PC Gaming News
Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 154
  1. #31
    GWOnline Content Team
    GWOnline Site Pal
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranCreated Blog entry10K Posts
    Alaris's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    The Order of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    22,615
    Quote Originally Posted by CHIPS View Post
    Isn't the point of removing monks from the game to encourage partying? If so why doesn't story quests involve more people?
    Actually, stories are rarely soloed. You usually have some NPC helping out, in many cases you have a whole lot of NPCs zerging with you. If you choose to builds more healish, you'll usually find a use for your healing skills other than on yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by CHIPS View Post
    I mean you come right back when you die, so how can you fail?
    I think they should add the option to fail and have to start over, or at least the reward for doing it in one try (and ability to replay story missions). I agree that they failed at that. But as a player, you can challenge yourself to not mindlessly zerg, and actually play as if death was meaningful. When I do that, I get a better sense of challenge from my gameplay. The level design is less at fault than the lack of strong penalty for dying...

    Penalizing people for dying by preventing progress... damned if you don't, damned if you do.
    == Alaris & clone ==
    Proud Officer of The Order Of Dii [Dii] - join us
    You can tell the quality of life of people by what they complain about

  2. #32
    Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteran1,000 Posts10000 Experience Points6 months registered
    CHIPS's Avatar
    Server

    Tarnished Coast
    Guild

    The Order of Dii (Commander)
    Posts

    1,941
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberman View Post
    Aren't you weakened each time and losing armor? While your enemies are rapidly healed? Or is that only in the regular quests/events/whatever?

    I agree that quests/events seem to be lacking, but I don't think forcing the player to die repeatedly is what they need.
    You don't get weakened I don't think. You do lose armor pieces, but that's only after many many deaths. Enemies heals up once they are out of combat. But honestly you have to be super low level and super weak to not being able to kill them.

    All in all, as long as you get to the required level before attempting a storyline quest, there is almost no way you can fail them.

    As for dying over and over again, I will just talk about Elona Reach. When I finally completed it, after many many failures, it was one of the greatest feeling ever. It was my first time bringing my Chipsy though GW1. Good times. That said I might not be the average crowd. Not many people had to determination to finish Winds of Change in hard mode like I did. My personal deaths would shed enough blood to float a log. :P

    Quote Originally Posted by Alaris View Post
    Actually, stories are rarely soloed. You usually have some NPC helping out, in many cases you have a whole lot of NPCs zerging with you. If you choose to builds more healish, you'll usually find a use for your healing skills other than on yourself.



    I think they should add the option to fail and have to start over, or at least the reward for doing it in one try (and ability to replay story missions). I agree that they failed at that. But as a player, you can challenge yourself to not mindlessly zerg, and actually play as if death was meaningful. When I do that, I get a better sense of challenge from my gameplay. The level design is less at fault than the lack of strong penalty for dying...

    Penalizing people for dying by preventing progress... damned if you don't, damned if you do.
    I meant solo in the sense that the only human player in it was you. Yes you do play with NPCs. But I was surprised to see less partying with humans in GW2 than in GW1. Like I said, wasn't the point of removing monks to encourage partying with other players?

    As for failing the missions, I think it is difficult to appease all the crowd. Some players really love challenge. Some players will rage quit on the slightest failure. So as a game designer who want to cater to as many people as possible, it is a huge challenge.
    Last edited by CHIPS; 21-11-2012 at 22:11.

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by EnoughAlready View Post
    only if you think the dev's are idiots would that argument be true, it has been thoroughly debunked in other threads already.
    Thread please?

    I'd love to learn more.

    Just for example if you pull part the Ele weapons, you would totally break what that character is, and also what the Engineer is. It's a design of the game on what skills you want. if you want to hold a bow, are you able to do a whirling axe attach as a char? or are you thinking that the warrior should have all the skills of bows as Rangers and thieves too? Like shadow stepping attacks?



    Quote Originally Posted by EnoughAlready View Post
    they only offer nothing because they aren't there. If they were there, then there's a lot to offer.

    Didn't take long to get back to the 'GW1 was 7 years old' did it? Also completely fails to address the point in my original post.
    GW1 was released in 4/05, and Factions a year later. With Factions came Alliances, because Alliances towards Luxon and Kurzick.

    In GW2, there isn't a setting for that, so having alliances technically don't fit. There isn't a mechanic to fit that tool of having Alliances.

    I think if they open up Cantha in an expansion, because you know they would, they would probably bring something to this effect also.

    Please tell me how they would fit besides what Alaris stated? I think the only thing that goes against it is that one person can only join 5 guilds, and there is a limit on player members per guild, which is driven by gold for player expansion. (Complete Gold sink here).

    Quote Originally Posted by EnoughAlready View Post
    they would provide exactly what they provided in GW1.
    A place to train together, handy storage, access to merchants & banks, a place to meet group for dungeons or events, hell even just a place to hang out.

    Did you even play GW1? Or fo you just not have any friends?
    Guild halls were used for training? I think only when two Guilds offered to fight right? because I couldn't do anything but change skills. Storage for guild are right next to every Bank, in every major town, and maybe some explorables? No need to go back home. Same with merchants and banks, there other other features available that replace them. In an open world, nothing is preventing you from meeting up somewhere. Travel everywhere, even meet up with random guildies. There isn't a place you couldn't make "home". And you can hang out at every place you want to, just pick it.... you're only restricted on how far a character has gone.

    (They did hint that personal place might be built in the game, so you have a Home to go back to.)

    Quote Originally Posted by EnoughAlready View Post
    I can far to readily believe you'd prefer the dumbed down version over the real thing, you don't need to convince me.
    Mesmer is different, not dumbed down. What mesmer did in GW1 had to change for GW2. Just as GW1 is a different game than is GW2.

    Every class plays differently because of this change.

    Quote Originally Posted by EnoughAlready View Post
    Haven't read the books, shouldn't need to.
    You're missing out, the first one is good, real good. I heard the second one is not as good but plays into more of the story line for GW2.

    Honestly would be bored to ends if GW2 required me to read a book for everything. I was thinking games like Skyrim or Morrowind have this much in books and you can read alot but is it required? maybe, maybe not.

    This game bases what you know in GW1, are they suppose to repeat it ? Lore is happening as you live it. History is being made by Halloween, and telling of the Mad king's tale... that was full of lore. The one time event and the Kraka introduce a major part of what will be the future and the Consortium.

    Lore is out there, if you're not reading it or can't see it, it can't be helped.


    Quote Originally Posted by EnoughAlready View Post
    GW1 I could use any weapon on any profession.
    But effectively?

    They matched weapon to skills and balanced them. I don't see how auto-attacking could match up with skills you want then. How would you want to do melee attacks while you use a bow? Try a hammer knockdown? not going to work with a bow.

    Quote Originally Posted by EnoughAlready View Post
    And??? Or do you believe that a few crazy ideas negates a whole thread? If so I'll just set you to ignore because in your previous post alone you've negated anything else you may have to contribute.
    Not a whole thread, which one is it again?

    I'm just saying there are alot of people that want to make this game into something else. And that's the crazy part. GW2 will be GW2, not WoW, not GW1.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by sorudo View Post
    actually GW1 and GW2 can't really be compared, one is a fully instance but dynamic based game while two is a persistent zerg fest.
    at least GW1 has a kind of consistency so everyone could play on a stable but fun way, GW2 is good in it's own way but it encourages grind and farming allot more and allot of things are out of control.
    i have had more crashes with GW2 in one month then i had with GW1 in 4 years, the game is simply not stable enough and it misses something that made GW1 so good.

    to answer your question, GW1 had the flexibility to go from one place to the other, follow the story line you want to follow and have no restrictions on replaying a part of a story.
    GW2 forces you to pay just to get somewhere which is getting more and more expensive, the story lines are locked behind your personal story and you can never ever play a different path ones you choose one.

    it is missing some more things but that just takes to long to go in to, the point is just that GW2 can use some GW1 spirit in it.
    let us play a mission in an instance just like in GW1, let us choose a different path ones you completed the story to a part and let us get what we want even if it's not part of the story you chose.
    I agree on the first part, GW1 and GW2 are completely different games, mechanics, story, everything, and it's only sharing a name.

    Same effect to Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander, they may not share a name but everything about them is the same.

    I think most RPGs aren't a choose-your-own adventure book. Final fantasies usually are one set story, most other RPGs require you to replay from the begining to live another story line. I think this is "normal".... you can always run a new alt if you want a different story. There's been a thread here that has beaten that to death.

    I think what would be nice, and what Chips and Alaris are talking about is the "What If" or Fail types... similar to DE's. I haven't been far into my stories but I think if you fail something that should give you a twist... that by replaying it you can get a better part or failing will give you what happened and you have to try harder or different to get back to the story you're following.

    This could be improved and would have enjoyed it better.

  5. #35
    GWOnline Site Pal Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteranBlogger10000 Experience Points6 months registered
    sorudo's Avatar
    Server

    far shiverpeak
    Guild

    the legendary alterans
    Posts

    9,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Xycury View Post
    I think most RPGs aren't a choose-your-own adventure book. Final fantasies usually are one set story, most other RPGs require you to replay from the begining to live another story line. I think this is "normal".... you can always run a new alt if you want a different story. There's been a thread here that has beaten that to death.
    to be fair, final fantasy is pretty much a series of single player games, the MMO's fail horribly and you can see that by looking at all the previews, reviews and community talk.

    GW1 gave us the flexibility to play the game however we want, that's why GW1 has some superiority over GW2.
    may it be story, traveling or playing fur fun, it's allot more flexible them you think.
    it's alive but cannot be living, it's dead but lives a mortal life.

    sorudo.9054

  6. #36
    GWOnline Content Team Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteran1,000 Posts10000 Experience Points6 months registered
    Nemeon Lion's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    GuildWars Online [GWO] ||| The Order of Dii [Dii] |||
    Posts

    3,980
    Guys, guys, GUYS!!!

    We're missing the most important factor of all.

    Age bought GW2.

    We should be thanking him for supporting the series once again. I call for a "clap post train"!

    I'll start.


    *clap*

  7. #37
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteran1,000 Posts5000 Experience Points
    Giggles's Avatar
    Server

    2nd star to the right
    Guild

    wouldn't you like to know (maybe not)
    Posts

    4,094
    Nice one Nem

    The only thing that I find I'm really missing from GW1 that isn't in GW2 is structure. I like the free form nature of GW2 but I think in some ways they went too far. What I mean is that combat becomes largely a big mess once you get past a few people in a team. In small groups it can be pretty cool. Once it gets past a certain size it kinds turns ****ty imo. The enemies you fight also have no structure to them really. Where's the frontline, backline tactics? Why don't they do simple flanking maneauvers when the people in the event get to a certain size, or mix up things when the group gets big instead of just increasing the bad guy numbers? A lot of the boss fights I've done end up with you just spamming skills and dodging red circles.

    Most quests are too focused in one area. I'd love to see things move around more and I'm not talking about escort quests. It makes the quests feel static and not very dynamic (sorry for the pun) to me when most of them all happen in the same place. Where's the journey and adventure? Even the personal story quests take place in small areas. In GW1, most of them took place over large areas with quests where you you had to trampling across maps to complete them. The quests feel very small in GW2 in this sense.

    The game has a hell of a lot going for it imo but, it needs time to settle in and get tweaked big time. I don't know what the weekend content was like, I didn't have time to see it, so I don't know if they're making some positive steps or not.

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Nook View Post
    A troll as an admin, ouch!

    Age, you have to remember that whilst GW2 certainly has its problems, the game that you are comparing it to (GW) isn't the same game as it was at launch. GW has changed a lot and I see no reason as to why GW2 won't experience similar change.
    This...
    Quote Originally Posted by Nemeon Lion View Post
    Guys, guys, GUYS!!!

    We're missing the most important factor of all.

    Age bought GW2.

    We should be thanking him for supporting the series once again. I call for a "clap post train"!

    I'll start.


    *clap*
    Also... Age hasn't posted since the OP.... What is this thread even for?

  9. #39
    GWOnline Content Team
    GWOnline Site Pal
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranCreated Blog entry10K Posts
    Alaris's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    The Order of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    22,615
    *clap*

    Also, story missions can totally be played with other people. In fact, I played with some PUG once cuz I saw him go there and asked if he wanted to team up and we did.

    You can team up to 5 if you can find the people who want to join.
    == Alaris & clone ==
    Proud Officer of The Order Of Dii [Dii] - join us
    You can tell the quality of life of people by what they complain about

  10. #40
    Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteran1,000 Posts10000 Experience Points6 months registered
    CHIPS's Avatar
    Server

    Tarnished Coast
    Guild

    The Order of Dii (Commander)
    Posts

    1,941
    Quote Originally Posted by Giggles View Post
    Nice one Nem

    The only thing that I find I'm really missing from GW1 that isn't in GW2 is structure. I like the free form nature of GW2 but I think in some ways they went too far. What I mean is that combat becomes largely a big mess once you get past a few people in a team. In small groups it can be pretty cool. Once it gets past a certain size it kinds turns ****ty imo. The enemies you fight also have no structure to them really. Where's the frontline, backline tactics? Why don't they do simple flanking maneauvers when the people in the event get to a certain size, or mix up things when the group gets big instead of just increasing the bad guy numbers? A lot of the boss fights I've done end up with you just spamming skills and dodging red circles.

    Most quests are too focused in one area. I'd love to see things move around more and I'm not talking about escort quests. It makes the quests feel static and not very dynamic (sorry for the pun) to me when most of them all happen in the same place. Where's the journey and adventure? Even the personal story quests take place in small areas. In GW1, most of them took place over large areas with quests where you you had to trampling across maps to complete them. The quests feel very small in GW2 in this sense.

    The game has a hell of a lot going for it imo but, it needs time to settle in and get tweaked big time. I don't know what the weekend content was like, I didn't have time to see it, so I don't know if they're making some positive steps or not.
    I agree that battles in GW2 tends to become one big mess, with no clear cut tactics. What would be cool is the mobs line up to form line battles. If the players don't do the same they will be surrounded and killed.

    Anet should also look into decisive battles. Put the players in the losing side and see how their fair. For example Battle of Austerlitz, where Napoleon tricked and separated the Austrian-Russian army, before taking the middle heights, attacking their flanks and crushed everyone.



    Another good example would be Battle of Cannae. Hannibal made the overconfident Romans trap themselves.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQNCGqfjaBc

    Last edited by CHIPS; 22-11-2012 at 10:38.

Posting Permissions

Posting Permissions

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off