Guild Wars 2, Don't make it WoW

[Fleagle]

After only reading these forums for about 20 minutes, I have realised that some have made numerous suggestions implying to make Guild Wars 2, WoW. Do we want Guild Wars 2 to become an exact copy of WoW?

Let me know your thoughts and views so I can get a better point of view =].

[Asbjornsalech]

where have you seen such things, the only thing i know of, that people want, is an auction house ,which is realy needed, or another way of selling items, instead of spamming the trade channel, and you can only yell WTS so many times before you just merch it anyway.

[Fleagle]

There are threads about "mounting onto creatures". Threads about make a medic skill to make bandages. They imply basically that you have to learn skills and improve upon them. For example, one person said there should be a crafting skill so you can only craft certain things at low levels. In my opinion, this is totally like WoW.

[Asbjornsalech]

Well, i also want GW 2 to be different than WoW ,i play both games, and i want to have the diversity there is, GW is so much better on the PvP side, and that's what's good about GW, they should keep it that way

[uifhwfuiwehuifwehuifqwegh]

WOW has things that are better on it than GW (y halo thar auction house, Z axis, fishing, self crafting, mounts) so is it so bad to want to have similar things on GW2?

[Xycury]

There is a difference though.

WoW cloned every other MMO/RPG... so basing GW2 like WoW is kinda like saying the Ford Focus came from the Ford Escort when if you traced back it came from the Model T instead, it's true origin.

I think there are many things in WoW that work OK, but there are alot that shouldn't.

Fishing, probably shouldn't be one.... nor medics because bandaids are not what GW needs.

Mounts may be useless if we're still given the chance to hyper travel map like we are doing.

So all in all, GW2 won't be WoW, it may have characteristics that appear to also be in WoW, but that doesn't make GW2 to be like WoW. It makes GW2 more like having features that are also in dozen of other MMO/RPG games.

[raspberry jam]

WOW has things that are better on it than GW (y halo thar auction house, Z axis, fishing, self crafting, mounts) so is it so bad to want to have similar things on GW2?I bolded the parts you mentioned about WoW that are bad. You should feel quite stupid for suggesting that they are good.

[Asbjornsalech]

I bolded the parts you mentioned about WoW that are bad. You should feel quite stupid for suggesting that they are good.

That's your opinion, the guy has his opinion, does that make it wrong?


I also like those things, instead of doing X for Y, you can take a day of and fish in a lake, where's the bad thing in that? again, everyone has an opinion,and you're also entitled to yours, i just find your response quite stupid.

[Beta Sprite]

I bolded the parts you mentioned about WoW that are bad. You should feel quite stupid for suggesting that they are good.

They could be done better in GW2, though:

A mini-game for the fishing that requires some skill, instead of "wait for the bobber to shudder and click".

Self-crafting... of basic items. I never did like crafting armor or weapons on my own, but maybe weak consumables? That could be interesting...

A mini-game for mounts, like Chocobo Racing or Mario Kart. That would be sweet. I would expect the Asura to create hoverbikes or lightcycles, the Norn and Charr would just run (Charr on all fours), Sylvari and Humans would ride whatever animal they felt like. Could be interesting. Just don't add any Blue Shells, because they're annoying.

[Princess eirika]

There are many MMOs and Rpgs on the market. Every one of them have their own unique aspects as well as borrowed concepts and universal ones as well.

Claiming things like because GW will add races, movement and jumping will make it more like WoW, just think again. Races is just one of the many universal aspects in MMOs. You can't claim they are "copying" other games simply from that.

If that was the case, then just about all games are "copying" from D&D or any core RPG franchise. And there are many people who love certain aspects from other games that want to add it to GW, and thats just up to the developers. Alot of the people who add "WoW" elements are already WoW Players and who are more than likely will continue to play it. GW is GW and hopfully it will stay that way.

ANet has already stated that they dont intend to create another "WoW Clone." Or, how about lets wait til summer when more information will be revealed until we make quick judgements. But than again that's what this forum does best.

[Tru Reptile]

That's your opinion, the guy has his opinion, does that make it wrong?


I also like those things, instead of doing X for Y, you can take a day of and fish in a lake, where's the bad thing in that? again, everyone has an opinion,and you're also entitled to yours, i just find your response quite stupid.

I like the idea of crafting, I think it's just been done wrong in past games. I like map travel and the fact that GW isn't gear dependant. So there's some things from other games that could work well in GW2 while keeping the good things about the original GW.

But yeah, Raspberry's response was pretty silly.

[Alaris]

I just want GW to steal the good ideas from WoW, but otherwise remains GW. Quickly-attainable cap, skill > time, good fun, builds, etc... but instances & solo content is fun too, and has been lacking in GW.

[BlueHeaven]

I get 2 gerneral opinions out of most of these posts.
Some people are suggesting different game plays, crafting, leveling, skill aquisition mimicing other MMORPGS, kinda of getting away from the GW type jump in and play.

Others seem to just want a rehashing of what GW is with better graphics and a new Campaign.

Things need to change or be added, else whats the point of making a part 2 over a new campaign or expansion to play thru. Its that fine middle road the developers will have to walk on to satify everyone.

What I personally would love to see, is a complete, totally seperate PvP and PvE with skills, ability, game play.
The PvP players don't want the unbalanced skills and gameplay from PvE, and PvE players don't want to be governed by the current PvP meta game.

[raspberry jam]

That's your opinion, the guy has his opinion, does that make it wrong?Bad, not wrong. In WoW. And there are reasons for why these things are bad in WoW.

[Rob Van Der Sloot]

For me the main question is, if they are making a GW2, what will make it better than GW1 apart from just the graphics?

And more importantly: What makes it different from any other MMO on the market.

People say they want an auctionhouse and mounts. What they really should be asking for is a better trade system, instead of picking one of many possible solutions to the problem. Leave the solution to the game designers, focus on the problem rather than the answer.

You say you want mounts? Why? Why should mounts be added? How would they change the game, what impact would they have? Why would people make use of mounted travel if a better way of travel (map travel) is already available to them? Would even more features and mini games have to be added in order to validate the addition of mounts, and if so, would leaving them out not be a better solution?

So many demands for old ideas from other MMO's. How about a totally new experience? How about changing the genre completely and doing new stuff? To me there isn't any reason to make a new MMO unless it will be completely different from any other MMO out today.

[Antillio]

1 thing i find good about WOW is that they have tons of customisation options and this is 1 feature i like to see back in GW2.
GW1 can feel a bit restriced in it's options sometimes. So basicly more hairstyle's, races, coloring options & assecoires(hat's, ring's eyepatches you name it). The thing is if you have that many options you can really create your own hero and that would add good fun to the game for alot of ppl i think.

[shardfenix]

It'll only become a copy of WoW if they:

1: Make the graphics worse
2: Make the game balancing suck
3: Charge a monthly fee for letting you grind character levels.

So far, they have only accomplished #2.

[Tru Reptile]

So far, they have only accomplished #2.

I want to borrow your time machine.

[Lamuness]

Yes. Say no to mounts. However, if most of the GW2 world will be persistent, then that would pose a problem of getting places in a timely manner. That was the main reason why there are mounts in WoW was because you would have to get from town to town with no flight path. With the amounts of run skills GW has, we don't need mounts.

I personally like how GW is now, where I can get to max level fairly quickly and then not have to worry about what gear is better than what. If Anet starts implementing gear that is significantly different with crazy stats like in WoW, then I will boycott this game. I hate the gear race and hate the grind that usually is associated with it.

Which is the main reason why I hate starting in Nightfall because it FORCED me to grind levels or rank. Yaya, it's easy or whatever, but still I got stuck at level 8 and at level 12 because I didn't have enough rank.

WoW cloned every other MMO/RPG... so basing GW2 like WoW is kinda like saying the Ford Focus came from the Ford Escort when if you traced back it came from the Model T instead, it's true origin.

You should have put Street Fighter : The Movie : The Game as an example. Where they took a game, and made a movie, then made a game based on the movie, which was based on the game.

[Xycury]

You should have put Street Fighter : The Movie : The Game as an example. Where they took a game, and made a movie, then made a game based on the movie, which was based on the game.

well I think WoW is doing that....

making the game, WoW, then the movie, sometime in the future, and I'm sure Blizzard will create an Expansion from the Movie....

[MiatheHierophant]

A note about mounts:

I absolutely love having the instant warping to a town you have visited. I think it's the best thing about traveling in GW. With that in mind, I would still like to be able to have some mode of travel to places where there isn't a town that is faster than hiking the whole way, with less chance of being overrun with mobs. For instance: In GW1, I would love to be able to "rent" a steed (or whatever) to get to a specific part (say Bogroot from Gad's encampment) and then proceed as normal. There is no "town" outside the entrance to Bogroot, so you have to hoof it the whole way, usually losing quite a bit of time if you run into mob or two. If you have a limited amount of time to play, it can be a PITA. With a rented mount, you could get there, turn it in to the Stable NPC, and proceed through Bogroot. The Stable NPCs would have "rides" to specific points, rather than free roaming mounts. The key would be that you would have to physically walk to the destination point on the map first, to activate the destination NPC. Thereafter, you would be able to access the pair of NPCs (one at the town, one at the destination) on that character any time. If you zone, you would lose your mount. The Stable NPC in town would have a list of places you could "ride" to, somewhat like the Ship that takes you to any of the three Cities and GTOB.

What do you think?

[Inchino]

I like guildwars warp feature, would be cool if there were some rural outposts which have everything towns have but you can't map travel there, so you fight your way to the town where you can grab new supplies and then continue deeper into the outback.

[Derked]

Yes, samll isolated outpostd would be nice, but the "renting service" sounds really good, such things sounds really nice in GW2. I would like to see fishing and cooking skills and maybe somekind of first aid, but not smithing alchemy and such things.
That's more like professions, you don't learn those things over a night, so an adventurer wouldn't be able to learn them, maybe you cpuld learn a little of the profession but not everything.

[Derked]

Oops bad spelling in that message sorry!
:sad:

[raspberry jam]

I like guildwars warp feature, would be cool if there were some rural outposts which have everything towns have but you can't map travel there, so you fight your way to the town where you can grab new supplies and then continue deeper into the outback.Why would this be cool? I really like the way the action starts instantly in GW, without having to waste X minutes to get to where the action is, like in basically every MMO.

[The Sins We Die By]

I like guildwars warp feature, would be cool if there were some rural outposts which have everything towns have but you can't map travel there, so you fight your way to the town where you can grab new supplies and then continue deeper into the outback.

A.K.A. Endgame content

[Arkhan The Black]

My guess is that GW2 will combine real-time traveling with fast traveling via Asura gates. I recall reading something about dragons going rampage and if it destroys a bridge players would have to go long way around until it was repaired.

[The Sins We Die By]

My guess is that GW2 will combine real-time traveling with fast traveling via Asura gates. I recall reading something about dragons going rampage and if it destroys a bridge players would have to go long way around until it was repaired.

Asuran gates have been mentioned in a couple articals I recall. Hopefully we're still able to just hit a location on the map, and maybe appear at the gate in an outpost.

[Lamuness]

I like guildwars warp feature, would be cool if there were some rural outposts which have everything towns have but you can't map travel there, so you fight your way to the town where you can grab new supplies and then continue deeper into the outback.

There's not quite that many, but there are a couple in Factions and a few in Nightfall that give quests at these areas, but they're annoying as hell to get to.

[drox]

Yes. Say no to mounts. However, if most of the GW2 world will be persistent, then that would pose a problem of getting places in a timely manner. That was the main reason why there are mounts in WoW was because you would have to get from town to town with no flight path. With the amounts of run skills GW has, we don't need mounts.

you allready know what skills there will be in GW2? :rolleyes:

the one thing i think that will NOT be the same as in gw1 will be the skills you get, so imho talking about the skills there will be in the game (and then refer to gw1) is a bit pointless in this thread.

[raspberry jam]

you allready know what skills there will be in GW2? :rolleyes:Oh, at least I hope that there will be running skills.

[BanduluFox]

Though if there weren't (running skills) the mounts that some would like would make up for the lack. What's wrong with having mounts instead of running skills? Not everyone likes reactivating a skill every 10 seconds or having to replace a fair portion of their skill bar with skills used for the sole purpose of getting from point a to b. Also properly implemented mounted combat would add a different dimension to the game and make them more useful than just a form of transportation. Maybe the mount could be sort of like a pet you can ride (i.e. something of an update to the existing pet implementation only thing not explicitly tied to a ranger class or equivalent). Just a thought...

[Terenas]

Oh, at least I hope that there will be running skills.
Me too. Any news about the ancient topic block vs dodge ? They think to implement the two as separate or just keep the block ?


I generally do not think gw2 will look too much like wow. There is a wow already, the clone route would not appear as a winning one unless said clone inherits only the good about wow whilst surpassing its shortcomings.

Part of me wants gw2 to be strongly innovative and more diablo-like, part of me wants it to be close to the current logics and general gaming philosophy (guild wars is not extremely hard to understand, can be played solo, requires team strategy (in PVP at least) and is very fun if played with other people, on the other hand being very good at gw is not easy so you are always left with something to improve in your gaming skills without grinding your butt on titles (which I kinda like - especially those with in game effects)).

We'll see.

[amcoolio]

I would strongly prefer that they make it a cross between Guild Wars and Diablo 2 than WoW (which I have never played, but seen and not attractive.)

No mounts. Already enough **** on the battlefield to include mounts, which are not needed with the use of running skills. How are you supposed to fight on a mount? Does your mount stay there and can't get killed when in a battle? If it is killed can you get it back? Would a part of 8 mounts look ridiculous (yes)? No to mounts.

"Bandages" are not really needed with the amount of self heals there are. Crafting can be left to NPCs, although this area should be expanded in GW2 (using rare materials to create even stronger weapons than the ones you are wielding).

I don't know how items work in WoW but I think items need an overhaul for GW2. The only thing GW got right was the varying amount of skins - pretty much the only reason why weapons cost money after the first year of release when the markets settled.

[raspberry jam]

I don't know how items work in WoW but I think items need an overhaul for GW2. The only thing GW got right was the varying amount of skinsNot at all, GW has a very good system of modular upgrades to an item (the exact details of the system - the available mods and so on - is very good, but I still hope that it's changed up in GW2), as well as a very clearly defined max limit on damage etc. that keeps the game from becoming gear-dependent.

Also, auto-customized armor meant that you could only wear a certain suit of armor if you actually got to the crafter that makes the armor in question. This is IMO a good thing, adding a lot to the prestige of certain armor suits.

Would a part of 8 mounts look ridiculous (yes)?2 mounts is enough to look ridiculous.http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/4007/mountonmounteh1.jpg

Though if there weren't (running skills) the mounts that some would like would make up for the lack.No running skills? Well I wouldn't buy that.

[Lamuness]

http://bp2.blogger.com/_AjqsbzyaBGU/Rf4DrXA9XbI/AAAAAAAAAJo/vdXP0HpJ394/s1600/flyingsword.jpg

THAT would be awesome :grin:

[amcoolio]

Lets face it, weapons are (for the most part) useless in the economy. Not talking about greens, but there is only 2-3 versions of a sword that are deemed the best in GW. Everyone wants dmg +15 >50, health +30, eng +5 >50 mods. Vampiric weapons are useless. Sundering weapons are useless. Bleeding, Crippling, Poisonous, i.e. every other mod is useless. There are no variety to weapons, they are vary stale - you get your hopes up when a gold drops but then quickly remember that it is worthless and won't improve over your cheap, widely available green that was given to you by a guildie.

I'm talking about a assload more variety in mods, keeping the max dmg. for axes/swords/etc. How cool would it be to see a sword drop with a +8% chance to cast Inferno (Fire 5 Attribute) on hit? Adding skill possibilities already makes weapons more valuable than they are by adding a lot more diversity to the economy since there are a ton of skills.

Make gold weapons clearly better than blue or purple weapons. This was a large problem in the game until they fixed it with the Sorrows update I believe.

Green items have to be extremely rare and could even have added bonuses when in a set (like shield and axe. wand and focus.)

Lastly, kill inscriptions. These made weapons absolutely worthless.

[Dark Wolf]

A note about mounts:

I absolutely love having the instant warping to a town you have visited. I think it's the best thing about traveling in GW. With that in mind, I would still like to be able to have some mode of travel to places where there isn't a town that is faster than hiking the whole way, with less chance of being overrun with mobs. For instance: In GW1, I would love to be able to "rent" a steed (or whatever) to get to a specific part (say Bogroot from Gad's encampment) and then proceed as normal. There is no "town" outside the entrance to Bogroot, so you have to hoof it the whole way, usually losing quite a bit of time if you run into mob or two. If you have a limited amount of time to play, it can be a PITA. With a rented mount, you could get there, turn it in to the Stable NPC, and proceed through Bogroot. The Stable NPCs would have "rides" to specific points, rather than free roaming mounts. The key would be that you would have to physically walk to the destination point on the map first, to activate the destination NPC. Thereafter, you would be able to access the pair of NPCs (one at the town, one at the destination) on that character any time. If you zone, you would lose your mount. The Stable NPC in town would have a list of places you could "ride" to, somewhat like the Ship that takes you to any of the three Cities and GTOB.

What do you think?

LOTRO has that. You have to go in each town and talk to the stable-master in order to open up the town in the travel pannel so that you can travel there later. It get costly though. There are horses as mounts in LOTRO as well to fasten the trips but it still takes time to get from one place to another. The hunter has running and teleportation skills which is nice but the other classes get nothing. But the devs have implemented a form of teleporation that players can use, players can teleport to the guild house (if they are in a guild, and if that one has a house) and they can teleport as well to their houses, and from there they can easily get to one of the major race outposts (Bree for Humans, Celondim for Elves, Thorin's Hall for Dwarves and Michael Delvings for Hobbits) and from there you can get a very cheap switft travel to any of the other major race towns. Also, players can put in their racial trait an instant teleportation skill to the main place place of their race (again, Bree for Humans, etc.). Still, getting around in LOTRO takes a lot of time.

The Asura portals could be a better way to implement the teleportation in GW2 like we have now, similar to Tabula Rasa. In TB, there are teleportals here and there that you have to activate first in order to use them and add them to your teleportation pad. Then, you can teleport afterward from one place to another as long as you opened up the places first (similar to the stable-masters in LOTRO and in GW). A way to not add mounts in GW2 would be to give everyone running skills and I've heard that in some MMOs, the roads have a speed booster so if you walk/run on the roads, you get a boost to your speed so you run faster, so if everyone has a running skill and get a boost on the roads, we could get around faster. So people would use the teleportation and roads to get around and still have a running skill once they are not on the roads anymore too.

[Akirai Annuvil]

I agree with the titular suggestion.

[Ace Bear]

After only reading these forums for about 20 minutes, I have realised that some have made numerous suggestions implying to make Guild Wars 2, WoW. Do we want Guild Wars 2 to become an exact copy of WoW?

Let me know your thoughts and views so I can get a better point of view =].
Forget what they think. On almost every GW2 interview and preview of GW2 we have seen that Anet wants to make it what WoW wants to grow up to be. Many stuff is similar to how WoW works, but heck that can be said about alot of MMOs(Crafting, for instance, was not started by WoW lol, they didn't even make anything new about that system). Not only that, Anet came from WoW, why would they have left being the top of the Blizzard food chain to make exactly what they just made only a bunch of years later? That seems like a huge waste of time to me.

[Gmr Leon]

2 mounts is enough to look ridiculous.http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/4007/mountonmounteh1.jpg


Well of course when you put it in that scenario.

No mounts. Already enough **** on the battlefield to include mounts, which are not needed with the use of running skills. How are you supposed to fight on a mount? Does your mount stay there and can't get killed when in a battle? If it is killed can you get it back? Would a part of 8 mounts look ridiculous (yes)? No to mounts.

The key thing to remember is that we don't even know whether or not the same skill system will be used in GW2.

How are you supposed to fight on a mount? Well, if we look into medieval history and even modern history to an extent it's pretty clear. Cavalry didn't exist because it was useless and while I know putting it into a game would restrain what you could do with the concept, it would still be something new and unique. That is, for a mount to be useful not only in hastening your travels, but also in combat.

Would a party of 8 players on mounts look ridiculous? That's entirely dependent on the mounts implemented. Of course it's going to look ridiculous if you have them all on different animals. However, eight players on horses outfitted with armor and the players wielding weapons that are useful on horseback, would look rather imposing.

It would be similar, in some ways, to the idea you mentioned on having a skill activate when you use the weapon at a certain attribute. Just in this case dependent on the mount.

For example:
Rapier
Dmg. 12-22 (Req. 9 Swordsmanship)
Decapitation (When on Horseback)
Artery Slash (When on [Insert Mount Here])

Just to let you know, I'm not extremely fond of the idea of mounts, but if it can be fashioned into something new and innovative in a game I'm all for it.

[Tro]

There are threads about "mounting onto creatures". Threads about make a medic skill to make bandages. They imply basically that you have to learn skills and improve upon them. For example, one person said there should be a crafting skill so you can only craft certain things at low levels. In my opinion, this is totally like WoW.

WoW not the only game with Mounts.

I Say make GW2 into a Free to play Warhammer, wouldnt be such a bad Idea.

[Aiiane]

"Make GW2 a free to play ______" where ___ is another MMO is both a) silly and b) not going to happen/work.

Why would you make a copy of another game, and then use a payment system that makes more money? You're already losing customers because of a split playerbase between two identical games.


Please, don't ask for GW2 to be "like InsertMMOHere but free-to-play". I don't typically inject my opinions into actual moderation, but this is something that I simply won't tolerate here.

[Math Person]

And anyways, what the heck is so bad about being like WoW? WoW is a good game and I would probably play it if it weren't for that fact that I would not want to pay the subscription.

[Akirai Annuvil]

And anyways, what the heck is so bad about being like WoW? WoW is a good game and I would probably play it if it weren't for that fact that I would not want to pay the subscription.

Then why don't you. Illegal servers are not uncommon. Not to mention the myriad of free to download, free to play WoW clones, following the exact same well-worn formula as WoW does.

If anyone wants to play WoW, regardless of whether they are willing to pay a fee or not, they are perfectly able already. Making a game which is like WoW is stupid.

[raspberry jam]

Vampiric weapons are useless.:huh: WHAT????

There are no variety to weapons, they are vary stale - you get your hopes up when a gold drops but then quickly remember that it is worthless and won't improve over your cheap, widely available green that was given to you by a guildie.Then again you'd get a game that is extremely gear-dependant, like WoW. No thanks.

Green items have to be extremely rare and could even have added bonuses when in a set (like shield and axe. wand and focus.)Extremely rare: Why?? Why would you want this?? The role that greens currently fill, which is the same as a max gold with known stats and a known place you can farm it, is perfect.

Added bonus in set: ...yes, I'd like this idea. Nothing too wild though, but there could be some small bonus for using a full set of greens

Lastly, kill inscriptions. These made weapons absolutely worthless."Flexibility? Who would ever want that?"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

WoW is a good game and I would probably play it if it weren't for that fact that I would not want to pay the subscription.1) Download and install WoW client

2) Patch WoW until you reach a version thatis not too painful to play

3) Download and install Ascent

4) Invite friends to play WoW for free using your own PC as server

[Raiala]

And anyways, what the heck is so bad about being like WoW? WoW is a good game and I would probably play it if it weren't for that fact that I would not want to pay the subscription.

It's a different game, you do know that right?

[Tro]

"Make GW2 a free to play ______" where ___ is another MMO is both a) silly and b) not going to happen/work.

Why would you make a copy of another game, and then use a payment system that makes more money? You're already losing customers because of a split playerbase between two identical games.


Please, don't ask for GW2 to be "like InsertMMOHere but free-to-play". I don't typically inject my opinions into actual moderation, but this is something that I simply won't tolerate here.
still Warhammer has Great World PvP concept. WoW iam sure many can agree, has the best PvE. Guild Wars has good Class Balance and Instanded PvP. so I dont see why using those fun things that other games have brought out, is such a bad thing.

[Shallowrain]

still Warhammer has Great World PvP concept. WoW iam sure many can agree, has the best PvE. Guild Wars has good Class Balance and Instanded PvP. so I dont see why using those fun things that other games have brought out, is such a bad thing.

Because blatantly ripping off another game's designs for things makes you lose points in innovation and originality. If you just copy something that somebody else is doing, you'll not really attract anybody from those games, as they've already got whatever shiny thing you're promoting. And what's the point of playing a game when you keep going 'oh, I remember doing this in game X.' I feel like the Guild Wars team should be able to come up with enough original stuff to make the game something nice on their own, without having to directly rip off ideas from other places.

[Tro]

Because blatantly ripping off another game's designs for things makes you lose points in innovation and originality. If you just copy something that somebody else is doing, you'll not really attract anybody from those games, as they've already got whatever shiny thing you're promoting. And what's the point of playing a game when you keep going 'oh, I remember doing this in game X.' I feel like the Guild Wars team should be able to come up with enough original stuff to make the game something nice on their own, without having to directly rip off ideas from other places.

Anti Example to post above:

WoW
Warhammer
LOTRO
EQ

need I go on?

[Miss Bailing]

I played GW a bit, I picked up Factions and Nightfall a while back but didn't go too deeply into it. I've played WoW for 3+ years and I'm still subscribed to it. Preordered Age of Conan and I'm looking forward to that.

I haven't played GW in a while and I'm trying to settle back in some and level up one of the new classes but I can't seem to do it (http://guildwars.incgamers.com/showthread.php?t=477852 shameless plug).

Anyway, back on topic, the best things I remembered about GW were several things.

First off, the transportation method. It's pretty good to port around with just a few clicks and there's always a nice hub for everyone to hang out at. I don't think this game really needs mounts. It kind of deters away from the exploring the world type of thing since it's pretty much all instanced and you get everything to yourself. I can't really tell but I believe the GW's world is a lot bigger than WoW's. Even though it's so big it's not all completely open spaced and it's more linear.

Second, the equality. It's been more than two years and everyone's still level 20 am I right? lol There's no huge gap in itemization right? It's not a bad thing. In fact, WoW has morphed into a similar MMO model and are catering more to casuals giving more itemization to the mainstream. They're pretty much cutting down on the elitism and spreading loot better. This is something I remember of in GW back then and I think it holds true today.

Third, PVE and PVP? I put a question mark because I never finished the classic campaign but questing and pugging pretty much made me want to rip some heads off in both games. The PVE content in GW is a bit bland IMO and I would certainly like to see more epicness in GW2. I think PVP is nicely implemented. I can't find a good guild but I have joined numerous scrub guilds that are trying to PVP or PVE and fail miserably while getting a guild hall that nobody uses. The PVP in this game is kinda better. There is too much variety in here as opposed to WoW. There's usually just one or one and a half dominant spec for PVP in WoW. There isn't enough. GW has a ton more comps and specs for people to try out. It's just groups of people counter comping each other with the same specs but different make ups.

All in all, GW doesn't have to use any of the successful content being used in WoW and there should be more emphasis on better PVE and PVP content. There isn't much to really copy from WoW and because GW isn't a persistent world like WoW it is also limited to the things it can implement. I haven't gotten into the high end of things from GW but I'm looking forward to.

And to all the WoW haters, I don't think GW has the subscriber base to beat WoW, so WoW has definitely done something right in that sense. Afterall, it's all about the cha-ching. ArenaNet would not put out such a great game without the $$$. I hope there is more good content coming along with GW2, I look forward to it.

[Shallowrain]

Anti Example to post above:

WoW
Warhammer
LOTRO
EQ

need I go on?

No, I think you either missed my point, or it wasn't very clear. How many of the other games are going to pull people from WoW? For what reasons do or will people move from WoW to those other games? To me, a good deal of those games have had a very similar system of hooking a player into keeping their subscription by danging the rewards of being bigger, better, and stronger through doing stuff over and over again.

[raspberry jam]

WoW iam sure many can agree, has the best PvE.PvE in WoW sucks, most of the quests are FedEx or "kill 5 wolves", and once you get to higher levels it has these huge raids that forces you to either join elitist guilds, or groups that makes GW PUGs look like well-trained special forces units.

Oh yes, WoW has crafting etc. That's not PvE (Player versus Environment) though, since no environment is involved.

[sorudo]

still Warhammer has Great World PvP concept. WoW iam sure many can agree, has the best PvE. Guild Wars has good Class Balance and Instanded PvP. so I dont see why using those fun things that other games have brought out, is such a bad thing.
uhmm, i hate the PVE in WoW.
there is no goal, you're searching your butt of to find just that monster you have to kill for that quests and everything is about gear, armor and mods.
and i'm not even beginning about the grind, which is the worst i have ever seen in any MMO.
so in all, WoW is no fun to play PVE, it's no game anymore but a grind fest for anything you can get your hands on, something Anet has corrected in GW.

[Beta Sprite]

I'm talking about a assload more variety in mods, keeping the max dmg. for axes/swords/etc. How cool would it be to see a sword drop with a +8% chance to cast Inferno (Fire 5 Attribute) on hit? Adding skill possibilities already makes weapons more valuable than they are by adding a lot more diversity to the economy since there are a ton of skills.

I agree with you on this point the most, but with one limitation:
Make those attributes of the weapons PvE-only (They've already started with skills, so why not items, too?). Or possibly, make everyone that is playing PvP use PvP-generated weapons, like the PvP characters of today use.

That way, we'll never have to worry about some kind of auto-cast being too imbalanced for PvP, and it will never be nerfed and destroyed for PvE use.

EDIT: Oh, and I agree with sorudo's post about PvE in WoW. Never could stand it, and wouldn't play it if it was free.

[Ace Bear]

Damnit, can we lock this thread? Way to many people who haven't played the game either at all or enough or have no clue how the game works and are making assumptions on things they have never seen. Vamp sucks? Fire magic casting Swords? Seriously, lock the thread, lord almighty.

[Akirai Annuvil]

still Warhammer has Great World PvP concept.
Not particularly. DAoC remake.
WoW iam sure many can agree, has the best PvE.
No.
Guild Wars has good Class Balance and Instanded PvP.
Correct.
so I dont see why using those fun things that other games have brought out, is such a bad thing.
Cuz their unoriginol and baed.

[Dark Wolf]

No, I think you either missed my point, or it wasn't very clear. How many of the other games are going to pull people from WoW? For what reasons do or will people move from WoW to those other games? To me, a good deal of those games have had a very similar system of hooking a player into keeping their subscription by danging the rewards of being bigger, better, and stronger through doing stuff over and over again.

It's not the case with LOTRO who make it that their game is about the journey, not the end. The content starts right after you create your alt, not at 50. Same with GW.

[sorudo]

Damnit, can we lock this thread? Way to many people who haven't played the game either at all or enough or have no clue how the game works and are making assumptions on things they have never seen. Vamp sucks? Fire magic casting Swords? Seriously, lock the thread, lord almighty.
IMO vamp does suck, i rather have zealus then vamp, that atleast only gives with a cost of an energy pip instead of an energy degree....

[shawn]

IMO vamp does suck, i rather have zealus then vamp, that atleast only gives with a cost of an energy pip instead of an energy degree....
Stop using so many energy based skills on a warrior, you shouldn't need zealous out all the time.

[raspberry jam]

Stop using so many energy based skills on a warrior, you shouldn't need zealous out all the time.In PvE zealous is really nice with Furious Axe and Triple Chop.

[sorudo]

Stop using so many energy based skills on a warrior, you shouldn't need zealous out all the time.
in case you didn't know, the warrior isn't the only melee profession in GW, assassin anyone?

[shawn]

lol, wow, zealous on a sin. That's even funnier.

[Gmr Leon]

lol, wow, zealous on a sin. That's even funnier.

For once Shawn, I see your logic, and agree with you completely. Assassins were given Critical Strikes for a reason, heck, it's their primary attribute! Not to mention the many skills that provide you a solid 100% chance to hit with a critical.

Assuming you're not blinded, away from the enemy, and all those minor details.

[shawn]

For once Shawn, I see your logic, and agree with you completely.
First time for everything! \o/ Congrats. :p

[Gmr Leon]

Most of your posts I simply don't see the logic because I'm not deeply involved in PvP, mind you.

..Now then, back to the topic at hand..Well, if it was on that topic in the first place..

[Muhummad Msabi]

Mounts may be useless if we're still given the chance to hyper travel map like we are doing.


When I first started playing WoW (after quitting GW) I thought not having Hyper-travel was a pain.

However, my thoughts on this issue changed over time. What's the point of having all the beautiful scenery around you in this game if there is no one to see it?

Let me give you an example. When is the last time you have seen the area outside of Augury Rock since you ascended?

My girlfriend and I used to farm Minos and Griffons all over that area when there was nothing going on in the guild. We just enjoyed having one tank and another aoe for some gold and the chances for decent purples and golds. We often did a chest run down this one valley and it was the highlight of our run. Then ANET nerfted it. They introduced locked chests. Then they introduced more crap to make it harder to travel around without a full 6 person party. So I ask, when was last time you have travelled outside of Augury Rock?

Sometimes having a mount and the ability to travel out in the non-instanced world might be fun to some.

~Muh

[Muhummad Msabi]

PvE in WoW sucks, most of the quests are FedEx or "kill 5 wolves", and once you get to higher levels it has these huge raids that forces you to either join elitist guilds, or groups that makes GW PUGs look like well-trained special forces units.

Oh yes, WoW has crafting etc. That's not PvE (Player versus Environment) though, since no environment is involved.

WoW's crafting is PVE based. Often times you have to kill some monster to have it drop an item or be able to skin it for some item.

You also have to mine or something like that while monsters constantly roam around you ready to pounce on you. On the PVP servers of the game, you also have to be constantly ready to battle another person who may try to gank you while you are fishing, mining or herbing.

To say crafting is not PVE based is flat out lying.

~Muh

[raspberry jam]

To say crafting is not PVE based is flat out lying.

~MuhPvE is about killing monsters.

Crafting is about double clicking things while in town.

Also, one of the best way to get materials is to sit on the auction house. No monster killing needed.

Let me give you an example. When is the last time you have seen the area outside of Augury Rock since you ascended?Last week.

Sometimes having a mount and the ability to travel out in the non-instanced world might be fun to some.It's not about having that ability. It's about being forced to, which you are in for example WoW. If you want to manually run everywhere, you can do that in GW too.