Everyone on your server is on your side / no seperate factions = No pvp servers / open world pvp, ever. V_V
PVP will always be with consent. Whether it is a duel, Guild versus Guild, battleground or *coughs* "world" pvp in the Mists.
This is the thing I dislike most and it really is a hype killer for me.
The only chance that I will ever purchase GW2 is if this Mists thingy will be truly amazing, in scope, size, longevity and pvp-gameplay fun.
I've been through it before in Lotro: awesome game which I really wanted to play for a long time, but after a few months the lack of player danger out in the open world made the whole game feel predictable, artificial and boring to me.
Both Lotro and GW2 are "safe world - single faction" formula's and as of yet I have no reason to believe that GW2 would entertain me for much longer than Lotro did.
now: GW2 (11 80s). Dark Souls 2. future: Mount&Blade 2 BannerLord. "Bro, do your even fractal?" Recommends: Guild Wars 2, Dark Souls, Mount&Blade: Warband, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning.
I don't like that it has 80 levels. Sure the level curve supposedly flattens out, but still it's going to take a lot of pve before you reach the level cap. I'd rather have a standard level curve with 20 or 30 levels. Did they pick 80 because it's approximately what WOW has or something? I'm sure I'll hate their gear grind too but if the 3 world RvR is awesome, I'll deal with it.
Well first i would like to say that i won't judge GW2 because it hasn't comed out yet. Secound i would like to say that i find it great that for a this game the way you uses your skills definds if you are gonna die, instead of your armor/gear.
What i hate about GW2? well, that must be that all the classes haven't comed out yet, in other words, the game hasn't comed out yet, but then agian.. I don't hate that, that just mean that they put effort into this game, and makes it more great then it already is.
So what i hate about Gw2? my answer is: Nothing, i think its perfect.. So far.
Everyone on your server is on your side / no seperate factions = No pvp servers / open world pvp, ever. V_V
PVP will always be with consent. Whether it is a duel, Guild versus Guild, battleground or *coughs* "world" pvp in the Mists.
This is the thing I dislike most and it really is a hype killer for me.
The only chance that I will ever purchase GW2 is if this Mists thingy will be truly amazing, in scope, size, longevity and pvp-gameplay fun.
I've been through it before in Lotro: awesome game which I really wanted to play for a long time, but after a few months the lack of player danger out in the open world made the whole game feel predictable, artificial and boring to me.
Both Lotro and GW2 are "safe world - single faction" formula's and as of yet I have no reason to believe that GW2 would entertain me for much longer than Lotro did.
The main PvP in GW1 and GW2 is guild Vs Guild and if you think there is no competition between the top guilds you really should think again. G vs G will be pretty intense, already GW1 can get ather competetive.
But it is true that there wont be any griefing/danger in the game, PvP will be instanced or in the mists so everyone will be ready for you. What probably will turn some people off even more is the fact that you more or less have equal gear to the rest so it will be all about your own skills.
GW1 & 2s PvP is more of a sport than games with open world PvP and everyone will not like that of course but since the game have no monthly fess you could just see it as a FPS styled game instead.
I think Gw2s PvP will be awesome in many ways, and LOTRO is nowhere near this but it wont make everyone happy. No game wll make everyone happy.
I don't like that it has 80 levels. Sure the level curve supposedly flattens out, but still it's going to take a lot of pve before you reach the level cap. I'd rather have a standard level curve with 20 or 30 levels. Did they pick 80 because it's approximately what WOW has or something? I'm sure I'll hate their gear grind too but if the 3 world RvR is awesome, I'll deal with it.
As far as I know we still don't know if we will need to level up in PvE to do high level WvW. We know that there will be no gear grind in the structured PvP or GvG as it is called sometimes. I don't think we know how gear will work in WvW. There is alot of confusion since these parts of the game seem far from finished.
I have read somewhere tho, that the decision to have 80 levels was basicly one of those "we decided to listen to the majority of players who like to have more levels".
I really don't understand why all of you people don't have problems with the normal things games do to punish you, like death penalties and drowning. The game will probably be just as challenging, if not more challenging, than other games, yet you insist on punishments? People complain about the game being unrealistic... because in a fantasy game of magic and plant-people we are definitly going for realistic... I think GW2 is just working on its addictive quality by eliminating some of the things that erk people. I definitly think GW is a great game, but I don't play anymore because of its unaddictive quality. Once you got a great game, great pricing, and unbearable addictiveness that GW2 seems to have, then I find that GW2 will be a perfect game.
"Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa
...and the skill system. I had an earlier thread on the build system with my concerns, so I understand your concerns. You are limited to 5 defined skills based on weapon sets, giving you the oppourtunity to have multiple combinations of 40 skills or so... but its the trait system that is really cool. You can use traits to add additional affects to weapon skills, so there is plenty of room for diversity. A group of fire eles wielding staves throwing fireballs can all throw them in different ways. The main point of this is so that people won't get harrassed by others on their builds. There is no room for people to have suckish builds and be limited by that. Yet there is so much room for people to have great builds with great trait combinations. Then there are weapon sets to give cross weapon skill combos. Then there are cross profession skill combos. People think that GW has more diversity and combos than GW2, but that is not true. Now you won't have to worry about needing help and only being around noobs, everybody can be useful! and experts can be epic!
"Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa
In other MMO's combat mainly consists of clicking the same skills in the same order over and over again, battle after battle. If Im going to be doing this for several hours, then Im probubly going to need some sort of punishment for slacking off. Death penalty is what MMO's have come to use for this.
Its allot like a boss coming to check up on your status at work, cause if your job is boring, you need a punishment to keep you from dozing off in the future.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, is GW2. The combat is made to be exciting and enthralling. The way you use your skills has to change with the flow of the battle, and you are encouraged to rez and help your friends using cross profession combos ect.... I played the demo for GW2 at PAX 5 times, and I have to say that the combat felt GREAT. I was constantly switching my build from dealing damage to supporting teammates.
So if I was enjoying combat so much, then why on earth would you go out of your way to punish me MORE if I died?
Would any good teacher display dissapointment to a child who they new tried their best and still got an F? Of course not!
Getting a lower grade is its own punishment just as Death is its own punishment, it was made for gw2 so that the game wouldnt be broken if players where able to rejoin the fray quickly. And it adds to the game because it doesnt take you out of the experience by making you talk to an npc or wait 5 bloody minuets before you can have FUN again.
If combat is enthralling, but the second you die your Punished further then players with less experience or arent good at the game yet will be turned away from the constant punishment. Or they will work tirelessly in order to be better at the game, but working defeats the purpose of a game to begin with.
Who cares if someone in an event slacks off, it doesnt cause everyone to wipe or the event to get harder, and it surtainly doesnt take away from your gaming experience in any way.
Single class system. After watching GW and seeing how the primary classes were "maintained" I am not confident that GW2 won't end up with broken classes.
Example... right now in GW only two or three primary classes actually work well after all the updates, the rest are only good depending on what secondary class you use with it. To me that is a completely broken system. If something should be "off" or "broken" it should be the secondaries, NOT the primary classes.
What I am afraid will happen in GW2 is that the Devs will have one or two classes they really care about, and the rest will get lip service, just like it is right now in GW. I have no interest in a MMO maintained in that fashion.
Everything else I would have issue with is irrelevant compared to the above.
I am the Player that wonders... "What the %#*& just happened?!" ............... "I Believe... There should be NO financial connection or portals between the Real World and the Virtual in MMOs. " __Ever Present Cockroach of the MMO Verses__ ...scurrying to and fro... .munching on bits of garbage... always under foot...
Single class system. After watching GW and seeing how the primary classes were "maintained" I am not confident that GW2 won't end up with broken classes.
Example... right now in GW only two or three primary classes actually work well after all the updates, the rest are only good depending on what secondary class you use with it. To me that is a completely broken system. If something should be "off" or "broken" it should be the secondaries, NOT the primary classes.
What I am afraid will happen in GW2 is that the Devs will have one or two classes they really care about, and the rest will get lip service, just like it is right now in GW. I have no interest in a MMO maintained in that fashion.
Everything else I would have issue with is irrelevant compared to the above.
They've already shown that they are fixing these issues, with removal of secondary professions and revamping each profession. Basically each class will be capable of damage, support, and controll but each profession will do these in different ways.
For example the warrior can use foot stomp to push enemies away, while the elementalist can freeze them with surtain water spells; both keep enemies off of players (controll) but do it in different ways. This ensures that each profession is just as capable as the next, but creates unique play syles for each.
The only part that I really do not like is that they are removing collision detection. I understand why they are doing it, because they want to eliminate any form of player griefing with the DEs. If you watch the PAX GW2 event panel 1-10 (the vidoes listed on the right side of the youtube page) they talk about why certain things were eliminated. So I can live with it, although I would of liked CD to have made it into GW2.
I find it funny how many people are QQing about no world PVP. Yeah that would make a lot of since for Anet to add that, first we will spend money having people go through ever DE and make sure no one can grief anyone. Then we are going to through all that money out the window and add in world PVP so DEs are grief central. Yeah sounds like a brilliant move to me, most of the game is made of DEs let’s make it so no one can do them because they are getting ganked constantly by level 80s. Sometimes the posts on this site makes me think people ate a lot of paint chips when they were younger.
People think that GW has more diversity and combos than GW2, but that is not true.
GW2 will have less skills. How do you know if GW2 will have more diversity? You've never played it and by the looks of it, you also never go into GW1 as well.
Now you won't have to worry about needing help and only being around noobs, everybody can be useful! and experts can be epic!
This doesn't even make sense. Do you mean that there won't be any useless builds? If so, I think there will always be predominant builds which are simply more powerful and get things done quicker. This was the case in GW1 and I am 99.999% confident that this will also be the case in GW2.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
GW2 will have less skills. How do you know if GW2 will have more diversity? You've never played it and by the looks of it, you also never go into GW1 as well.
This doesn't even make sense. Do you mean that there won't be any useless builds? If so, I think there will always be predominant builds which are simply more powerful and get things done quicker. This was the case in GW1 and I am 99.999% confident that this will also be the case in GW2.
Well, initially it will be a lot less skills, yes. Is that surprising to you? GW1 is 6 years old in 2 months.
But the fact that skills can interact with other skills do matter, it should make it possible to make certain combos and builds together with your friends and that is good news.
But yes, there will be useless builds, otherwise there wouldn't be good builds. The fun part in GW1 is thinking out a good build and find out it works as intended or even better. Of course sometimes they backfire but6 it is all part of the game.
What I like best about GW1 and what still is interesting in GW2 is that you can make a lot with a single class. It is true tjhat you can make less in GW2 but not so much because fewer skills initially but because you can't multiclass anymore.
I am sure GW2 will add skills with time just like the first game to broaden the selection. It might not ever be axactly as much as the first game since you get half your skills from your weapon in GW2 but it is still a lot more cusomization than most other games.
GW2 will just like GW1 have some builds that people notice, post on the net and many copy. Or similar builds people put together independant from eachother . But anything else is impossible, all skills can't be just as good, particularly together in a combo. If they would be I wouldn't like it at all.
Now you won't have to worry about needing help and only being around noobs, everybody can be useful! and experts can be epic!
This doesn't even make sense. Do you mean that there won't be any useless builds? If so, I think there will always be predominant builds which are simply more powerful and get things done quicker. This was the case in GW1 and I am 99.999% confident that this will also be the case in GW2.
Actually GW2 doesn't seem to be a game where if I don't use X build with Y profression, then I would be seriously gimping myself. No, it's more about creating a build that matches your own playstyle, not creating a build that some wiki site has deemed the most useful. So that will allow me and everyone else to experiment, throughout the progression of the game and slowly find that magic build that we each individually fall in love with. The fact that traits & elite skills will have to be earned by completely challenges in the world, helps cement the idea that you won't see everyone with predominantely powerful builds, especially in the World PvP.
Actually GW2 doesn't seem to be a game where if I don't use X build with Y profression, then I would be seriously gimping myself. No, it's more about creating a build that matches your own playstyle, not creating a build that some wiki site has deemed the most useful. So that will allow me and everyone else to experiment, throughout the progression of the game and slowly find that magic build that we each individually fall in love with. The fact that traits & elite skills will have to be earned by completely challenges in the world, helps cement the idea that you won't see everyone with predominantely powerful builds, especially in the World PvP.
This is Guild Wars 2, not Build Wars 2.
Now you are thinking like a PvE player. In PvE you can easily do that. If you however play high end Guild Vs Guild or Arena a few builds will dominate, that is just what will happen in any game.
In fact it happened IRL as well, there is a reason Romans had "classes" for gladiators with certain weapons and armors.
People think that GW has more diversity and combos than GW2, but that is not true.
GW2 will have less skills. How do you know if GW2 will have more diversity? You've never played it and by the looks of it, you also never go into GW1 as well.
Now you won't have to worry about needing help and only being around noobs, everybody can be useful! and experts can be epic!
This doesn't even make sense. Do you mean that there won't be any useless builds? If so, I think there will always be predominant builds which are simply more powerful and get things done quicker. This was the case in GW1 and I am 99.999% confident that this will also be the case in GW2.
Well thanks for avoiding to quote the entire reasoning that came before these two claims...
Yes GW2 will have less skill, but because of the trait system the same skill will come in many forms. If you account for all the different forms of each skill then there would be more skills in GW2 then in GW.
Not only will there be combos among a build, there are cross-weapon set combos, and cross profession combos, leaving people with a limitless amount of stagetic capabilities.
Yes there will not be any useless builds, you are not allowed to just put any random skills together, and every skill in the game is useful. In GW a warrior could bring magic or a caster could bring weapon skills. There was so much room for people bringing useless skills in GW due to all of the freedom. But now there is a structural limitation. In GW2 your build must have an elite skill, it must have a self heal, it must have weapon skills and utility skills. Some combinations of skills will be better than others (making the experts epic) but there will not be a useless combination (making the noobs useful).
"Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa
I just wanted to say that by limiting the skills the way they have for GW2, they've reduced the spread in effectiveness, which would then theoretically lead to a larger amount of viable builds. We won't know if they succeeded until we actually get to play the game, but there's no reason why that shouldn't work.
The number of viable builds in GW is definitely an extremely minute portion of available ways to build yourself, while everything in GW2 should be at least a tolerable build.
I mean, for every 1 great build in GW, there's about 10 okay builds, and several billion builds that are absolutely crap useless.
I just wanted to say that by limiting the skills the way they have for GW2, they've reduced the spread in effectiveness, which would can theoretically lead to a larger amount of viable builds. We won't know if they succeeded until we actually get to play the game, but there's no reason why that shouldn't work.
The number of viable builds in GW is definitely an extremely minute portion of available ways to build yourself, while everything in GW2 should be at least a tolerable build.
I mean, for every 1 great build in GW, there's about 10 okay builds, and several billion builds that are absolutely crap useless.
True dat, but I know I will somewhat miss the "deck building" (MTG reference) in GW1.
There are some things I feel reserved about - nothing that I dislike outright.
I loved the deck building when I first started playing, it was all new, and I got to goof around with my guild and try wacky builds and people in PvP with skill combos I came up with on my own.
pvxwiki kind of sucked some of the soul out of the fun of deck building.
It's still a cool idea, but it's also somewhat flawed in many ways, and I can see why they made the change. I think the benefits of the change outnumber the bad parts (and yes, there are downsides to the shift)... especially when doing dynamic events and you don't want to be stuck with somebody with a completely worthless, useless build. I mean, there will always be useless players, but no reason to compound it several times over.
edit: Many of the complaints, like the lack of FFA open world PvP, lack of death penalty and the new skills, I can understand WHY the changes were made. I think even if somebody disagrees with a change, it helps to look at it in context. There's a reason why these changes were made, in general, and they fit into a cohesive vision.
Comments
Everyone on your server is on your side / no seperate factions = No pvp servers / open world pvp, ever. V_V
PVP will always be with consent. Whether it is a duel, Guild versus Guild, battleground or *coughs* "world" pvp in the Mists.
This is the thing I dislike most and it really is a hype killer for me.
The only chance that I will ever purchase GW2 is if this Mists thingy will be truly amazing, in scope, size, longevity and pvp-gameplay fun.
I've been through it before in Lotro: awesome game which I really wanted to play for a long time, but after a few months the lack of player danger out in the open world made the whole game feel predictable, artificial and boring to me.
Both Lotro and GW2 are "safe world - single faction" formula's and as of yet I have no reason to believe that GW2 would entertain me for much longer than Lotro did.
My brand new bloggity blog.
no pk system =/
now: GW2 (11 80s).
Dark Souls 2.
future: Mount&Blade 2 BannerLord.
"Bro, do your even fractal?"
Recommends: Guild Wars 2, Dark Souls, Mount&Blade: Warband, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning.
I don't like that it has 80 levels. Sure the level curve supposedly flattens out, but still it's going to take a lot of pve before you reach the level cap. I'd rather have a standard level curve with 20 or 30 levels. Did they pick 80 because it's approximately what WOW has or something? I'm sure I'll hate their gear grind too but if the 3 world RvR is awesome, I'll deal with it.
DAOC Live (inactive): R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R6 Healer
The rabid fans and uncertainty of how good the post-launch service is going to be given NCSoft's terrible support of their other games.
I dont like the bend over running style. Its not natural and reminds me too much of asian mmos.
<span class="hps" title="Klik her for at f
Well first i would like to say that i won't judge GW2 because it hasn't comed out yet. Secound i would like to say that i find it great that for a this game the way you uses your skills definds if you are gonna die, instead of your armor/gear.
What i hate about GW2? well, that must be that all the classes haven't comed out yet, in other words, the game hasn't comed out yet, but then agian.. I don't hate that, that just mean that they put effort into this game, and makes it more great then it already is.
So what i hate about Gw2? my answer is: Nothing, i think its perfect.. So far.
Well the game looks perfect so far and i cant wait for it^^. The only thing i dislike(hate) is
the name: NCSOFT
The main PvP in GW1 and GW2 is guild Vs Guild and if you think there is no competition between the top guilds you really should think again. G vs G will be pretty intense, already GW1 can get ather competetive.
But it is true that there wont be any griefing/danger in the game, PvP will be instanced or in the mists so everyone will be ready for you. What probably will turn some people off even more is the fact that you more or less have equal gear to the rest so it will be all about your own skills.
GW1 & 2s PvP is more of a sport than games with open world PvP and everyone will not like that of course but since the game have no monthly fess you could just see it as a FPS styled game instead.
I think Gw2s PvP will be awesome in many ways, and LOTRO is nowhere near this but it wont make everyone happy. No game wll make everyone happy.
As far as I know we still don't know if we will need to level up in PvE to do high level WvW. We know that there will be no gear grind in the structured PvP or GvG as it is called sometimes. I don't think we know how gear will work in WvW. There is alot of confusion since these parts of the game seem far from finished.
I have read somewhere tho, that the decision to have 80 levels was basicly one of those "we decided to listen to the majority of players who like to have more levels".
you've got to be a troll...
"Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa
I really don't understand why all of you people don't have problems with the normal things games do to punish you, like death penalties and drowning. The game will probably be just as challenging, if not more challenging, than other games, yet you insist on punishments? People complain about the game being unrealistic... because in a fantasy game of magic and plant-people we are definitly going for realistic... I think GW2 is just working on its addictive quality by eliminating some of the things that erk people. I definitly think GW is a great game, but I don't play anymore because of its unaddictive quality. Once you got a great game, great pricing, and unbearable addictiveness that GW2 seems to have, then I find that GW2 will be a perfect game.
"Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa
...and the skill system. I had an earlier thread on the build system with my concerns, so I understand your concerns. You are limited to 5 defined skills based on weapon sets, giving you the oppourtunity to have multiple combinations of 40 skills or so... but its the trait system that is really cool. You can use traits to add additional affects to weapon skills, so there is plenty of room for diversity. A group of fire eles wielding staves throwing fireballs can all throw them in different ways. The main point of this is so that people won't get harrassed by others on their builds. There is no room for people to have suckish builds and be limited by that. Yet there is so much room for people to have great builds with great trait combinations. Then there are weapon sets to give cross weapon skill combos. Then there are cross profession skill combos. People think that GW has more diversity and combos than GW2, but that is not true. Now you won't have to worry about needing help and only being around noobs, everybody can be useful! and experts can be epic!
"Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa
My thoughts on those great death penalties.
In other MMO's combat mainly consists of clicking the same skills in the same order over and over again, battle after battle. If Im going to be doing this for several hours, then Im probubly going to need some sort of punishment for slacking off. Death penalty is what MMO's have come to use for this.
Its allot like a boss coming to check up on your status at work, cause if your job is boring, you need a punishment to keep you from dozing off in the future.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, is GW2. The combat is made to be exciting and enthralling. The way you use your skills has to change with the flow of the battle, and you are encouraged to rez and help your friends using cross profession combos ect.... I played the demo for GW2 at PAX 5 times, and I have to say that the combat felt GREAT. I was constantly switching my build from dealing damage to supporting teammates.
So if I was enjoying combat so much, then why on earth would you go out of your way to punish me MORE if I died?
Would any good teacher display dissapointment to a child who they new tried their best and still got an F? Of course not!
Getting a lower grade is its own punishment just as Death is its own punishment, it was made for gw2 so that the game wouldnt be broken if players where able to rejoin the fray quickly. And it adds to the game because it doesnt take you out of the experience by making you talk to an npc or wait 5 bloody minuets before you can have FUN again.
If combat is enthralling, but the second you die your Punished further then players with less experience or arent good at the game yet will be turned away from the constant punishment. Or they will work tirelessly in order to be better at the game, but working defeats the purpose of a game to begin with.
Who cares if someone in an event slacks off, it doesnt cause everyone to wipe or the event to get harder, and it surtainly doesnt take away from your gaming experience in any way.
"What don't you like about GW2?"
Single class system. After watching GW and seeing how the primary classes were "maintained" I am not confident that GW2 won't end up with broken classes.
Example... right now in GW only two or three primary classes actually work well after all the updates, the rest are only good depending on what secondary class you use with it. To me that is a completely broken system. If something should be "off" or "broken" it should be the secondaries, NOT the primary classes.
What I am afraid will happen in GW2 is that the Devs will have one or two classes they really care about, and the rest will get lip service, just like it is right now in GW. I have no interest in a MMO maintained in that fashion.
Everything else I would have issue with is irrelevant compared to the above.
I am the Player that wonders... "What the %#*& just happened?!"
...............
"I Believe... There should be NO financial connection or portals between the Real World and the Virtual in MMOs. "
__Ever Present Cockroach of the MMO Verses__
...scurrying to and fro... .munching on bits of garbage... always under foot...
They've already shown that they are fixing these issues, with removal of secondary professions and revamping each profession. Basically each class will be capable of damage, support, and controll but each profession will do these in different ways.
For example the warrior can use foot stomp to push enemies away, while the elementalist can freeze them with surtain water spells; both keep enemies off of players (controll) but do it in different ways. This ensures that each profession is just as capable as the next, but creates unique play syles for each.
The only part that I really do not like is that they are removing collision detection. I understand why they are doing it, because they want to eliminate any form of player griefing with the DEs. If you watch the PAX GW2 event panel 1-10 (the vidoes listed on the right side of the youtube page) they talk about why certain things were eliminated. So I can live with it, although I would of liked CD to have made it into GW2.
I find it funny how many people are QQing about no world PVP. Yeah that would make a lot of since for Anet to add that, first we will spend money having people go through ever DE and make sure no one can grief anyone. Then we are going to through all that money out the window and add in world PVP so DEs are grief central. Yeah sounds like a brilliant move to me, most of the game is made of DEs let’s make it so no one can do them because they are getting ganked constantly by level 80s. Sometimes the posts on this site makes me think people ate a lot of paint chips when they were younger.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Well, initially it will be a lot less skills, yes. Is that surprising to you? GW1 is 6 years old in 2 months.
But the fact that skills can interact with other skills do matter, it should make it possible to make certain combos and builds together with your friends and that is good news.
But yes, there will be useless builds, otherwise there wouldn't be good builds. The fun part in GW1 is thinking out a good build and find out it works as intended or even better. Of course sometimes they backfire but6 it is all part of the game.
What I like best about GW1 and what still is interesting in GW2 is that you can make a lot with a single class. It is true tjhat you can make less in GW2 but not so much because fewer skills initially but because you can't multiclass anymore.
I am sure GW2 will add skills with time just like the first game to broaden the selection. It might not ever be axactly as much as the first game since you get half your skills from your weapon in GW2 but it is still a lot more cusomization than most other games.
GW2 will just like GW1 have some builds that people notice, post on the net and many copy. Or similar builds people put together independant from eachother . But anything else is impossible, all skills can't be just as good, particularly together in a combo. If they would be I wouldn't like it at all.
Actually GW2 doesn't seem to be a game where if I don't use X build with Y profression, then I would be seriously gimping myself. No, it's more about creating a build that matches your own playstyle, not creating a build that some wiki site has deemed the most useful. So that will allow me and everyone else to experiment, throughout the progression of the game and slowly find that magic build that we each individually fall in love with. The fact that traits & elite skills will have to be earned by completely challenges in the world, helps cement the idea that you won't see everyone with predominantely powerful builds, especially in the World PvP.
This is Guild Wars 2, not Build Wars 2.
Now you are thinking like a PvE player. In PvE you can easily do that. If you however play high end Guild Vs Guild or Arena a few builds will dominate, that is just what will happen in any game.
In fact it happened IRL as well, there is a reason Romans had "classes" for gladiators with certain weapons and armors.
Well thanks for avoiding to quote the entire reasoning that came before these two claims...
Yes GW2 will have less skill, but because of the trait system the same skill will come in many forms. If you account for all the different forms of each skill then there would be more skills in GW2 then in GW.
Not only will there be combos among a build, there are cross-weapon set combos, and cross profession combos, leaving people with a limitless amount of stagetic capabilities.
Yes there will not be any useless builds, you are not allowed to just put any random skills together, and every skill in the game is useful. In GW a warrior could bring magic or a caster could bring weapon skills. There was so much room for people bringing useless skills in GW due to all of the freedom. But now there is a structural limitation. In GW2 your build must have an elite skill, it must have a self heal, it must have weapon skills and utility skills. Some combinations of skills will be better than others (making the experts epic) but there will not be a useless combination (making the noobs useful).
"Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa
I just wanted to say that by limiting the skills the way they have for GW2, they've reduced the spread in effectiveness, which would then theoretically lead to a larger amount of viable builds. We won't know if they succeeded until we actually get to play the game, but there's no reason why that shouldn't work.
The number of viable builds in GW is definitely an extremely minute portion of available ways to build yourself, while everything in GW2 should be at least a tolerable build.
I mean, for every 1 great build in GW, there's about 10 okay builds, and several billion builds that are absolutely crap useless.
If you dont' believe me, play with this for a bit. http://gw.gamependium.com/tools/builds/random
Tell me if you ever end up with an even okay build.
True dat, but I know I will somewhat miss the "deck building" (MTG reference) in GW1.
There are some things I feel reserved about - nothing that I dislike outright.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I can't stand american voice acting in fantasy games.
Always read the small print.
I loved the deck building when I first started playing, it was all new, and I got to goof around with my guild and try wacky builds and people in PvP with skill combos I came up with on my own.
pvxwiki kind of sucked some of the soul out of the fun of deck building.
It's still a cool idea, but it's also somewhat flawed in many ways, and I can see why they made the change. I think the benefits of the change outnumber the bad parts (and yes, there are downsides to the shift)... especially when doing dynamic events and you don't want to be stuck with somebody with a completely worthless, useless build. I mean, there will always be useless players, but no reason to compound it several times over.
edit: Many of the complaints, like the lack of FFA open world PvP, lack of death penalty and the new skills, I can understand WHY the changes were made. I think even if somebody disagrees with a change, it helps to look at it in context. There's a reason why these changes were made, in general, and they fit into a cohesive vision.