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

Reader Comments (97)

Posted: Apr 15th 2011 5:07PM Sephirah said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Marked

Maybe for the same reason foe which, for example, in WoW not every tank is a Warrior, every healer is a Priest and every dps is a Mage (change Warrior, Priest and Mage with the current FotM for that role).
Reply

Posted: Apr 15th 2011 11:26PM nagennif said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Marked

There are always people who will pick the FotM in any game. That's all there is to it. There are always people who won't...like me. Some people role play to role play. What is nice about Guild Wars 2 is that the world is really built to role play in. I don't mean sit and talk in old English in game. I mean get into your character, to know who he/she is and to play that character. Most games are set up around gear grind so of course, FotM is popular But in GW 2 you don't have to raid to get top gear. You can get it in a number of other ways. It's already been stated by the devs. So if you just do dynamic events, you can still get your top end gear.

Most games force you into FotM in end game by making it hard to do top raids without the best possible spec. I just don't see Guild Wars 2 going this way.
Reply

Posted: Apr 15th 2011 6:17PM Graill440 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The problem with the holy trinity as the devs put in such a cute way is they forced it on everyone from the start all those years ago, no thinking. Its the stale thinking (still) with devs that keeps this old idea in place, that and money model consideration, imagination need not apply. I cannot even remember needing a "healer" or "CC" in any D&D games or the older rpg's.

Right now there is one title with a large zombie like fanbase where some characters have over 40 thousand armor and health plus, wtf over. Does anyone really think that more levels, more hitpoints, more healing is what is needed to have fun? To bad i cant fire most of these developers.

Rift went way over the top and in my opinion failed miserably with their soul idea, 8 useable out of 30 plus? Cmon, the game is heavily heal oriented.

I am curious to see what happens when GW2 devs see the feedback from the probe they just did in their article, and it was a feedback probe, in addressing the old ideas of simply having fun in an adventure.

Posted: Apr 15th 2011 6:54PM scrubmonkey said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
People are confusing the concept of the "holy trinity" with the more general concepts of doing damage, preventing damage, and repairing damage. Will these more general concepts exist in every game? Certainly. Doesn't mean that designating classes specifically for those set roles will happen though.

Remember, the difference is not only in class design, but in content design as well. Yes, you can say that your "designated squishy class" can tank under limited circumstances, but do those circumstances include challenging content? Not really. This is because in the most challenging content, class roles are absolutely enforced by content mechanics.

Having a limited ability to perform a role =/= being able to fill that role in content that matters. At the end of the day... no one here has seen the content yet. It's pretty much an argument of semantics. It's already pretty evident that in GW1 that you can create a more dedicated healer or tank type of build if you wish to, but they are in no way required for even the most challenging of content. It is a much more loose system. If people are looking for a game where there is no healing, dpsing or mitigating damage though, obviously they will be sorely disappointed.
---

My concern is actually the polar opposite of the above. Classes that can do it all is obviously nice for the soloist mentality, but will group content suffer as a result of this? GW1 never billed itself as a MMO (and could absolutely be played as a single player game that happened to require an internet connection), but this game seems to be stretching a little further than that...

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Posted: Apr 15th 2011 11:18PM nagennif said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) It's not a trinity without a tank bucko. And you can't have a tank without being able to hold aggro. The fact is, if everyone has a SELF heal (and there's a dedicated slot in every bar for a self heal) and everyone can rez from level 1 and there are no skills that target an ally, well, then you're simply wrong.

Sure damage must be done. But healing isn't done by ONE character, while damage isn't done by another and certainly no one can take ALL THE AGGRO because aggro doesn't work that way.

Trinity means 3 but not all recipes with 3 ingredients are going to be the same, if the ingredient differ.

Posted: Apr 15th 2011 11:22PM nagennif said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Puremallace

LOL. You know, the original Guild Wars is the second most played game having sold more than 7 million accounts. Doesn't take brain surgery to figure out that in addition to capture all the people who are tired of WoW, they're also going after people who don't MMO at all, people who play single player games and the original Guild Wars fans.

WoW is simply a dumbed down version of an RPG with added gear grind. It's certainly addictive. Doesn't mean it's good, or even as good as anything else.

But I don't think Guild Wars 2 needs to kill WoW.. Wow is dying all by itself. Cata was the first step in the death of WoW. Recycled content, anyone.

Dream on, ballerina. WoW days are numbered, simply because of its age. It'll be more interesting to see what comes next from Blizzard. Even my two sons, die hard WoW fans have left WoW for Rift. And both are waiting for Guild Wars 2.

Posted: Apr 15th 2011 11:49PM nagennif said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Those who play other games and haven't played the original Guild Wars don't get it, because they believe the trinity is immutable. Not every game has or requires the Trinity. This is an invention of game designers, welded in spot by the popularity of WoW.

Anyone who thinks it can't be superceded, doesn't have enough imagination to be a game designer, and that's fine.

The popularity of WoW insured that dozens of games would copy it. Hollywood does the same thing. They find something that sellls and they beat it to death. Does that mean no one can produce a movie that's different? Or works on a different dynamic? Of course not.

Just because everyone has copied a mechanic doesn't make the mechanic a must have in a game. It makes it something that's been copies. The fact that is has been copied, makes it tired.

So a company comes along and wants to show that it can be done without one person holding aggro and one person healing. Or as they do in Rift having those roles assigned to multiple classes.

I'm playing Rift right now, and enjoying it. I have a six month subscription. But it's the same old tired mechanic, except that different classes can do it. But I know that other games exist where this mechanic doesn't exist, because I've played them.

There will be people who are better at taking hits in Guild Wars 2 than others, and there will be some AOE healing as well, but without the ability to draw and hold aggro and without any skill in the game targeting an ally, you simply can't depend on others to heal you or block for you.

That's why you have to have things like a dodge mechanic. Why every character have to have a self-heal. Your best heal will always be your self heal. And it's why everyone can rez another character, right from level 1.

You can be a naysayer all you want. You can say the holy trinity must exist. But as games currently exist without it, you don't have a leg to stand on.

Posted: Apr 16th 2011 12:00AM Sharuk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
GW2 looks nice, but it is overhyped. People need to tone down their expectations a tab bit or they will be disappointed.

Posted: Apr 16th 2011 12:27AM nagennif said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Sharuk

I agree expectations are high. Still I expect it to be a great game, based on what I've seen from playable demos.

My big problem isn't what Guild Wars 2 is doing, so much as what everyone else keeps doing. Eventually someone is going to have to take a chance and make a quantum leap to move the genre forward. Right now the genre is stagnating, mostly because people are scared to take a chance.

If Guild Wars 2 provides a fun to play game, without depending on tired class mechanics that everyone else uses, it'll be enough for me.
Reply

Posted: Apr 16th 2011 3:07AM Nhoj1983 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Sharuk

When the devs say such bold things of course peoples expectations will be high. I mean... just read they're blog... if you can't find something in there to jump up and down about in excitement.. well.. maybe your on the wrong website.. You are right until they show it to us in all it's glory... or otherwise we won't know.

It's not the second coming and it is just a game... but I've not seen anything that has caught my imagination like this game has in years. While you are right in your wait and see but how do you know we'll be disappointed? It's possible they'll pull it off. Respectfully there is a time and place to be excited about something... it will be up to the devs to meet that excitement. One way or another though it will very likely be a good game. To be honest... it's not going to be that hard to outdo the copycats until now.
Reply

Posted: Apr 16th 2011 12:13AM nagennif said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Puremallace

Sorry to disllusion you, but the reason Guild Wars didn't succeed as it might have, is because it didn't have a persistent world. Guild Wars 2 does. And it still sold 7 million accounts.

The fact you seem to ignore is that not everyone who plays games plays WoW and not everyone likes WoW. I never particularly liked WoW because it's not immersive.

There are a TON of people who play single player games who would move up to an MMO if they found something immersive that they could play. Guild Wars 2 doesn't need to depend on WoW players, though it will get some of them anyway. Some who are tired of the same old thing.

The problem is, WoW and Rift, focus on the end game and so as soon as that content is clear, it's just the end game. over and over again, until new content comes out. I couldn't do that if you paid me. Well maybe if you paid me a LOT.

But there are people out there who want to do more than just end game raiding. Do you think people who do end game raiding make up 50% of WoW's population? Ummm, I don't think so.

And there are a LOT of people who play WoW just because their friends do. They don't even like it. I know a handful of those people too.

WoW is not the holy grail of MMOs. WoW came out at a time when EQ was pretty much the only game in town. The dumbed it down which appealed to a broader base of the community. Right place, at the right time. People grew up on wow and, much like real life, you never forget your first. It becomes nostalgia, you grow blind to it's limitations.

So Guild Wars isn't going up against WoW and if you read the entire interview, you'd see that they don't even see WoW as competition. They see WoW as a pay to play game, that people will pay to play and Guild Wars 2 as a no monthly fee game that people will play and perhaps say with or perhaps bounce back adn forth to other games.

But that's a very slick approach because as people play, they'll start thinking, hmmmm. I pay $15 a month for this game and all I'm doing is the same raid/dungeon over and over and over again. Or the same dailies. And they'll think I can go to this other game with it's dynamic events and replayability due to personal storylines, and not pay $15 a month. It's a no brainer.

And other clones will continually pull people out of WoW anyway. Rift has done a pretty good job already. And with the new rift patch coming out, and a new raid, even more people will leave WoW.

WoW's population is already on the decline. It won't take Guild Wars 2 to make that happen. But a lot of people will try Guild Wars 2 and see the type of game they've never seen before. To me, GW 2 represents the promise the MMO industry had, before the popularity of WoW ruined it for everyone else.

Three or so years ago, I had a conversation with my eldest son, a die hard WoW player. I listed all the things I wanted to see in an MMO. He laguhed at me. I swear it was like Anet had my house bugged. It's positively spooky.

Since that time, my eldest son stopped playing WoW and started playing Rift. But he's really looking forward to Guild Wars 2, because he's simply tired of the same old thing.

Posted: Apr 16th 2011 8:16AM Arkanaloth said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For someone claiming it to be an issue of "older" gamers you sure have an antiquated mindset.

In the dice / paper world of RPG's, you know the place where it all started that us older gamers are typically familiar with, there are a few games that don't conform to the trinity that work fine. Off the top of my head Legend of the Five Rings doesn't use a trinity system, since there are no real healing classes.

You just have to be creative as a GM and think beyond the tank / healer / DPS stigma that was born of Dungeons & Dragons to run a good L5R campaign.. you have to *gasp* have story and real RP and really think about the combat in a way that is challenging but befitting a healer-less world.

same really applies to games in this point, course it's not easy.. Trinity is cake to setup even if it is a bit of an oddity after all what "Big Bad" is going to stand there while a warrior is yelling at them and *NOT* go crush the little mage spamming 1000+ damage shots?

Anywho, Here's *SOME* quick advice to people claiming things can't be done. If the majority of the worlds inventive people had listened to people like you, we'd still be living in the stone age.
Reply

Posted: Apr 16th 2011 8:45AM cforciea said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Arkanaloth
Really picking a trinity-free pen and paper game is much easier than that. I pick Dungeons and Dragons. There were no aggro mechanics, and the class with the most healing ability in most editions was a heavily armored bruiser that was second at melee combat only to warrior classes, and even then frequently saved healing for after combat because they were too busy calling down pillars of fire and freezing enemies in place during combat. They finally added an aggro-like mechanic to 4th edition, but that's not what I grew up playing.

It really just makes me scratch my head when people talk like the trinity has always been there and can't be avoided. It is a relatively new phenomenon that got added to earlier MMOs because of technical limitations (server and connection technology were such that having the games much more actiony and still on a massive scale was difficult, especially on early MMO budgets). There are still technical limitations to consider (I doubt anybody is going to put out a persistent MMO that requires
Reply

Posted: Apr 16th 2011 8:17AM Arkanaloth said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
that was @kalipou134 by the way.. silly thing didn't put it as a reply like I told it to do.

Posted: Apr 19th 2011 8:56AM Dblade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They wont be able to do much better. Even CO, which didn't have a dedicated tank class, and every player can self-heal in a boss fight, had tanks and healers arise naturally.

The problem is boss fights. Unless every boss run is fighting a group of enemies, a focus on CC and everyone tanking/healing, etc is going to be inefficient. It will be easier for one good person to tank a single boss anyways, because I'm sure Anet isn't going to enable you to kite or cc endgame instance bosses.

Anet is going to fall on its face with this, I think.

Posted: Apr 19th 2011 11:24PM Poordevil said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I walked away from that interview thinking Colin is painting himself into a corner. Color me skeptical but it doesn't seem possible for any game to be and do everything he is telling us Guild Wars 2 will be and do.

He is setting what almost seem like unattainable goals for this game. No lack of content, revolutionary gameplay, no sacrificing when it comes to gameplay decisions, high quality production values at every turn, gorgeous artwork out the wazoo. On top of that there is no pressure at all from the money men to get the game done and published? They are living every devs dream!

I dunno what to think other than wait and see. If they deliver on half his vision I will be a happy camper. If they deliver on all of it I will be amazed, stunned.

Posted: Apr 20th 2011 4:00PM wardenwells said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Puremallace

What are you, some kind of ... dumbass? To all the people saying the trinity is needed or that the trinity still exists in GW2, I put this to you: why is it difficult to imagine a game without aggro tables and necessary heal bots standing in the background with their UI's covered in bright green and red icons, instead of people watching each other's backs and using skill to determine the course of a battle? ANet is attempting to go past Rift and WoW and provide us with the ability to spend more time in the game fighting than watching bars and percentages. I for one appreciate it.

Also, Puremallace, I consider myself a WoW fan, and I and many other WoW fans I know will not be aiming any kind of hatred at GW2. In fact, with the overall lameness of Cataclysm, I fully intend to park WoW indefinitely once GW2 is released. I've played the game for years, but I'm sick of feeling forced to heal or tank or otherwise sit in a queue for an hour. True, it won't be nearly as long as Rift players wait just to play the game, but hey...

Featured Stories

Make My MMO: November 16 - 22, 2014

Posted on Nov 22nd 2014 8:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW