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

Reader Comments (65)

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 3:58PM Ocho said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
As they say, you can't please all the trolls all of the time...
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 5:04PM Keen and Graev said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
In his defense, the trailer really didn't tell us anything new. It showed us some neat stuff though. Like all trailers, it's for hype.
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 5:49PM Eamil said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I wasn't really looking closely at Guild Wars 2 until I saw that trailer, and then I started looking to see if there was anything behind all those fancy words.

I'm convinced that the game deserves my attention, so I'd say the trailer did its job.
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 6:07PM The Other Chris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually, it showed a number of the 'innovations' they had talked about, but actually in motion and in game. The centaurs attacking, players combining abilities, sharks for pets, etc. It also showed us that a mid-level dragon here is 100 times cooler than an end-game dragon in WoW. :) (however, I've never enjoyed fighting dragons in RPGs as attacking giant hit boxes just doesn't do it for me. But, if they have cool death animations akin to Dragon Age, then it makes it all worthwhile.)
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 3:30PM Greyjoy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Please god may GW2 and SWTOR not come out around the same time :(

Be a nightmare deciding between them both

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 3:46PM Randomessa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Lateris, each player will have a "home instance" that will comprise roughly one city block and will update based on where you are and what you have done in your personal story.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Home_instance

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 4:13PM Lateris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
OK I am in. LOL - ty
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 3:59PM Bhima said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If Anet can deliver on the goods, AND they can get it out BEFORE SWTOR, I think we will be seeing a new heavy-weight MMO game company. Remember, a great game is extremely vital to success but timing is equally as important. WoW definitely had a level of polish that we had never seen before, but their domination in the MMO market might have been something completely different if WAR, EQ2 and AoC came out at the exact same time or BEFORE WoW.

Posted: Aug 13th 2010 2:53PM Valdamar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
EverQuest 2 launched 15 days before World of Warcraft, so I guess that's torpedoed your theory. Sure, WAR and AoC launched later... 2.5 to 3 years later, which in MMO terms almost makes them a completely different generation - i.e. they had full opportunity to learn from WoW's/EQ2's launch.

I was in EQ2 beta, but had wanted to be in WoW beta (and never got in), so I was highly focused on both games during that launch period. Blizzard are notorious for not launching until a game is ready, but SOE seem to care more about market forces - in EQ2's case they rushed to launch (allegedly moving up their launch window by a month) purely to beat WoW to market - they ended up rushing the end of the beta and it backfired on them.

SOE overhauled EQ2's spells/abilities a couple of days before launch, giving us beta testers little time to test the surprise changes, rendering a year of feedback/testing with the old system useless, introducing some bugs, balance concerns and useless abilities/spells. Another month in beta would also have let SOE do some much-needed gfx optimising, the one thing which marred what was otherwise a very smooth launch in technical terms - far smoother than WoW's launch, which suffered lots of downtimes and log-in queues, a victim of its own success and Blizzard's inexperience at running an MMO.

WoW launched two weeks after EQ2's smoother launch yet made the latter game's 300k or so subs (at that time) look pathetic as WoW quickly hit 1million subs (which no other western-made MMO had ever done) then just kept on going, breaking subscriber records.

It's a textbook example that it's always best to release when you're ready, not when market forces or competing products dictate you should launch. MMOs only have just one chance to launch successfully and they never really recover from a terrible launch. I'm sure ArenaNet know that and will do a good job - and they certainly wouldn't be claiming all these wonderful things for GW2 if they couldn't deliver, because they know what has happened to previous MMOs that disappointed players - including several other NCSoft MMOs which have now gone to the big MMO heaven in the sky.
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 4:13PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
... but you can please all the "simple" people

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 6:03PM Its Utakata stupid said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No...your right, it didn't show us anything new...

...it did show us that that they are putting some of their ideas they've announced to work. This is important...since they are showing us instead of telling us. I believe this is purpose inpart of the video.

The other main purpose of this video is that they also stating they have a vision, something a little harder to show unless we actually get to play their product.

The new stuff will come in the form of announcements likely without the spectacular videos, as they have been done previously. Unless you haven't being paying attention to that, you should of have had already realized that without needlessly making trolling insults.

And finally, the video only really becomes over-hyped if their product doesn't meet it's and our expections and/or their claims. Again something none of us can state...until we actually played their game...

...so save it, please. thanx.
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 4:27PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
So their big innovation is making the MMO genre feel more like a single-player game? I could care less about "feeling like a hero." MMOs are interesting because there aren't heros, everyone is an equal member of the world. If you want to innovate the MMO genre, you need to take advantage of that fact, not try to make the experience more scripted. So what if the village you saved remembers you? It's programmed to remember every other player that has done the exact same thing. This isn't a "deeper, more personal" experience, it's a facade. It's taking the same boring MMO elements we know and love and tarting them up to make us feel better about them.

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 6:07PM Dirame said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeap they remember every single player that helped save the town... and isn't that how it should be? They might be scripted events in the sense that; this is where they happen and this is how they will happen but the way they play out still depends on your participation.

You might not want to get hyped, you might just want to diss the game but I don't think you have a valid point here.
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 10:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If you are one of the people who saves the town, the town will remember you as such. The attack on the town will not reset so other players can do the exact same thing. If you start saving the town on your own, other players can join in if they are just walking by and help out too, and you will all be recognized by the town as a part of the group of players that rescued the town.
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 11:03PM Valdur said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nick,WoW and most post WoW mmo are already single player with co-op.Show me a game which gives you a group event at level 1?
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 11:17PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
So all of your criteria for being a game-changing, ground-breaking MMO is consistency during interaction with NPCs and being group-friendly? This is not the ultimate promise of a Massively Multiplayer environment. If you want to look towards changing the face of the WoW-cloned state of MMO gaming, you need to look at games like Eve that don't moderate your experience in the world through instances and NPCs. You can't just shift the paradigm to the left 3 inches and say you've changed everything, even if it does look like a fun game. I'm sure GW2 will be tons of fun, but is it changing anything? Not really.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 2:20AM Dirame said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You just went back on your own words and changed your perspective from which you can attack the game...

You say Eve is the real innovation but how many people play it? That innovation is too niche for the kind of people Anet is going for and there are a lot of them, way more than 330000.
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 4:29PM Dblade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I can't see at all how they can accomplish the manifesto goals.

I can't see how you can "rescue a village and have it stay rescued" in a normal, persistent world. The village would be rescued, but then you'd have no more content unless you made thousands more villages. You'd have new players come in and everything would be done.

I can't also see how one person's actions can affect the world in any real way without grief potential. Having no grind makes you wonder how they structure content to avoid it-does it just mean all we'll do is run PvE instances with the fun stuff?

Just too many questions raised for me.

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 4:52PM Randomessa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The village will stay rescued until it is attacked again, or something else happens in the area. In a way, yes, there are *hundreds* (last reference I saw was 1500+) events in the game world, so something should always be happening somewhere. If the village is not being attacked, a farmer's field is being overrun by farmers. A nearby water supply is being poisoned, etc. etc.

Also, again, since ANet has said that events are cyclical, the village may be attacked again some days later, perhaps by a different set of enemies that bring their own event chain to participate in.

Events are neither a) one-offs that will never occur again at any point in the world, ever, nor are they b) exactly like WAR public quests that will just reset in 5 minutes after completion. I recall in WAR, if stage 1 of a PQ meant that a village was on fire, when that timer was up, boom! The village would burst into flames and the marauders would appear out of nowhere. From what I understand, it is this kind of distinction ANet is trying to make.

Next, my understanding of the no-grind philosphy is that you will not need to run content repeatedly in order to level up; particularly in the personal story, you will level at the rate of your content so that there won't be any "go away and become stronger before continuing" roadblocks. Similarly you won't have to "grind" though the PvE in order to be able to PvP (a complaint PvPers had in GW1 before you could create PvP only characters) from level 1 if you so desire.

ANet seems to be confident that they have enough content in game to prevent repeating content to be required in order to progress. Whether they actually have this or not, of course, remains to be seen. But the 1500+ events is a quote from the dev team, and IIRC, is many times the number of quests in the entirety of GW1 accross all three campaigns.
Reply

Posted: Aug 11th 2010 5:57PM Eamil said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Just too many questions raised for me."

I thought the same thing, so I went looking for the answers.

http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/dynamic-events/dynamic-events-overview/

http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/personal-stories/personal-story-overview/

These are the two most relevant articles I found. I have to say it sounds like they have the right idea.

I just hope their execution lives up to the promises.
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW