User talk:Seventh/Archive Prerelease

GW2 Ranting & Raving

Well since Guild Wars 2 Guru is afraid of discussion I'll post this here and people are welcome to comment.

Let me start off by saying I haven't played the demos at any of the gaming cons, and I'm basing this off of what I've seen from other people's playtesting, as well as interviews, panels, and press releases from ArenaNet. If you feel I've made an error, please correct me with information from a reputable source.

The Good

• The new combat style looks amazing. Much faster paced, more dynamic, and more engaging.
• Solves a lot of the problems with persistent worlds (looting, scaling, etc.) in new, innovative ways (level scaling, difficulty scaling, etc.).
• Dynamic event system looks mostly awesome, but with a few drawbacks (see below).
• Personal story system sounds very cool too. Or, as Anet puts it, "Putting the RPG back in MMORPG."
• Attributes system will be somewhat similar to GW1. You can be a jack of all trades and a master of none, or pump all your points into one place. Also, importantly, the total number of points gained from equipment bonuses will be higher if you spread things out, but players can sacrifice a few points to put them all in one place. (source)
• Trait system appears to take the place of runes/insignias from GW1, but has more variety and, perhaps more importantly, no disincentives to swapping, as far as I know. This is a huge improvement over the rune/insignia system in GW1.

The Bad

• Classes look basically the same, or at least have lots of overlap. For instance, the warrior is purportedly a close combat fighter, but then it appears that he can just whip out a bow and be seemingly as good as a ranger is at any point (see 12:40 in this vid). Another good example is the necro, which can summon a minion out of thin air to help them. Can you say ranger pet? Sure, it probably doesn't have the advanced control, but the elements are the same. If the pet dies, you have to revive it. If the minion dies, you suffer a similar time penalty in resummoning it (see 2:05 in this vid & 3:46 here).
• The "down state", with the exception of the necromancer (who can run around when "downed"), seems to be nothing more than button-mashing skill spamming in order to kill something to get back up ASAP (see 7:05 here).
• While it's a relatively minor point, as I think GW2 looks very good from what I've seen, they develop on older hardware. This isn't inherently bad--I really admire an effort to make the game run well on older systems--I think that some is lost on the potential for more affluent customers to make use of newer technology, e.g. newer versions of DirextX. Yes, the game should run acceptably on older hardware, but that's no reason to not let it take advantage of newer, better hardware/software (source: 8:32-9:21 here).
• What if I want to play a particular dynamic event in a chain, e.g. preventing the centaurs from reinforcing a town they've taken over, but players on the server continually win the previous event in the chain (protecting the town in the first place)? Seems like there's the potential to experience a LOT less dynamic events than are in the game simply because the chain doesn't get further than a certain point or always branches a certain way because players always complete a certain dynamic event. (source)
• Potions? Potions. Potions! Why, why, why?! They were a nuisance in Diablo and they rear their ugly head again in GW2. The only good thing about potions in GW2 is there are none for health. GW1 is already extremely con-heavy (though this has other implications because GW1 has heroes/henchmen), and unfortunately GW2 appears to be heading down this route as well. My biggest problem with potions? An individual has to pay the price for something that will ultimately benefit the entire team. This will probably make people less likely to use potions as the team grows in size. Why do I say this? Take, for example, FoWSCs in GW1. While they might not have an exact analog in GW2, one important aspect remains the same. You are usually playing with at least one other person you may have never met before, possibly in a critical position (T1 or T2 are the most critical, but MT is fairly critical too). The less you know these people, the less likely you are to use individual cons (e.g. a cupcake on T2 when running through the ToS area), because the chance of failing in a PUG is greater than in a team you know well and know are experienced and reliable. Cupcakes are not terrifically expensive, but they're also not cheap either (typically ~500-550g). If you use a cupcake as T2, and T1 fails, chances are the whole run will fail and you would then be out ~525g in addition to what you already paid for cons (typically 1k). And, if you don't use the cupcake, the chance that you fail is also greater, further increasing the chance that the whole group fails. So, if Anet's goal is to make us want to play with random other players, or at the very least never be upset when random other players join in, they seem to be going in the wrong direction. LOL not only are potions gone from the game, they've gotten rid of energy entirely?! So, now what, we just spam our whole bar all the time? Doesn't sound like an improvement to me, but they haven't really given enough details yet to be sure.

The Ugly

• This game borrows, rips-off, steals, however you want to put it, far too many things from WoW that it would be much better off without. They are:

1. Nothing on the compass. No enemies. No allies, save for your pet. Just you, and the background map with a few dynamic markers (see any of the previous vids). I wouldn't mind it so much, except (and correct me if I'm wrong here) there's the potential in PvE for another player to aggro other mobs into you from behind. Even if that's not possible (aggro is locked onto the other player), they could just stand next to you and get hit by an AoE attack that would then hurt you too. In PvE, players should have a fair warning of this. This is an improvement on GW how, exactly?
2. Because of this, they have no way to graphically indicate how far out of range, or in range, a enemy/ally is in relation to attacks, skills, spells, etc. To find out if something is in range, you have to look at your skill bar, and the color of the number under the skill will change depending on if you're in ranger or not (seen in numerous vids). Yet, one of their goals is to make the combat "very visual" (see 3:32 in this), which I think includes not staring at numbers on the bottom of the screen. Skills used outside of range will still go on recharge, to the user's detriment.
3. Completely manual movement. Unlike in GW, where you would automatically move into range, now all control of your character is manual. This potentially penalizes melee fighting styles more than ranged.
4. The notion that bigger = better, largely to the game's detriment. I am, of course, speaking about boss size. Have you seen the size of "The Shatterer"? This attendee spent the majority of the fight (jump to 3:50 in the vid) staring at the ground and basically the feet of the dragon, not seeing much else. You have to look at somewhat of a down angle to place your AoE templates, and the larger the boss, the more you will not see of it. To add insult to injury, this is only a "mid-level" (referring to size) creature in the game (see 12:12 here). This might be alleviated somewhat with the large bosses, like the Shatterer, which appear to be designed to be destroyed from gun or siege emplacements and ranged fighters. The melee fighters are then, at least in theory, more used to defend these ranged fighters from the mobs spawned by the larger boss. Ultimately, only experience playing these events will tell for sure.
5. Bigger = better, but this time with health bars. Bosses with high health aren't a challenge, they're a grind. While some people (WoW players?) may have fun hacking away at a boss for the better part of a half hour, it ultimately seems more like a test of endurance than a test of skill. It's the math teacher that assigns 30 of the same style of math problem as opposed to the one who can figure out whether or not you know what you're doing with only three, or even one. Dhuum is really the only boss in GW like this, and I don't find him fun or challenging. Give me Kanaxi, Mallyx, or Shiro over Dhuum any day. They don't take grind; instead, they take a talented, well executed approach to dispatch.
6. Mining resources (source) is a pretty blatant borrow from WoW. Why is this needed? Like many things in WoW, it wasn't fun, challenging, or a good idea in general. The closest analog in GW was the hidden treasures, but these gave you only gold (not a special resource as they do in GW2), and thus could be ignored without issues.
7. Fear. My complaints about fear are two-fold. One, you lose control of your character. Yes, knockdowns do this too, but that doesn't mean we need another, and that brings me to my second point--unlike knockdowns, they force you to run away. In GW1, this wouldn't be a big deal, but because you can run off of cliffs in GW2, this is HUGE. In PvE, this may be manageable, but in PvP, this will be a disaster. Why? If you've watched the PvP gameplay, you know there is fall damage if you run off a ledge, cliff, clocktower, etc. This can be greatly abused by players, and there are only two ways to fix it. One would be to remove fear from PvP completely (good), but that seems unlikely. More likely, AreanaNet will either have to go through the painstaking trouble of designing every single map to prevent abuse of the fear mechanic (unlikely, and bad--I think it would be cool to have fights near cliffs, if there was no fear), or more likely, if GW1 is any barometer of success, just leave broken maps in the rotation that can be heavily abused by a team built to exploit it.

I love Guild Wars. I've accumulated more play hours on my account than I will publicly admit. And it's my sincere hope that I won't be able to gripe about any of this when the game is finally released. But, unless some of these problems, particularly the ugly, are addressed between now and the game's release, I won't purchase it. If I wanted to play WoW, I'd already be playing it. They've certainly made some major improvements, but I feel like it's one step forward, and two steps back. I think that currently the pros outweigh the cons, but I would still like to see at least some of these problems addressed. Also, it's possible that when I finally get my hands on the game, they are less of problem than I currently imagine, but the only way to know for sure is to at least get the first campaign. Will I continue to play it as long as I've played GW1 through (or more)? That's the real question.

Thoughts, comments, or other things you see that you do or don't like? --Seventh 09:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Can't believe this was deleted on GW2Guru. This is a good post, voices a lot of my concerns as well. You still missed a few of 'the Ugly', though ;). --Naoroji 10:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

What else do you think is missing? List them down here and I'll add them to the list if I agree (and chances are, I will). --Seventh 10:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Is it possible to toggle the compass content? Other than that, I fully agree. - Infinite - talk 12:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Sadly, it isn't possible to toggle compass content. It's just empty all the time :(. --84.26.78.183 18:44, 2 October 2010 (UTC) (I iz Nao; cbb to log in)

I agree with a lot of what you've said, though some things strike a chord. I personally don't care too much about dots on the radar. Anet said that they took them out because they felt that too many people spent the game staring at it, instead of the world. And it's true. No one can claim that they haven't tried to skirt a group by carefully skimming around those red dots. I think they want us looking at the game world a bit more. Also, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with borrowing from other games. I personally very much enjoy resource collection and crafting in WoW, and am glad to see that it will be included in GW2. They've even improved on the system by removing player competition for nodes. You know, they are trying to appeal to a wide range of player tastes here. Different people like different things. If you like huge bosses, go chip away at the shatterer. If you like collecting resources, do that junk. --Emelend 14:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I know they don't want people staring at the compass, but still, I don't think removing all enemies from it is the solution. Removing them creates more problems, as now to see if you're in range for a skill you have to stare at numbers on the bottom of a screen, which seems even worse. If characters still automatically moved into range when using a skill, I could see it working. Even then, I still think it'd be beneficial to have enemies on your compass, so you don't have to constantly check behind you. All you'd really have to do to keep people from staring at it is have variable aggro (different instances of the same monster can have different aggro ranges), which makes players less inclined to stare at it to avoid aggroing more people, but still able to take a quick look to see what's behind them. As for resource collection, it depends a lot on how important the resources are. If you need them to upgrade, craft, or trade for new and better equipment, I just see it as more of a time sink. I'd rather be doing something fun than doing nothing while boringly gathering node resources. The problem wasn't the competition from other players, it's the sheer monotony of gathering resources from nodes to begin with. And in trying to appeal to "a wide range of players" (i.e. WoW players), it seems they've alienated a large portion of their original fan base. --Seventh 20:52, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd have to say that I completely agree, though I would add on with the generic stats (intel, strength, ect)and the lack of auto attack. This isn't necessarily bad, but will make playing physical classes quite annoying. The lack of auto attack will make huge bosses especially annoying.. I would also add simplified skill system, but it's somewhat understandable from a game balancing standpoint Reez 13:07, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

@Seventh: I totally agree about not automatically moving into range to use a skill. I have a few theories on why they did it, but I can't be sure. For example, perhaps they didn't want you accidentally walking off a cliff or something because you thought you had another foe targeted. I do know though that there are many skills that now incorporate move into it, making you leap at your target for example. Back to the minimap--I hadn't even considered that you won't be able to see what is behind you now. That adds a whole new level to PvP. You can actually sneak up on people now. Hmm. I only wonder if Rangers (Tracking) will become important parts of structured PvP because of that. Crafting. It's never really required in any MMO, because of the very fact that it is boring. I'm sure craftable items will be tradeable amongst players anyways, so it's no big deal really. I really don't think many people are alienated. You're still going to play otherwise you wouldn't be so concerned, right?

@Reez: I don't know. I was never a huge fan of wanding. You can right click any skill in GW2 to make it your Auto Skill anyways, which is basically the same thing. --Emelend 21:23, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess accidentally walking off a cliff would be annoying, but I also think you'd see it coming and stop your char from automatically walking over it. Maybe shadow stepping skills will help, but I'm sure they too will have a maximum range. Sneaking up behind will be interesting, no doubt, but I'm not sure I'll enjoy it :|. As for crafting, I sure hope the stuff you craft isn't customized to you, so you can trade for the crafted item (or at least for the materials to make it). I suppose that would at least let you avoid having to farm resource nodes. Lastly, I probably won't play it, if it's as close to WoW as I suspect, but only when I get a chance to play a beta/trial will I know for sure. --Seventh 23:49, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

i think the weaps are going to be imba because with said weapons comes new skills.... i just dont see how thats going to work or how building your own bar is going to play out either.--- Zesbeer 23:48, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

As a person who played as a ranger in the PAX demo that number 3 is totally wrong. Nearly all of the bow attacks require manual movement or more input than just clicking away at your skillbar. It seems to require just as much manual input as a warrior, if not more. However, 4 and 5 are dead right. For all the hype about the Shatterer, it was an incredibly boring and repetitive boss battle. Because the health bar of bosses scales in regard to the number of players attacking them, in a huge battle like the one against the Shatterer you cannot see that you as an individual are making any progress towards killing the boss. I spent the last 20 minutes of my demo repetitively hacking away at one of the Shatterer's legs, and all the while I saw little to no change in the Shatterer's health bar whenever I attacked. It felt as though I was chipping away at a stone wall for 20 minutes. Compounding the issue is that the Shatterer simply is a terrible boss - he's a regular enemy with a ridiculous health bar, save for one special attack wherein he traps players in crystals and drains them of their health to heal himself. The basic strategy is to just hack away at his legs for as long as it takes to kill him, taking fifteen seconds periodically to rescue other players from crystals. Varve 00:35, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

when i played the demo and fought him he died in like 5 mins maybe that im just pro or i dono but it was rather quick.--- Zesbeer 01:55, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen a few ranger vids now, including some from Pax East 2011, and they do move around a lot, usually out of necessity as melee is suicide with a bow out. However, this was solo play, and I imagine will change quite a bit when other people and professions are involved. --Seventh 21:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The Unknown

I'm adding this because there's a few things that are still too early to classify in the above section.

• What about builds in GW2? Will it have things for PvE as crazy as 55 monks, 600 smite, 330 rit, 105 derv, visage/famine, perma sins, imbagon, cryway, etc? Will it have crazy PvP things like EoE bomb, <insert prof here> ball, IWAY, etc? Of course, I don't expect it to have quite the variety that GW1 has at launch, as it will surely have less skills than 3 campaigns + 1 expansion do, but how extreme are the combinations with respect to builds? Yes, I know that, for example, you can put down fire shield (or whatever it's called) and fire arrows through it that then become fire arrows that light things on fire. This is not the same type of thing as 55 monks though, for instance. I want crazy things like GW1 has! We will need to see more classes, and all the skills each has, and weapon skills before we can judge this.
• Servers in GW2 will be segregated by region. However, it's unclear to what extent, probably even to ArenaNet themselves, at this point. Can characters move between servers at will for free? How large are the regions? Are our character slots per-server or per-account?

Let me know your thoughts. --Seventh 21:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

• "Will it have things for PvE as crazy as 55 monks, 600 smite, 330 rit, 105 derv, visage/famine, perma sins, imbagon, cryway, etc? Will it have crazy PvP things like EoE bomb, <insert prof here> ball, IWAY, etc?" Analyzing all skills and traits currently revealed; No. There won't be extremely potent tanks/farm/godmode/rupt builds. As far as the game currently reaches, there's no tanking, no godmode (save Necromancer, which is being reworked) and no rupts. There will be farming/camping, but not like the SF farms in GW1. The crazy overpowered stuff GW1 had seems to be removed from GW2 completely. In GW2, godmode appears to be impossible to obtain and the closest you can get to any godmode appears to be "having mad skills".
• Servers can be freely moved between, with some restrictions shortly after a move. This has been done to disallow WvWvW exploiting and other server-swapping exploits. Character slots are therefore likely collected on one account and not per server. You (probably) simply log onto a selected (or client-memorized) server. - Infinite - talk 01:57, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

There may end up being particular combinations of weapons/weapon skills, so for instance bring dagger/dagger and pistol/pistol may eventually be seen somewhat like a particularly good build; I doubt it will be anything as potent as some of GW1's tho. Zolann The Irreverent 03:03, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, I'm just thinking that the skills that have been released so far are only a small portion of the total, and the ones that are known could possibly change substantially between now and release. As far as "godmode" in GW1, nothing was completely immune, at least in all areas--things like Soulrending Shriek and touch necros come to mind. I just feel that those who come up with a very inventive build, 600 smite and the extremely short lived but extremely overpowered "infinite" AoE DPS Shadow Walk necro are the two best examples I can think of, should be able to use it to their advantage. Of course if it's too overpowered, like the infinite DPS necro, it needs to be brought back in line. The 600/smite nerf though seems a little ridiculous though, given the state of perma sins in SCs. Anyway, I just liked the variety of crazy stuff that other people, as well as myself, can come up with. Better builds should let you progress through the game faster, just like better play should.
• Where is your source for moving between servers? Everything I've heard from Anet is deliberately vague on the issue, even to how the servers will be divided. Is all of US going to be on one "server" or "region" as it were? See: Will players be region locked on servers or can US players join EU server. --Seventh 22:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Server. - Infinite - talk 08:38, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Hrm, I'm not sure the wiki page is right on this. If you read the Q&A, it says "...we need to allow players to transfer servers during a WvW matchup. However, since it would not be fair to allow people from other worlds to influence the balance of the battle by constantly moving between servers, we will impose some restrictions for a short amount of time on players who switch servers." It says nothing about players transferring to different servers outside of WvW, or if the change is permanent. For all we know it could just temporally ally you with players on another server for the purposes of WvW. --Seventh 15:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I can see where you are coming from, but I believe the keywords are "short amount of time". This indicates anything but permanent. What they (very likely) mean is countering the exploiting of the WvWvW system by continously swapping servers and thus affecting the outcome by a bigger margin to claim rewards players should not be rewarded with. - Infinite - talk 18:24, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, the "short amount of time" was referring to the restrictions, not how long the server transfer would last. And yes, it makes sense that there would be such restrictions, I just wonder if you can switch outside of WvW (i.e. which PvE server you are on), and how permanent the switch is. --Seventh 10:42, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

If anything, I am sure we will receive accurate information regarding servers as I asked them and got the typical "We're not ready to explain yet." answer. Let's hope it's soon! :) - Infinite - talk 13:23, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Move

I have moved your troll mesmer pic to user space I hope you're fine with that. --The Holy Dragons 21:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Hrm, I thought adding the tag did that. For some reason when I go to the "Upload File" page on the wiki, I don't get the radio buttons that my friend does on this same wiki. Thanks for moving it though! --Seventh 21:31, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually that seems to be a difference between the GW1 Wiki and the GW2 Wiki. --Seventh 06:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)