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

Reader Comments (64)

Posted: May 18th 2011 3:34PM Ratham said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
So... its RIFT's invasions pretty much?

Those can get so annoying at times.

Posted: May 18th 2011 3:43PM Apakal said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Ratham

Only if Rift invasions have a tangible impact on the world, have their own independent story lines, success or failure alters a chain of events that alter the way your character can progress and interact with the world, etc. etc. etc.

So no, not really Rift invasions at all.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 3:58PM Oskari said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Apakal

But can't Rift events pretty much all of those things, except for changing how our characters proceed in the story? A full blown zone invasion definitely has an impact on the world. They are varied, sometimes with stories tying into a greater theme (River of Souls). Success or failure will trigger different events within the Rift.

So, basically, I am not seeing how they are so different.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 4:43PM Ehra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Oskari

I don't know exactly how Rifts work since I only started the beta, but there's a rough outline of how GW2's Dynamic Events work.

Some centaurs start start raiding an outpost. As part of our goal of taking the outpost, they'll start sending out various groups to take different strategic positions, like setting up archers on a nearby hill. They'll then invade the outpost and start killing the NPCs until they're in control of that outpost and start setting up attacks from there. Events will start in nearby towns as they attempt to reinforce the attacked outpost.

Players can at any point fight off the centaurs and eventually force them back into their fort and take on their leader. If they kill him then the centaurs will be disorganized and won't be able to organize another attack until they've massed troops and appointed a new leader.

Also, the events dynamically scale with the number of players participating. From what I remember of Rift, I think they took into consideration player numbers and levels on creation, but after that it was static. Throughout the entire event, monster strength and numbers will dynamically adjust to the number of players that are actively participating.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 4:57PM Oskari said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ehra

Ah ok. That makes sense now. Thanks!
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 4:58PM Caerus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ehra

Rift events work almost exactly the same way, except instead of the leader, it's a static NPC "building" called a Foothold. The invasion groups don't take up strategic positions either, but Rift doesn't implement anything like high ground for archers (which I believe GW2 will) so it's unnecessary IMO. Invasion groups will scout other outposts and try to take them over, in much the same way as described here. Player numbers and levels are considered both when the mobs are created as well as when they are engaged (or re-engaged, if you wipe), although it's only stats that scale up/down, not number of mobs. It's easy to see this when you swarm a Minor Rift with a full raid - suddenly the level 48 normal mobs will have 20k HP.

I'm not saying this won't be done well, but it's sounding almost exactly like how Rift did it. Remember this is PR spin and not actual gameplay.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 5:10PM Baromega said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Oskari Aren't the essence of all invasions the same? As in big horde group of monsters, defeat waves, big baddie comes out and you kill him. ANet has been been saying that there are enough dynamic events to hold you over until level 80 (they gave a number but I can't recall it). I think it's safe to see that's more variety than Rift will ever have, since Trion is sticking with questing.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 5:16PM Ehra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Caerus

I think the main differences (if there are any) will be more apparent in different types of events and how they interact with each other. Something I recall hearing about was harpy invasions in an area. As a result of the recent influx of harpys, a duo of Ogres are unable to travel to a nearby lake to get water and require player help to protect them from the harpys. However, if the players fight off the harpys then the Ogres wouldn't need help from players (although maybe there will be wolves in the area instead, or something).

There would also be events that can be started by players finding a hidden object in the world. Something else I recall reading about is climbing to the tallest tower of an abandoned keep, reading a book found there, and a portal opens that creatures stream out from.


But, yeah. In the end we'll only know for sure until the game (or beta) is out.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 5:51PM Oskari said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Baromega

Indeed, killing a big baddie is the overall goal of rift events. From what I am reading, it seems that it is the same mechanism in both games, just one willbe far more detailed.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 5:52PM paterah said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ratham No it's not. Not even close. GW2's dynamic events ARE the game, it's what you will be doing and it won't be annoyance because you were on a quest. Because there are no quests (other than the personal storyline). Not to mention that there is a vast difference between 1 and 1500 which is the different "events" in Rift and GW2 respectively (actually that was the number a year ago, there are probably more now).
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 5:55PM Irem said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Caerus
There are videos of the dynamic event system in action, and it's considerably different from a rift or invasion. It's actually much more like a traditional quest (guys, let me finish!), but it's a traditional quest done realistically.

Random asspull example: in WoW, Soandso wants me to kill ten harpies and tells me that they're raiding the nearby camp, and that if the leader isn't killed, they'll try to invade the next town over. I head into the harpy camp, where they're flying around in one area, and kill ten and the leader. Ta da, quest done. The camp and town were never actually in danger in the game world. In GW2, the harpies would be -actually- raiding the camp, and if I saw them doing it I'd have the option to push them back. Then I could carry on and decide to follow them back to the source and kill their leader, and if I didn't, once they were done with the camp they would probably move on and attack the village. It's like they took questing and said, "Okay, but what if this stuff in the little text boxes were -actually- happening and you could just see it happening and run in and stop it?"
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 8:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Irem Bump^^
Couldnt have said it better myself.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 8:58PM Monkey D Luffy said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Ratham. Rift wasn't the first MMO with invasions.

Final Fantasy XI has had invasions for a long time, and I remember reading that WoW used to have elemental invasions from rifts.

Rift is nothing but a compilation of good ideas from other MMO's trying to be emulated by a mediocre company for a hyped up game that people too stupid to think for themselves play.
Reply

Posted: May 19th 2011 4:20AM BGExorcist said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Apakal
Maybe try Rift before you copy some PR. They have fixed spawn, fixed paths, and by altering your progression you mean get in the way for a few minutes before someone comes and clears them (if you yourself cannot ), which can take a good time on most servers, cos noone cares, then yes I agree. If you comment is not irony, then go play some rift and see for yourself.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 3:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Please GW2 ... please be what I hope you are.

I love it that quests are gone ... I just hope that the "dynamic events" are dynamic enough and varied enough that they stay interesting and tangible ...otherwise it becomes grindfest ...

Posted: May 18th 2011 3:48PM The Ogre said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
"The good thing is those events run even if there are no players involved -- if there are no players, the enemy will take over and you'll have to get it back before you can actually do anything. That's why it feels more organic and breathing."

...but also crappy and very un-fun. No thanks. The more I hear of GW2, the more certain I am that it's going to be garbage.

Posted: May 18th 2011 3:54PM Lenn said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@The Ogre Can I pre-emptively have your stuff?
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 3:55PM Apakal said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@The Ogre

I'm kind of concerned about this as well. So if I like a town, but for whatever reason its unpopular with other players, and its the subject of a dynamic event on a short cycle, I might have to replay the event each time I log in to take back my town? That could get tedious.

I'm not so concerned it will be a large problem, but for players who like to stay out of the way, it might be troublesome.

But I'm still optimistic.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 5:54PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Apakal

why would that be tedious? it's what everyone has been asking for: a world that moves on its own. this is what the vast majority is asking for, but ANet cant please anyone and this is for the best

@The Ogre

youre the only GW2 hater ive seen on the internets. no matter, youre a troll and your comments get voted down anyway
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2011 6:07PM paterah said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@The Ogre I believe your name is a bit misleading. You should be named something else. Let's say....
Reply

Featured Stories

WRUP: Queue zen

Posted on Sep 20th 2014 10:00AM

Betawatch: September 13 - 19, 2014

Posted on Sep 19th 2014 8:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW