Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

What don't you like about GW2

124»

Comments

  • HomituHomitu Member UncommonPosts: 2,030

    Originally posted by Timok


    These are just my opinions and in no way will influence my decision to purchase this game when it’s released. I was just curious if I am alone on these points and what others thought, as all that’s ever talked about are the positives which are plentiful.


     


    No death penalty – I’ve always felt that some sort of death penalty should be present in these games as it greatly effects your playstyle and decision making. Otherwise you just get sloppy players carelessly running around with no worries about dying. This takes away some of the excitement for me. I understand the developers viewpoint about it and how they wish to not punish players I just don’t agree with it.


     


    No pvp servers – I would much prefer to play on a pvp ruleset server as it really adds excitement to my playtime knowing that I can be attacked at anytime while playing rather than a somewhat stale pve server with really no risk or worries of death with no penalties. I’m more of a pvp player though while using pve as a means to get to endgame.


     


    Skills – I may be misunderstanding this but I’m not sold on having your first 5 weapon skills predetermined for you by the type of weapon you are wielding. I would prefer the GW system of being able to mix and match from a pool of available skills to suite my playstyle.


     


    Titles – I guess I have never understood the drive for titles or housing with no real benefit in game other that running around with some words above your head that everyone around you also has. Maybe if it was implemented so that a certain title may give you a slight boost in certain areas like in GW or once someone has achieved the title the first time it is locked and sticks with that character. Then I could see the benefit of displaying that title.

    How about housing that is actually useful as in UO where you could have merchants in it selling your wares rather that just having a place to sit around in and waste time while you could be out adventuring, to each there own I guess.

    Death Penalty - 

    I agree that having some sort of penalty for death is a postive thing.  it serves to create a more visceral experience, bridging the gap between fantasy and reality.  Dying in a game should induce an emotional response.  However, i feel that too harsh of a death penalty severely discourages adventure and exploration.  You should be encouraged to explore the nooks and crannies of every zone and environment, not scared away from those dark caves for fear of the baddies that reside within.  There needs to be a balance.  Exploration, aside from enjoyment of pure aesthetics, loses its luster if there's no danger involved, but becomes daunting, frustrating, or downright impossible if there is too much danger and potential consequence involved.  

    Skills -

    I eagerly await more detailed information on character progression in GW2.  I think they have the right number of relevant spells in mind (10ish), it just depends on how they are implemented and how engaging the character skill development process is.  To me, progression and character improvement is the driving force behind RPGs both online and offline.  

    Titles -

    I think it is a postive thing for an MMO to have a strong mix of rewards that actively or passively improve your characters' performance, whether in combat or out, and also vanity rewards that serve as nothing more than a token of prestige.  Much of the appeal MMOs have on players is derived from the fact that they can become renowned heros in their world, not just in terms of the game's lore, but also in a very real sense among other players on their server in their little 5,000 player socieity.   A title or rare mount that is awarded from performing some of the game's most difficult feats of strength can generate a greater sense of accomplishment than almost anything else in an MMO.  

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • sketchy_sketchy_ Member UncommonPosts: 137

    Originally posted by DanMcC

     And I hope the combat style will not be similar to Allods (your point of view [character and/or camera] must face the enemy while attacking them; I HATE THAT SO MUCH). Can someone confirm this for me?

     

    So you want to be able to shoot fireballs out of your ass?

    "If I had a d*ck, I'd go get laid. But we can do that next best thing... Let's kill people."

  • KingdouglasKingdouglas Member Posts: 81

    Originally posted by sketchy_

    Originally posted by DanMcC

     And I hope the combat style will not be similar to Allods (your point of view [character and/or camera] must face the enemy while attacking them; I HATE THAT SO MUCH). Can someone confirm this for me?

     

    So you want to be able to shoot fireballs out of your ass?


    ¿que?

  • KleirKleir Member UncommonPosts: 155

    Originally posted by Homitu

    Death Penalty - 

    I agree that having some sort of penalty for death is a postive thing.  it serves to create a more visceral experience, bridging the gap between fantasy and reality.  Dying in a game should induce an emotional response.  However, i feel that too harsh of a death penalty severely discourages adventure and exploration.  You should be encouraged to explore the nooks and crannies of every zone and environment, not scared away from those dark caves for fear of the baddies that reside within.  There needs to be a balance.  Exploration, aside from enjoyment of pure aesthetics, loses its luster if there's no danger involved, but becomes daunting, frustrating, or downright impossible if there is too much danger and potential consequence involved.  

    yeah... if this game was a "reality" you would die when you die...

    In this game there are two types of playing styles: solo and with a group.

    If you die with a group, they can ressurect you so that your team can move on.

    If you die solo you have to be teleported back to a shrine.  That should be punishment enough since you are taken away from your activity to a safe spawnable area.  Some good things about it is that you don't have to find your body and get lost, or have your body in an unreachable spot to then have to shrine ressurect and suffer an unreasonable amount of punishment.  

    So this would pursuade people to branch out and play with others, so that dying won't be so annoying.  Yet it isn't annoying enough to really punish those players who prefer to solo.

    Another thing I have experienced in the demo, was that in dynamic events people die a lot, all the time.  Other players can res them so that you guys can continue the fight without wiping.  

    Also, this game is not a holy trinity game, so no one can blame someone else for their death.  It was okay to have death penalties in games with a class specified in only keeping team mates alive, because they have failed and deserve a punishment.  In a game where people are responsible for themselves, and death occurs frequently, having a penalty would be unreasonable.

    Finally, there are many things eliminated in this game to improve its addicting factor.  This seems like a game where you could just run around and do anything and still have fun.  There is nothing to loose.  Everything is quick paced so it doesn't feel tedious.  They not only remove death penalties for "ethical" reasons, but it is an intentional technique to make the game seem like more fun without crossing the line of being a carebear game.

    "Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa

  • TrollaramaTrollarama Member Posts: 96

    I have to admit I was dissapointed by the inclusion of other races. I somehow feel it's a big dettachment to the original game(lore). The story has a lot of tragedy for humans and running around with Charr seems like a travesty to me.

  • MelogoreMelogore Member Posts: 58

    I Wish there was some kind of death penalty.  This will be the first MMO that has none.  I don't like the money style death penalty that WoW, Rift and others have I like the exp penalty like EQ had back in the day.  Though I wish the penalty to be not as harsh as EQ, that was truely brutal.  I feel being set back sorta encourages you to play more responsible.  Now not knowing how hazardous the world is I think there needs to be a balance striked.  There should be a little pain though in dieing.  I laugh though when I think back in the EQ days, I almost blacked out in panic once when I was about to die.  You had to be there, it was funny.

  • RednecksithRednecksith Member Posts: 1,238

    From what I've seen/read about so far, the only thing I don't like about it is that NCSoft is the publisher. I really hate that company.

  • KleirKleir Member UncommonPosts: 155

    Originally posted by Rednecksith

    From what I've seen/read about so far, the only thing I don't like about it is that NCSoft is the publisher. I really hate that company.

    ditto.

    I also wish GW2 faces had a little more expression.  All the humans look so blank, bland, lifeless and dull.  If Wow can do it, if even RS can do it, GW2 should be able to do it too :P

    "Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa

  • AblestronAblestron Member Posts: 333

    Originally posted by Kleir

    Originally posted by Rednecksith

    From what I've seen/read about so far, the only thing I don't like about it is that NCSoft is the publisher. I really hate that company.

    ditto.

    I also wish GW2 faces had a little more expression.  All the humans look so blank, bland, lifeless and dull.  If Wow can do it, if even RS can do it, GW2 should be able to do it too :P

    As long as NCsoft doesnt get in the way of developmet (which they hevent) Im ok with them being the publisher. 

    Also human expression is something we've seen hinted at in a screenshot depicting a facial expression from gw2 human week. This means they probubly are still working on it. 

  • KleirKleir Member UncommonPosts: 155

    Originally posted by Ablestron

    Originally posted by Kleir


    Originally posted by Rednecksith

    From what I've seen/read about so far, the only thing I don't like about it is that NCSoft is the publisher. I really hate that company.

    ditto.

    I also wish GW2 faces had a little more expression.  All the humans look so blank, bland, lifeless and dull.  If Wow can do it, if even RS can do it, GW2 should be able to do it too :P

    As long as NCsoft doesnt get in the way of developmet (which they hevent) Im ok with them being the publisher. 

    Also human expression is something we've seen hinted at in a screenshot depicting a facial expression from gw2 human week. This means they probubly are still working on it. 

    Like the warrior chick with the raised eyebrow?  I can only hope so.  When I played the demo it wasn't like that at all.  Its ok if expressions don't change during gameplay or while idle, but at least do something about the cutscenes.  You'll see a woman with a great sad or excited tone in her voice but her face would look so... "monotoned."  Having a distressed facial expression during the downed state would be nice too.

    "Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa

  • MuffpojkenMuffpojken Member Posts: 54

    I don't really like the running/walking animation, perhaps the jump animations aswell. Mostly on what I've seen so far on the human side. They all feel very glidy and twitchy if you catch my drift.

    Playing: ARMA 2
    Waiting for: Darkfall: UW
    Played: Ultima Online, Age of Conan, Anarchy Online, Planetside, Dark age of Camelot, EQII, WoW, SWG, FFXI and a lot more

  • KleirKleir Member UncommonPosts: 155

    Originally posted by Muffpojken

    I don't really like the running/walking animation, perhaps the jump animations aswell. Mostly on what I've seen so far on the human side. They all feel very glidy and twitchy if you catch my drift.

    Like when humans run forward then jump back when they stop?

    It is a bit awkward to look at, at first.  But realistically speaking its beacuase humans run so fast with their bodies leaning forward that they have to reasonably stop.  It is very glidy, I think thats to make it feel smooth and fluid, just another visual technique to make the game more addictive.  Twitchy, I would assume you mean the jerking sudden stops... yeah I would say you would get used to it.

    "Many have eyes, but few have seen." - Goddess Lyssa

  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 4,600

    the wait

     

    tho i think thats a good thing meaning hopefully the game wont come out  half assed and unfinished xD ......ahem erm like FF14

    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • unrealunreal Member Posts: 53

    the asura race

  • YauchyYauchy Member UncommonPosts: 298

    The fanbase.  Unfortunately in college for original GW and now the community building up for GW2s release have really killed me looking forward to the game(s). It's nothing against the substance of the game per-say, but the lack of descent non-lopsided analysis readily available vs. rampant fanboism, is disheartening to say the least (imho).

    And in the end most likely I'll buy the game on it's own merits &  in beta later, it will shine brighter than the glowing fervour on forums - but only time will tell for me...

  • fivorothfivoroth Member UncommonPosts: 3,916

    Originally posted by Kleir

    Originally posted by fivoroth


    Originally posted by Kleir

    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).

    As you said, you are not allowed to just put random skills together. This severely limits the combinations available in your build.

    You will also have less skills in GW2 compared to the original Prophecies campaign. I am not comparing GW Prophecies + Factions + Nightfall + GWEN to GW2. I am comparing the number of skills in Prophecies to the number of skills in GW2.

    They are reducing the freedom you have in order to reduce the bloat. I believe that the trait system and the cross profession combos, while they sound quite interesting, will not give you as many options.

    And there is no secondary professions!

    This is the way I see things at the moment. I have not played the game. I will definitely play GW2 as I have been a GW fan since 2005.

     


    Originally posted by Master10K

    Originally posted by fivoroth

    Originally posted by Kleir

     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.

    This is Guild Wars 2, not Build Wars 2.


    This was also the case in GW1. It was always about creatin the build that you like and that is the right match for you. GW1 also gives room for experimentation. There are hundreds of thousands of builds in that game. You can experiment as much as you like.


     


    This is the case in PvE. However, in competitive PvP there are always builds which are much more popular. This will not be much different in GW2. World PvP will be most likely be not be very dependant on the skill of the individual though. In casual PvP you can do pretty much whatever you want and you may be successful.


    Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • AblestronAblestron Member Posts: 333

    Originally posted by DanMcC

    Originally posted by Kingdouglas


    Originally posted by sketchy_


    Originally posted by DanMcC

     And I hope the combat style will not be similar to Allods (your point of view [character and/or camera] must face the enemy while attacking them; I HATE THAT SO MUCH). Can someone confirm this for me?

     

    So you want to be able to shoot fireballs out of your ass?


    ¿que?

    I don't know either.

    I think he's refering to how targeting works, and how often unless your facing a target in an mmo you cant use skills. (rift has this issue for instance, though its more used for stretegy with rogues who benefit from back stabing enemies) 

    I wouldnt know really, it wasnt important at all when I played the demo. I think its because you and enemies can dodge attacks if they want to that this becomes less important; also since you can attack with your skills while moving, and you have to line up melee attacks manualy. 

  • Garvon3Garvon3 Member CommonPosts: 2,898

    Originally posted by Meowhead

    Originally posted by Garvon3


    Originally posted by thedarkess

    I only wish that there would be less fast travel points. Its good to have them but not for every single area. Something like flight transort in Aion would be good. But this is a minor thing, everything looks great so far.

    I just don't understand why games build a beautiful world if they just let people warp wherever. Just add in horse routes. If I really HATE long travel times I can sit on ahorse for 10 minutes and grab a sandwhich.

    I assume you're one of those people who's a huge fan of 10 minute long unskippable cutscenes, and can't understand why other people complain when they're watching the same video for the 5th time? :)

    A cut scene is not interactive. An MMORPG game world is. Your observation is moot. Being able to teleport is pretty game breaking. I've seen it happen in so many MMOs, where teleporting is just the start of the end.

  • RameiArashiRameiArashi Member UncommonPosts: 294

    The title. When I first heard about Guild Wars 2 I hoped that was just  a place holder until they were ready to reveal the real title. it isn't, its actually the title.

     

    Charr player characters and the rewriting Tyrian history to make it appear that the humans stole the land from the charr so the charr were just taking it back.  Charr were supposed to be the villains in Propechies (not  our player characters), and they should have stayed that way or not been in GW2 at all. Given how many I personally killed the charr should be extinct by GW2 time. :)



    Still sticking with Tyria being the continent and the planet.   Was hoping they'd come up with a new name for the planet.  It really make no sense that humans who came  from Cantha named the newly discoverted continent the same name as the planet.

     

    WASD. Keyboard control is a step backwards not forward.

     

    image

  • grimm6thgrimm6th Member Posts: 973

    Originally posted by RameiArashi

    Charr player characters and the rewriting Tyrian history to make it appear that the humans stole the land from the charr so the charr were just taking it back.  Charr were supposed to be the villains in Propechies (not  our player characters), and they should have stayed that way or not been in GW2 at all. Given how many I personally killed the charr should be extinct by GW2 time. :)

     

     

    ...it was always that way.  if you don't like the fact there there are still charr, blame your inept genocidle rampages, you never killed any of their females.

    I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.

  • RameiArashiRameiArashi Member UncommonPosts: 294

    It wasn't always that way, they changed the lore to fit GW2.

     

    Shouldn't matter that I left any females alive if I didn't leave any males alive.

    image

  • AKASlaphappyAKASlaphappy Member UncommonPosts: 800

    Originally posted by RameiArashi

    It wasn't always that way, they changed the lore to fit GW2.

     

    Shouldn't matter that I left any females alive if I didn't leave any males alive.

     


    And how do you know the lore wasn’t always that way? Are you part of the lore design team at Anet and you know the complete history of the world they created? From reading the wiki and playing the game I do not see any proof that you are absolutely correct on this.


     


    Also as for the Charr being a playable race, if you played Eye of the North you got to see a different side of the Charr then you did in prophecies. It seems to me that Eye of the North, which is set later in the time line then prophecies, ties perfectly in with GW2. 

Sign In or Register to comment.