Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
The Top 5 Arguments Against Guild Wars 2
fiontar
Member UncommonPosts: 3,682
in Guild Wars 2
The Top 5 Arguments Against Guild Wars 2
I don’t like PvP!
There’s no raiding/PvE endgame!
There are no healers/tanks! I can’t play my favorite role!
The combat is too hard!
There’s no subscription! It’ll lose money, crash, burn and fail!
Great article over at ZAM discussing the five above mentioned arguements against GW2 and why they may not hold up under closer scrutiny. Definitely worth a read and further discussion.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Comments
mm, those aren't my top 5, but I guess you got to start somewhere.
Looking forward to beta next week!
Thanks for posting.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
They are my top five reasons for playing.
Funny how it works out that way!
The "cons" are actually "pros" for most people once they understand the details.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
That's a well-written and reasoned article. Thank you for posting.
"Loading screens" are not "instances".
Your personal efforts to troll any game will not, in fact, impact the success or failure of said game.
Oh you left out the biggest one. But Im not posting it. Im sure someone will soon as it pops up in every single GW2 thread like a plague of locusts.
There's no way Im posting it though. Ive seen it enough.
Same for me. That isn't to say that GW2 doesn't have any weaknesses, as it does in my eyes. But those 5 reasons are not it. In the interest of trolling, I will list my top 5 weaknesses of guild wars 2.
1. World PVP limited to WvWvW
2. No Death penalty (death should be scary)
3. No item decay/player looting (for strengthening the economy)
4. Can't see the names of enemy players/guilds in WvWvW (doesn't promote rivalries)
5. No FFA PVP: (A game called guild wars should focus more on Guilds rather than factions/servers)
That being said, I preordered and i believe that the game will be better than anything else on the market.
Are you a Pavlovian Fish Biscuit Addict? Get Help Now!
I will play no more MMORPGs until somethign good comes out!
Have to echo some of the posts and say thanks for posting it. I'm one of those on the fence and have to admit I'm leaning more and more to pre-purchasing this one. I'm not finding any drawbacks at this point.
A bit of misinformation there:
I think the author is mistaking traits for skills, my understanding is that utility skills can be swapped at anytime out of combat and weapon skills can be changed during combat by weapon swapping. Traits on the other hand need a trainer to reset them.
This is my favorite excerpt from the article:
The truth is that the game isn’t too hard, it’s that it requires a different approach compared to what we’re used to. Coming from playing a spell caster in almost every other MMO, I’m used to standing at a huge range and spamming spells until things die. This is usually fairly easy, as spells do incredible amounts of damage and creatures usually don’t get close enough to hit me. It’s an approach that’s been reinforced by every major MMO I’ve played, from Warcraft through to SWTOR with several others in-between.
And it doesn’t work in Guild Wars 2. Stand still and die. Learn to dodge and you have a good chance of surviving. Find out which weapon skills work best for you, and you’ll get somewhere. Being a glass cannon means that there’s no margin for error, but it’s compounded when you try to play the game with the same approach that you’ve used for your last five MMOs.
That's such an important point to make. Not only does it communicate how differently the game plays vs. other MMOs, but it serves as a caution to new players that they will need to adapt to a new way of playing. From what I've seen, the game eases you into this over at least the first dozen levels. There is a lot more room for error when you first get started and old strategies may still work early in the game. The transition period is very important. too short and people get frustrated before they are able to adapt; too long and people wonder "so, what is actually different about this game, so far I can play it just like WoW and do ok".
The transition period and the learning curve are two things I'll be evaluating closely during the first Weekend Beta Event.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Yah, I agree. Skills you can switch out in the field. You can even switch the actual traits. You only have to go to a trainer to re-allocate your trait points. Unless, of course, there is a mechanism for refunding skill points if you don't like a skill you've purchased. It's possible that might be what he's talking about. It would be the first I've heard of it and would be a nice feature to have.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Yeah I'm really intrigued by this, playing the charr starter area up to around lvl 6 didn't require much more than a traditional style MMO combat of standing around and spamming skills with a lttle kiting, I did die twice, both could have been avoided by dodging and more effective skill use. I'm hoping the combat will be just a little more punishing than it was on the demo so people do realise a little quicker that they need to adapt. From the outside looking in it looks a difficult balance to achieve.
I just had to do this
1) Thanks to WvW we get true world pvp, no more just going around ganking. Finaly true world pvp
2) There is a death penalty, if a minor one. Your armor does take damage and does "brake"
3) Item decay? Very few MMO's have items that just disapear, and even fewer have player looting.
4) Ya not sure about this one. I can kind of see both sides.
4) Well since guild can own keeps in WvW its has a lot going for guilds. Also the Name Guild Wars has to do with lure and nothing to do with having guilds in the game.
Interesting article, but I think only the first argument is really valid. Either you like the PvP or you don't.
As a second one I think that the lack of gear grind really will be the thing that turn off some people, more than a few MMO players only play for better gear.
I don't think many people actually would admit that combat is too hard... The author do explain why he doesn´t think the arguments hold any substance as well but his argumant for the first one is a little fishy, sure you can still PvE but you do miss half the game if you only do. It will be worth it to some but not for everyone.
Let's face it, no game is for everyone and it shouldn't be either. Some people here shouldn't buy GW2, it just ain't for them.
The only one I see a lot of is the lack of endgame thing, which his reasonings why it's not a problem were rather weak. You could easily make the same argument he used in regard to TOR ( alts: play through different class stories), and it still doesn't explain it away. Repeating stuff isn't a good argument against the top reason people bring that up.
In my experience on forums, the main factor these folks have is against the idea that dev made content supplies a good end-game, this is usually in regard to a want for sandboxy features at endgame, not Raiding as is the common area rebuttals assume. IE City building, community building, etc..Things that all themeparks lack and why they receive so much flak in regard to this subject.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
1. Not the game's fault, personal preference, I do wish you all the fun in the world in whatever PVE game you find enjoyable, though.
2. I think this has been discussed before.
3. Heaven forbid try and enjoy something new.
4. Yes! Let's make it easy! That's what makes a winner!
5. Just like GW1 has been losing money, crashing, burning and failing for... how many years?
Seriously don't understand why people even bother with these posts. Do they hope to convince those who already pre-purchased and plan to actually enjoy the game that it will "crash, burn and fail"?
I would have loved it if the end game gave us some true sand box opportunities, in PvE and PvP. A persistent contested war zone with political systems and real support for RP (Quest/story creation, housing cities etc) would be great, maybe not something we could count out if the demand was there further down the line?
GW lacked those features and the traditional theme park end game but it kept me enthralled for four years solid, I'm not worried about GW2 for now.
If these are your top reasons then you obviously didn't play Guild Wars.
That would rock
..
Personally I'm not worried either as a PVPer they basically have what I seek. What they lack is those support roles people loved about other older MMO's SB, SWG, UO, EVE etc..
Basically dedicated crafters and those who supply them, hunters, etc...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If anything points 1 and 2 could be the most arguementative for players. Other than that we are golden.
Grim Dawn, the next great action rpg!
http://www.grimdawn.com/
Not exactly, you do´'t scale down in TOR so either you need to make many alts (which will force you to repeat a lot of things many times) or do it when they stuff is so easy you get no challenge.
Adding some sand boxy endgame to the game with an expansion would be sweet though, a guildcity your guild build and design together and which could be used for Guild Vs guild in a massive scale would really be great and not that far fetched really (problem is having the towns in the open world, in that case you probably would have to only add the top cities in the game and have the rest instanced like the guildhalls in the first game).
I think many themeparks in the future will end some sandboxy elements, they tend to keep the players happy and busy for a long time without adding a huge mandatory grind like raiding usually turns into.
Oh you mean the cas.....damnit.
Other than that, I've actually heard the argument that the game is 'too easy' more than the game is 'too difficult'. It would've been nice for them to address these claims of it basically being button mashing, but I guess TotalBiscuit already did it to some extent.
I"ll bite too (everything in the first article i actually am playing for those reasons)
1. IF you're going to do something do it. The main game is PVE, PVP makes no sense in this game's world (honestly most game worlds the idea of open warfare everyone is a juvenile way to think of warring factions) so instead, take it to a zone where you can have a realistic mideval approach. There's a battlefield, you know that that war is expected and you can design the entire system around pvp as opposed to introducing a host of other problems such as balancing, ganking and grouping.
2. There is a death penalty, time. In reality time is the only death penalty in any game. You loose time, and time is money in real life and in the game. Having a monetary or xp penalty creates a grind system to recover from it. Instead of a grand amount of time, the time it takes to get that back, so eventually youre working for that system. Whereas with a short death penalty of time being the distance between you and the encounter, it is not as encumbersome to your game play. You still learn, you still feel the anger of loosing, but you dont have to waste an hour fixing it.
3. Items do decay, they break actually. I think one breaks. Player looting doesn't fit the mode of RPGing. But that's up there with pvp. IF we're all on the same side, why are you robbing your fellow comrades. That's court martial and a cigar in most countries.
4. I'd love to see the name of certain guilds. I remember when we had server versus server sieges in Runes of Magic, some guilds were just notorius, and they would be killed on site.
5. Obviously the story and design of the game doesnt make sense to have guilds fighting one another. You can make a case that WvWvW is the Siege War, but this feels like the name Guild Wars is a legacy thing, much akin to the name Final Fantasy (which was a reference to the 1st game thought to be the last game by the design house) . My thoughts is that this will be explained in the player story. The guilds going to war not with each other this time but the dragons. HEck maybe the dragons have guilds. Dragon guilds, nice.
Adding some sand boxy endgame to the game with an expansion would be sweet though, a guildcity your guild build and design together and which could be used for Guild Vs guild in a massive scale would really be great and not that far fetched really (problem is having the towns in the open world, in that case you probably would have to only add the top cities in the game and have the rest instanced like the guildhalls in the first game).
I think many themeparks in the future will end some sandboxy elements, they tend to keep the players happy and busy for a long time without adding a huge mandatory grind like raiding usually turns into.
Agreed and I think if they are clever about it and provide the right tools the cost to them may well be less than trying to continually churn out content on rails. If future content wasn't about increasing levels or horizontal progression we could have some much more interesting stuff.
You're right that my example with TOR isn't 100%. I'm more just looking at the reasons I'd want to replay DE's or Personal Stories: To see things I didn't the first time through. With personal story and DE's there may be less run over (especially in the former, what was it 30 play-throughs just to see all of the first tier per option?) ..; you're still going to get it at a point. It then essentially depends solely on how tolerable it is the next time through. I just feel that's not the best reason to look forward to, to continue playing an MMO. Especially when that problem is easily handled as you said above with sandbox features.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson