| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (22)

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 11:11AM arnavdesai said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ok , I am now scared of this whole server model. One of the best things about GW was that you could be with anybody you wanted. I dont really care whether my world is instanced or not. I just want to enjoy with anyone and everyone.
I am afraid of this change & think its wrong on their part to do that.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 11:19AM Rowsdower said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Arnie: I wouldn't worry too much. I think they know that was a major feature in GW1. The interview implied they will make it a much easier task to transfer servers than in other MMOs where they do things like charge you money for it.
Reply

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 11:31AM arnavdesai said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
See that is not optimal. I wanted to change anytime I wanted to using the drop down they had. I dont want to be calling support or something and 'moving house' as such. Even if they dont charge money for it , it's still not optimal. I think its silly how much more they try to make their game seem like every other generic fantasy MMO out there when the things which made them great were things which were different.
Oh well, they still have my money for CE along with preorder.
Reply

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 12:35PM Tom in VA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Arnie, I imagine that switching servers is going to be like switching districts in the original game -- or something akin to that. You needed to be in a hub area in GW1, for example, to switch districts. In a persistent world, I imagine it's a bit trickier and may require your character go to some special location (by map travel, perhaps?).

In any case, I am not worried about this server business until I hear more about it.
Reply

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 11:12AM Meagen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Argh... the waiting is driving me insane...

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 11:19AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Great interview Shawn ^^ Much much better questions than most other GW2 articles out there.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 11:22AM Arkanaloth said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The server model is.. odd, but a bigger issue is the lack of heroes. The best thing about GuildWars is at any time I can log on, and if friends are not online I can just put together my AI team and still accomplish nearly anything I want without being subjected to people and personalities I wouldn't give the time of day.

My personal PUG experiences are pretty horrific. FFXI PUGs were so bad when I quit the game it would take nearly 6 months before I would play a healer again, but I vowed never to play a healer in a PUG ever again. In WoW after 4 years of play, I've never once been in a PUG that completed a single instance, they all fall apart due to two people bickering over stupid crap and it just goes to pieces when one of them leaves.

Running content with friends has never posed issues, with friends we've 3 manned Doan back in the day (and no we were not over-level for the instance) and duo'ed a metric ton of non-instance 5-man content (typically with me as healer).

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 12:43PM Tom in VA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Heroes and the ability to form groups on the fly was one of the very best things about GW1, imo. From what I have read of GW2, players will get one sort of "super"-Hero which they can use of not, and the game is supposed to be mostly accessible either solo or scaled for you and your NPC. Two players could thus form a party of 4 perhaps (2 players and 2 Heroes).

I greatly enjoyed the AI party dynamic in GW1 and will kinda miss that but as long as GW2 scales or adjusts content to party size -- solo, solo/Hero, 2+ players and their Heroes, etc. -- I'll be happy.

I am very eager to learn more about the NPCs/Heroes in GW2 and how they function, and I appreciated Shawn's asking about this in the interview.
Reply

Posted: Sep 22nd 2009 5:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh noc, i am really glad that they want to kill the heroes.
i dont know if you two have been in GW from the start on... but GW was much better, before they introduced these Hereo-mechanics.
sure, it's nice to start whereever you want, and whenever you want, you could easily invite your heroes and everything was set up, but this killed teamplay in GW. first thing you asked a new one, during set up of a group, was his build, if it was nothing not the exact thing you looked for, he got kicked, and soon after, a a heroe was invited (due to the maximum group size of 8 people, 2 real players are enough to fill a group with heroes).

the henchmen, on the other hand, have been a nice idea, 'cause you could fill one or two positions with them. But more of them could cause a wipe, they've been to dumb to go out of an AoE attack.
so you had to take human players, most of them would go out of a flame rain or something like that ^^
Reply

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 11:48AM Jesspiper said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Unfortunately we aren't speaking about specific game mechanics until sometime early next year."


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGHH!!!


So frustrating.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 11:53AM Potajito said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
The server thing just turned me down A LOT.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 12:44PM Askgar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Considering what they recently did in GW1 with the paid character changes (gender, appearance, name), the whole "make is easy to change server" thing just seems like an obvious way for them to charge and make more money :( I hope they prove me wrong but it would not suprise me.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 1:28PM deluxe2000 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"The trilogy of novels will be released before GW2 is launched. Is there a schedule for these that we can anticipate?'

Where did that info come from - the 3 books released before the game??? Because in the timeline shown here:
"Will McDermott: The first book will be published in the first half of 2010. The other two will follow. We do not have definitive dates for any of them at this point."

- 1 book in first half of 2010, we won't see the game until like Christmas 2011 at the earliest!!!

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 12:55PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
why? you will be able to go anywhere you want on any server like in gw1, but there will be a sense of community on each servers and competing against other servers in a fun/nonserious way. couldn't be any better imho.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 12:57PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
no, they won't do that. it will be free and easy.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 12:59PM Ozirus33 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm really not worried about the server issue. I feel like they know what they're doing and it really won't be a big deal. Even if it's like "pay a dollar every time you want to change severs" its better than "pay $15 and then we'll approve your transfer but you can only keep X, Y, and Z."

This wait is driving me crazy.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 4:40PM Akashic said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What slightly bad news. One of the reasons i'm getting this game is to find an old friend. It better be easy to switch between servers, i'm guessing we can't talk from different servers either.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 5:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't know why everybody is getting upset about he server situation, you cant expect them to just conjure up infinite server space so everybody can play on the same server as everybody else, especially with a free to play game. If Arenanet says they'll make it much easier to transfer servers than in other games, then that's good enough for me. It'll be at least a year before the game comes out, so there's no excuse for not getting together with your friends beforehand and agreeing to play on the same server.

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 8:27PM GaaaaaH said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
1. It's not free to play, it's no subscription fees
2. They managed it on GW1
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2009 3:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
1. That's beside the point; you aren't paying a subscription = devs have less money to operate on.
2. GW1 was instance-based; GW2 is a persistent world, meaning not only are much larger chunks of content being handled at once, but significantly more players as well. It is much easier to link an instance of a town (like LA) on one server to an instance of the town on another server than it is to do with an entire persistent continent. WoW is heading towards giving players the ability to do the instanced raids and dungeons with players on different servers, so I wouldn't be surprised if this feature makes it into GW2, but linking huge persistent areas over separate servers probably wont be practically possible for awhile. The closest GW2 could come to this is if it makes the major towns instanced and allows server switching ala district switching like in GW1, which I wouldn't be surprised if they did.
Reply

Featured Stories

WRUP: WoW's next-next expansion

Posted on Aug 30th 2014 10:00AM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW