User talk:Shard/GW2
From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
GW2[edit]
What, no skilled play? K, I'm not gonna buy GW2 for sure now. InfestedHydralisk 23:27, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Every element will get it's own 5 skills + a few elites, not too far from how it is now, is it? Except there won't be any gimmicks and everyone run balanced. I thought you wanted this? "Every MMO I've played has a loot system..." And you've played Diablo II. I dunno what you're getting at. -Cursed Angel 
23:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware Diablo 2 was an MMO. I only see up to 8 people at a time in that game. Are the rest ninjas? ~Shard
04:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- I was with you 100% until "So yeah in our last game skill mattered, but it won't be like that in GW2. GW2 will have no learning curve and a low mastery threshold, because we want it to be like The Sims." The difference between GW and The Sims is that The Sims is a good game.--*Yasmin Parvaneh*
03:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- We don't know what the skill curve is yet b/c they still haven't shown us anything solid about real combat. They say we can line up attacks or cones but that's not new, atleast half a dozen other MMO's already allowed that and it's pretty carebear as far as "skill" goes anyway. And combining static field with bullets doesn't even factor into real team building if all it does is add extra particle effects and a sliver of +damage. Nothing about how we aim or crit or attack vitals has been released yet and the people that kinda stuff really matters to, have Source games & Battlefield series which have much higher skill curves on those mechanics. A lot of what they're saying gives me pause too, as in they're trying to hard to go after WoW instead of talking about what it is that will actually make GW2's combat "competitive" when contrasted to a less cartoony game. --ilr
04:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- We don't know what the skill curve is yet b/c they still haven't shown us anything solid about real combat. They say we can line up attacks or cones but that's not new, atleast half a dozen other MMO's already allowed that and it's pretty carebear as far as "skill" goes anyway. And combining static field with bullets doesn't even factor into real team building if all it does is add extra particle effects and a sliver of +damage. Nothing about how we aim or crit or attack vitals has been released yet and the people that kinda stuff really matters to, have Source games & Battlefield series which have much higher skill curves on those mechanics. A lot of what they're saying gives me pause too, as in they're trying to hard to go after WoW instead of talking about what it is that will actually make GW2's combat "competitive" when contrasted to a less cartoony game. --ilr
- Funny, they're all just online games to me. Point is it's not like, say all rangers, doesn't already use the same 5 skills on all non-gimmick bars. It may be boring though. -Cursed Angel
20:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- I was with you 100% until "So yeah in our last game skill mattered, but it won't be like that in GW2. GW2 will have no learning curve and a low mastery threshold, because we want it to be like The Sims." The difference between GW and The Sims is that The Sims is a good game.--*Yasmin Parvaneh*
I think you misunderstood the final quote. I think it is supposed to be "GW1 was based on skill, this was a good thing, we intend to do this again", as in skill over gear/grind. I don't think they are saying there will be no benefit to understanding the game and being good at it. But, who cares! I'm playing SC2! Misery 22:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- Shard's point is this...its Izzy and the Anet crew making that game, the same crew that made this game. Same people, same motivations, same manners, same execution. You have a pretty girlfriend/hot boyfriend who lies and cheats on you is still a dbag in spite of a pretty package when you run into them a few months later after your split and get nostalgic or listen to their banter on how much they've changed. For the most part, people don't really change very much, yes there are occasions where they do, but in all honesty, they really don't.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 23:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- I think Jeff Strain is saying two different things in that statement, one for pve, and one for structured pvp. He plainly says players will have equal gear + skills in structured pvp, which is fine. What bothers me is the other part. He is implying that playing longer in pve shouldn't give you an advantage, yet it seems like they're going to make a Diablo-ey item mod system, where farming > being strategic.
- Also, yes, I originally misread it. I'll fix it appropriately. ~Shard 01:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- @Yasmin It would depend on their motives, if they were actually trying to make Guild Wars as good as they could but a mistake somewhere made it so they couldn't achieve that then they could have learned from that mistake and are now fixing it by starting over. If on the other hand they were laughing at us and wondering why we would spend good money on the drivel they were producing, well then we're frankly screwed, at least if we want Guild Wars 2 to be fun. --Orry 02:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- I don't believe their intentions are misplaced, I feel they lack the skill and execution abilities to fulfill this endeavor.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 06:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- ^ –Jette 07:47, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- So basically deciding they didn't learn any from their mistakes before they try. In this case their mistake was making the game overly complex and trying to give every profession a specific feel to it, it may be easy to balance every skill numerically, but it is a lot harder to do that, have each profession have a specific feel and give all characters access to every skill at the same time, not impossible just increasingly harder to do with more skills, and it word be hard to say, "Well, that was a mistake let's get rid of these new mechanics and skills we added so it's easier to balance." So, in a subscription-free model they did the only thing they reasonably could do, started over, if they added more expansions people would rage about the lack of skills or they would be adding to the problem, regardless of how entertaining the result was. They've already admitted to the problem created by having secondary professions and have decided to do away with them instead of trying to balance them. So, given that they're willing to do that when it was one of the largest features of the original, one has to have hope that they've learned something, maybe.--Orry 16:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- They did learn from (at least some of) their mistakes. However, the problem is learning from mistakes ≠ not making mistakes. They've gone from "we'll try to balance over a thousand skills - that couldn't possibly be difficult!" to "We'll pick half their skills." What really irritates me is that it feels like we have ten skills instead of eight purely to be misleading and suggest we've more flexibility, which is clearly flying in the face of reality. It's a matter of principal; I dislike handing money to people in return for their efforts at insulting my intelligence.
A F K When Needed 22:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- 2 weapon sets, 1 healing, 1 elite, 3 racial/profession and a trait, that's 8, albeit 8 from specific classifications of skills(and the trait is passive) but it still leads to plenty of choices, and if everyone has similar weapon skills it will take actual player skill to win, presumably.--Orry 23:08, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- They did learn from (at least some of) their mistakes. However, the problem is learning from mistakes ≠ not making mistakes. They've gone from "we'll try to balance over a thousand skills - that couldn't possibly be difficult!" to "We'll pick half their skills." What really irritates me is that it feels like we have ten skills instead of eight purely to be misleading and suggest we've more flexibility, which is clearly flying in the face of reality. It's a matter of principal; I dislike handing money to people in return for their efforts at insulting my intelligence.
- So basically deciding they didn't learn any from their mistakes before they try. In this case their mistake was making the game overly complex and trying to give every profession a specific feel to it, it may be easy to balance every skill numerically, but it is a lot harder to do that, have each profession have a specific feel and give all characters access to every skill at the same time, not impossible just increasingly harder to do with more skills, and it word be hard to say, "Well, that was a mistake let's get rid of these new mechanics and skills we added so it's easier to balance." So, in a subscription-free model they did the only thing they reasonably could do, started over, if they added more expansions people would rage about the lack of skills or they would be adding to the problem, regardless of how entertaining the result was. They've already admitted to the problem created by having secondary professions and have decided to do away with them instead of trying to balance them. So, given that they're willing to do that when it was one of the largest features of the original, one has to have hope that they've learned something, maybe.--Orry 16:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- ^ –Jette 07:47, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- I don't believe their intentions are misplaced, I feel they lack the skill and execution abilities to fulfill this endeavor.--*Yasmin Parvaneh*
- @Yasmin It would depend on their motives, if they were actually trying to make Guild Wars as good as they could but a mistake somewhere made it so they couldn't achieve that then they could have learned from that mistake and are now fixing it by starting over. If on the other hand they were laughing at us and wondering why we would spend good money on the drivel they were producing, well then we're frankly screwed, at least if we want Guild Wars 2 to be fun. --Orry 02:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
(reset indent)Yes, but you get two weapon sets to switch while in battle, so count it as two skill choices. --Orry 17:05, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- I get to pick 3 skills on my bar!!1! Sweet God, yes! This game will be so diverse! </sarcasm>
- Only more reasons I'm not getting this. However, the main reason remains the same. Botters are already preparing for GW2 and will more than likely have .dll injected bots up-and-running w/o the first week of gameplay. Or, at least, that's what Harboe plans on doing (and I have no doubts he can do it). Leave GW2 for the bots, imo. Karate
Jesus 17:16, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Bot Wars (2.0)? --Frosty
17:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Phinney: Okay, guys, GW has devolved into Build Wars. How can we prevent this from happening in GW2?
Izzy: Let's remove builds!
Phinney: Brilliant! Implement this at once.
Quality game design at work, folks. –Jette 17:49, 25 May 2010 (UTC)- Lol, I'm sure that's not how it went down, but it was funny nonetheless. ~Shard 01:40, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Lol, I'm sure that's not how it went down, but it was funny nonetheless. ~Shard
- Phinney: Okay, guys, GW has devolved into Build Wars. How can we prevent this from happening in GW2?
- Bot Wars (2.0)? --Frosty
(Reset indent) In all fairness, the quests in DII were largely forgettable. This is due to A) The simple design of most of the quests (go here, kill this) and B) the Quest Log explaining everything to you if the quest was more complex than described in point A. --Riddle 03:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Eh... seriously? I still remember going into the barracks for Charsi's hammer, finding the golden eagle for the dude on the docks in the third act, hunting down pieces of the horadric cube, killing the rogue angel in hell, finding the frozen babe in
hothsome cave and defrosting her... D2 had some of the most memorable quests ever :< (i also remember the names of each act boss off the top of my head, a feat i don't manage for most games). -Auron 15:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)- Agreed. Diablo 2 is one of the most fun and memorable games for me. I love loading it up every so often out of the blue. I love the swamp area in Act 3! Oh, man that was so much fun. Then the Harem! Stunning!! Bloodraven was such an awesome boss! Oh and Griswold! I could go on and on! Its GW that is forgettable...I didn't do any quests that weren't part of the main plot (what they called a plot) or for a special area like DOA/UW/FOW. The only GW quest I can think of off the top of my head is the "Tattered Bear" because I have that bear on each of the girls because its awesome and people go "wtf" when I randomly open trade with the bear. I actually read the quest after a while and saw it was a dead kid's teddy I stole. That made me laugh (yes I know that's cruel).--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 18:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- D2 was great. :3 D3 will probably suck. Anybody know if you can run D2 in 1920x1080? –Jette 18:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Who would have thought D2 could have a believable story without having a story. 99% of the game is "kill shit" but you still knew what was going on. ~Shard 02:20, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- I think the only reason I had a clue as to what was going on was because the cinematics were awesome in every aspect. I still enjoy watching them every once in a while. --Riddle 02:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Who would have thought D2 could have a believable story without having a story. 99% of the game is "kill shit" but you still knew what was going on. ~Shard
- D2 was great. :3 D3 will probably suck. Anybody know if you can run D2 in 1920x1080? –Jette 18:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed. Diablo 2 is one of the most fun and memorable games for me. I love loading it up every so often out of the blue. I love the swamp area in Act 3! Oh, man that was so much fun. Then the Harem! Stunning!! Bloodraven was such an awesome boss! Oh and Griswold! I could go on and on! Its GW that is forgettable...I didn't do any quests that weren't part of the main plot (what they called a plot) or for a special area like DOA/UW/FOW. The only GW quest I can think of off the top of my head is the "Tattered Bear" because I have that bear on each of the girls because its awesome and people go "wtf" when I randomly open trade with the bear. I actually read the quest after a while and saw it was a dead kid's teddy I stole. That made me laugh (yes I know that's cruel).--*Yasmin Parvaneh*
