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

Reader Comments (79)

Posted: Feb 28th 2012 6:17PM Faction 3 said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
The Hate Train is 45 minutes late...

Posted: Feb 28th 2012 7:21PM Dunraven said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Faction 3 Anything that isn't gushing ass kissing is a hate train to you.

It's okay to have concerns, it's okay to question Anet and it's okay not to like certain features.

Reply

Posted: Feb 28th 2012 9:16PM silver001 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Dunraven he probably talking about guru.

but if you have been there before you would those clowns are the worst type of fans you can get. Mainly cuz they like to overreact and whine like 1p yr olds.
Reply

Posted: Feb 28th 2012 11:39PM Faction 3 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Dunraven

Looks like it's arrived.

All Aboard!
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 12:25AM Dunraven said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Faction 3 I don't hate the game I just don't suck and slurp at the Teet of Arenanet like you do and have more realistic expectations.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 2:38AM Utakata said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Dunraven

...you mean teet of ArenaNet - just had the capitalization in the wrong places. And I strongly doubt Faction 3 is doing that.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 4:41AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Faction 3
I don't get it.

You're clearly trying to start a fire. In the first post you automatically assume that hate (or criticism) is to follow. This a stance that Dunraven tries to persuade you is overly generalist, bordering in fanboy-ish. I whole heartedly agree. Your response to useful advice is to call him a hater?

What I then don't get then is: why are we even trying to convince you? You're clearly a troll with little interest other than to make yourself feel better about some personal short-coming or another. What we should actually be doing is outright ignoring you. But alas the allure of adding my own 2 cents is just too much I guess.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 9:29AM Primal Zed said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) It's mostly about the history of these two, not the comments said in this particular article. Dunraven has a tendency to inflate minor issues with the game, deride those looking forward to GW2, and present himself as a martyr. Faction3 is pretty much his evil clone: a tendency to ignore any potential issues with the game, deride those who aren't completely sold on GW2, and present himself as a martyr. They like to call each other out by name.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 12:51PM Utakata said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Utakata

That's funny...only two days ago, I got downranked to the ground because I was accused of saying something negative against ANet (a position I later retracted)...now yesterday, I indicate something positive towards ANet and I still get downranked...

...is anyone else experiencing an inconsistancy with their rankings? This place is starting to become a lot like WoW Insider.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 1:52PM Ehra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Utakata

It's almost like the ranking you get is dependent on the quality of the post more than which "side" you're on.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 5:43PM Utakata said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ehra

And that's highly subjective too...

Remember this: "Release date or GTFO"? Pretty awful in quality IMO. And this was posted on a SWTOR thread a couple of days before BioWare did release the date of SWTOR . Yet it was upranked threw the ceiling.

But I think you where right the first time...it's pointless getting upset over this. Just say what I think, and let the opinions and the ranking fall where they will...and stop obsessing about it. It's surprising that I've advised others to do the same, I should really take my own advise. It's a flawed system...and one that is easily subject to abuse. Until Massively decides to remove it...I just have to L2deal. Plus there's bigger fish to fry.

Sorry for the derail.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 6:27PM Ehra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Utakata

"And that's highly subjective too..."

What else would it be?
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 6:51PM Faction 3 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Primal Zed

Kinda nice that I actually have an image on a MMO Blog....

However, you can take a look at my post history and realize that even though I have no issues with GW2, besides the lack of Dwarves, however, you can gurantee that I'll lay them out if I can find them. Make no mistake, I've yet to find any issues with said title simply because I (ME) have found none, also note, I haven't played the game at all. It simply has every feature included that I wanted in an MMO to-date.

Im seeing no issue with that.

Dunraven is just a Mongoloid. Clearly his past posts, arguing with Lenn, claiming his "ONGOING PLAYTIME with GW2 reminds him more of WoW", completely false and no-sense making concepts /accusations of A-Net (my favorite one was claiming that all GW2 was about was Story, therefore comparing it as inferior to SW:TOR...) and pretty much making such obvious statements about the most simplest, basic mechanics of the game, including ones that have been out for YEARS being non-existent or wrong, that staring at the GW2.com website would tell a blind person otherwise, and so-on, is more evidence than needed to make a justifiable claim that he's several cards short of a Deck. Its beyond "Puremallace" levels actually.

Read it like you want. Im looking foward to a great game coming out.

Sue me.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 9:09PM Utakata said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ehra

:)
Reply

Posted: Feb 28th 2012 6:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
After "refugeeing" back to GW from WoW, I am so glad to see ANet care about character customization. I really hope there doesn't become a standard cookie cutter build for each class.

One of the things I hated about WoW was feeling like a clone of everyone else of my class. This is one of the reasons I am so loving what I have seen so far from GW2.

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 12:15AM MasterX25 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) I actually preferred WoW talent tree from vanilla and BC than Wotlk and cata. They used to allow you customize more, but now they kind of force you down the cookie cutter path.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 1:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@MasterX25
Well, the trouble with WoW was the schizophrenic nature of it. The forced in PvP when the game was never designed for it (see the Rob Pardo interview on Warcry November 2008) so they rather messed up the talents even in vanilla and especially BC when they introduced arenas.

There always seemed to be the one build that was best for PvE and one that was best for PvP and everyone would spec into their classes cookie cutter.

With Wrath and Cata you are right, it got worse exponentially. I don't see how they could even have a straight face when they said that the talents would go away from cookie cutter by locking out 2 entire trees until you put 30 points into one. And of course the MoP talents is like 5 or 6 true/false choices which just keeps the cookie cutter while severely dumbing it down as much as possible without removing talents altogether.

Considering how ANet has been doing with GW and GW2, I trust them on knowing what they are doing to seperate themselves from the crowd until they prove otherwise.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 2:47AM Utakata said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

I think the builds will be a lot more complicated and flexible process than WoW's. And usually that means less cookie cutting. WoW has vitually given up on their trees...to make any of their character building mechanics remotely interesting come MoP. ANet appears to be going in the opposite direction. Hopefully giving your character meaning and diversity....and not just a Recount stoker.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 3:19AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Utakata
Flexible yes, but it doesn't need to be complicated. Hopefully it won't be and will be intuitive as well. I trust ANet to pull it off.

One of the problems with WoW's talents was there was so many, and so many unnecessary ones. Having more doesn't mean better. Often WoW forced you to stick 5-10 points in talents you didnt really want simply because you had to to get to the level inside of a tree to get a talent you needed/wanted. Completely counter-intuitive. I hope ANet avoids that mistake.
Reply

Posted: Feb 29th 2012 7:33AM Utakata said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

I won't get into WoW's talent ..other than to say, the problem with the original one is that you really didn't see the benefits to some trees until you where deep into to it. Blizz some what corrected that for Cataclysm, but instead even further restricted what one spent. Move those restrictions...and the system would of been almost perfect. However, they want to throw the entire thing away for MoP...when it really wasn't broken begin with. Anyways...I digress...

...I think with this system that ArenaNet is developing is an expansion to the one that already exists in GW. Accept they're are having to expand on it for 69 levels instead of 20. So this creates interesting challenges if they want to keep the core mechanics of the original intact.

And so to be clear, it doesn't appear there will be "put 5 points into this to boost your Haste Rating so to unlock the next tier" mechanic as there is in WoW (or RIFT or SWTOR if you like). But rather you put more talents in this tree, the more powerful and effective you'll become in that discipline...with a few ability and attribute unlocks on the way. So despite the 5 talent trees verse WoW's three...it doesn't appear it will be needlessly complex.
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW