the sense that it essentially seems to follow the MMORPG model, of slowly suckering you into an addiction in hopes that you will keep shelling out cash every 6 months.

Except they failed at the suckering part.

There is also very little replay value.

You might not care about replayability, but I certainly care about it. I think Blizzard cares about it too, and guess what? Every one of their titles are best sellers in their area.

GW? I don't know. Let's see about that. After all it has been a best seller for quite a while.

Ranger, Necro and Mesmer are advance classes for sure. Before I brought the game I was looking for threads about the Ranger class. To my suprise a great portion of them said Ranger sucked, was underpowered and very weak compared to other classes. I remember reading one comment saying in order for his Ranger to do damage he must rely on all his necro skills.

When I got the game and made a Ranger, I really started to wonder about these Ranger bashing threads. I started to see that the people who complained had no idea how to play them. You have to be crafty, have good timing and choose the right targets to exploit Rangers power.

I'm sure in time we will see many more Rangers and even Necros and Mesmers. After reading the Mesmer class description when I first started, I made it my goal to stay away from them. I had no clue how a "counter" character could work in a rpg. But they aren't as complex as they seem. In fact a Mesmer will be my next character :P

Also, Gw does "FEEL" like a fps. It doesn't look like one and it doesn't play like one. But it feels like one.

Gw: Community is broken up in many districts but are united on forums.
Fps: Community is broken up into many different servers but are united on forums.

Gw: PvP can either be organized(4vs4 etc) teams or your guild vs another guild.
Fps: You join server and play with random people or you clan vs clan.

Gw: Players do co-op objective based missions together in their own world.
Fps: Games like Rainbow 6; Players do co-op based missions together in their own server/world.

Those are just some of the ways it feels like a fps atmosphere to me.

wonder how wow people get suckered into playing over 200 dollas to play a game
hmmm yeah lets go do some quest kill x amount of this
yep that is fun
Im new in wow can i get helped yeah sure
what just happend i got ganked
o cool im about to kill this hard mob all bymyself see what loot i get
o what the heck just happend some one done stole my loot
o well to each his own
I am happy with guild wars and glad for guild wars

I agree, but I think it's not a matter of infancy (as in the case of the OP opinion) in the game in my opinion it's a matter of balance. People have already played the game to death, enough to know that certain classes dominate.

On the subject of what sort of game this is, I think Anet tried to make the game appealing to a wider variety of people and game types hence the reason no one can say it's this or that.

If they want to make up a new acronym for it, so be it. But please, to argue that it doesn't have fps elements because ti doesn't account for trajectory..blah blah blah is pointless. (one again not pointed ant anyone in particular)

The same could also be said for the RTS.

Gw: Community is broken up in many districts but are united on forums.
RTS: Community is broken up into mostly Channels depending on area or Rooms depending on type of game play. Message boards are usualy more scattered and less concentrated than most genres.

Gw: PvP can either be organized(4vs4 etc) teams or your guild vs another guild. Also boasts the idea of world and regional tournements.
RTS: Can mostly in groups ranging from 4-8 vs 4-8. You can do arranged games and clan wars in most. Most of them have prized tournements (So do FPSs)

Gw: Players do co-op objective based missions together in their own world.
RTS: Many games have such features as "Build a wonder of the world and keep it for this ammount of time" or "Completely advance the tech tree" such things. I'm generally refering to PvP here, but some games (Like Warcraft III) have custome, player made games that are VSed computer players.

no it doesnt.

GW is a simple trumps game, where you have 8 cards in your deck.
You are split into roles, and this is not only RPG/MMORPG releated, it has been in the FPS gendra, with BF games being a prime example.
I would not say its tactical, as in PvE once you know the creature in the areas you seldom change tactics or have to adapt on the spur of the moment.
In PvP its about finding a system the group can work too. Then you implement it till another team finds a counter system.
Tactics only really come into play after a battle when you are working out a new system to beat the guys/gals that just beat you. There is often not a great deal of tactical changes in any PvP battle once it has started, you have you skill locked and it depends on who has the best system worked out.
Much to the dismay of many players, The skill is in the system / team organisation and not in the players skillset / rune horde.

I wonder what FPS stands for?
FirstPersonShooter.
Hm,
My ranger shoots arrows.
If I zoom close enough, my field of view become that of a first person.
First person view.
Me shooting.
It's a first person shooter.

A very nice one with role-playing elements.

That is making a statement saying the game is like a fps.

I am curious though, why did you omit so many parts of your statement while using "..."?

Duck hunt
Is in the perspective of the shooter.
Simulates shooting ducks.
You pulling the trigger to shoot the ducks.
Duck hunt != First person shooter
Duck hunt = simulation or action shooter

Hm,duck hunt,
the term "simulation" is probably a term that describes almost any computer game there is.
So even a game like Doom, Quake or HalfLife etc. is some kind of a simulation.
And ActionShooter? Name one so called "real" FPS that isn't an ActionShooter?

How about DuckHunt being a first person action simulation shooter?
FPASS.

FPS = &^&ing please shutup. Dead topic

*blinks* That was unnecessary.