2. Characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress: a dynamic market.
(...)
The quoted definition has the word "continuous" and the change of quest phases in GW2 is discrete not continuous. So it isn't dynamic by that definition.
Your next task is to look up the meaning of the word "or".
Besides, when an event is active, it tends to be continually changing.
I could certainly see how a simple-minded individual who plays through GW2's PvE / leveling content one time, could feel like it was "dynamic" to some extent.
However, you really don't have to pull the curtain back too far to see that it's just a bunch of gimmicks with definitive triggers and timers.
I rolled a few alts in GW2 and found absolutely no variation in content during the leveling process. Each event had the same objective and outcome each time I came across them.
I'll definitely agree that ANet has taken quest design to the next level but you simply cannot continue to try to sell it as "dynamic" content.
Define Dynamic.
Well here is the part of the official definition from the GW2 site: "Dynamic events change and evolve in response to how you interact with them, leaving lasting effects in the game world."
continuing or enduring a long time; permanent; durable: a lastingfriendship.
noun
2.
a strong, durable, closely woven fabric for shoe uppers,coverings on buttons, etc.
3.
Archaic. the quality of surviving or continuing and maintainingstrength, effectiveness, etc.
---------------------------
I would say that most effects are not lasting given the definition by "lasting":
You guys probably expect mountains to move after a DE is over...well, I'm sorry too but that doesn't happen. But it doesn't take away the DYNAMISM of Dynamic Events.
The number of World Bosses wandering around, as well as encampments overrun with enemies attest to this "lasting appeal". Unlike in some other MMOs they won't magically despawn; they will stay around untill some players come along and retake the camp.
I'm just scratching my head with all these overblown expectations of the word "Dynamic"-- everytime a discussion about it pops up in this forum. Everytime.
2. Characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress: a dynamic market.
(...)
The quoted definition has the word "continuous" and the change of quest phases in GW2 is discrete not continuous. So it isn't dynamic by that definition.
Your next task is to look up the meaning of the word "or".
Besides, when an event is active, it tends to be continually changing.
Yeah, you are right it depends on whether or not the dictionary meant " continuous change, continuous activity, or continuous progress" or simply what you implied. Both meanings would be written as "Characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress" if I remember the rules correctly.
As for "Besides, when an event is active, it tends to be continually changing.". It changes discretely from one phase to another, see mathematical definition of the terms "discrete" and "continuous", it doesn't transform smoothly from one phase to another, it makes a jump.
In the end, I suppose it very much depends on which definition of "dynamic" and what aspect of the thing you claim to be "dynamic". One could correctly state that a quest asking you to kill 100 mobs has a strong dynamic aspect in the sense that it contains a lot of combat which is gameplay characterized by activity and thus dynamic gameplay.
You guys probably expect mountains to move after a DE is over...well, I'm sorry too but that doesn't happen. But it doesn't take away the DYNAMISM of Dynamic Events.
The number of World Bosses wandering around, as well as encampments overrun with enemies attest to this "lasting appeal". Unlike in some other MMOs they won't magically despawn; they will stay around untill some players come along and retake the camp.
I'm just scratching my head with all these overblown expectations of the word "Dynamic"-- everytime a discussion about it pops up in this forum. Everytime.
Yes, several effects are lasting and that's great because they live up to the given Arenanet definition of "Dynamic event". However, a lot reset in such way that people can farm them over and over again to get the same progress over and over again, which goes against the "lasting effect" aspect of their definition. So I would say, given Arenanet's definition there exists a significant amount of dynamic events such as those you mentioned, but there are a lot of events which are not dynamic as well. Arenanet tries to pass both as dynamic, when they really aren't given their own definition.
However, then again, it is nothing new that companies try to spin words in their favor and tell half-lies, so it simply puts Arenanet in the "neutral company" range in that aspect.
Yeah, you are right it depends on whether or not the dictionary meant " continuous change, continuous activity, or continuous progress" or simply what you implied. Both meanings would be written as "Characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress" if I remember the rules correctly.
As for "Besides, when an event is active, it tends to be continually changing.". It changes discretely from one phase to another, see mathematical definition of the terms "discrete" and "continuous", it doesn't transform smoothly from one phase to another, it makes a jump.
In the end, I suppose it very much depends on which definition of "dynamic" and what aspect of the thing you claim to be "dynamic". One could correctly state that a quest asking you to kill 100 mobs has a strong dynamic aspect in the sense that it contains a lot of combat which is gameplay characterized by activity and thus dynamic gameplay.
But then again, on the last point, let's take static and dynamic example of "kill n" quests. In a static system you'll go to a quest giver, get the quest to collect, say, ten livers from those pig-like creatures standing in the field right next to the quest giver (who obviously can't be bothered to get them himself). You go over to the boars, kill the ones you see, wait for them to respawn, eventually you get your ten livers and return to the quest giver. Make it 100, make it 1000... it's still static. You go to a set point, wait for respawns, and your kill or collection count only applies to you... someone else happening along that isn't on the quest may kill boars but they'll never see a liver or get credit towards the quest. You don't even have to finish it now... you can collect five livers, go to bed, and get the rest when you log in the next time.
In a dynamic example (I'll use a similar "kill n" style from the Norn area), at the end of a chain of events suddenly the village you're in begins to get overrun with bears. It doesn't matter if you took part in the events or not, if you're passing through, afk, whatever... here come the bears, and if you're there they'll attack you. You need to repel the bears, so start killing. Everyone participating is effected, and as more people join up the number of bears you need to repel increases as well. Finally, after enough are killed, the remaining bears actually turn around and run away, bring the event to a conclusion. This is an actively delivered "quest" where the content comes to you whether or not you're ready for it, and it required player interaction to bring it to a conclusion.
It's in the delivery. In a static system, you have to go find the content. In a dynamic system, the content finds you.
You guys probably expect mountains to move after a DE is over...well, I'm sorry too but that doesn't happen. But it doesn't take away the DYNAMISM of Dynamic Events.
The number of World Bosses wandering around, as well as encampments overrun with enemies attest to this "lasting appeal". Unlike in some other MMOs they won't magically despawn; they will stay around untill some players come along and retake the camp.
I'm just scratching my head with all these overblown expectations of the word "Dynamic"-- everytime a discussion about it pops up in this forum. Everytime.
Yes, several effects are lasting and that's great because they live up to the given Arenanet definition of "Dynamic event". However, a lot reset in such way that people can farm them over and over again to get the same progress over and over again, which goes against the "lasting effect" aspect of their definition. So I would say, given Arenanet's definition there exists a significant amount of dynamic events such as those you mentioned, but there are a lot of events which are not dynamic as well. Arenanet tries to pass both as dynamic, when they really aren't given their own definition.
However, then again, it is nothing new that companies try to spin words in their favor and tell half-lies, so it simply puts Arenanet in the "neutral company" range in that aspect.
As a side note to this... one thing ANet is doing is adding new events in all the zones continually, and while doing so reducing the recurrance of existing events. As time progresses the feeling of "recycled" events should continue to diminish.
Well here is the part of the official definition from the GW2 site: "Dynamic events change and evolve in response to how you interact with them, leaving lasting effects in the game world."
Most of them do exactly what they said they would do.
Lasting =/= permanent. In the GAME WORLD they can be quite lasting.
And its funny how many people try to change definition of "dynamic". Tell you what, apply your theory to science council, hey you never know, maybe you found out something completely new *whistle*
Simple display of "DYNAMIC" for those who have problem with words:
I could certainly see how a simple-minded individual who plays through GW2's PvE / leveling content one time, could feel like it was "dynamic" to some extent.
However, you really don't have to pull the curtain back too far to see that it's just a bunch of gimmicks with definitive triggers and timers.
I rolled a few alts in GW2 and found absolutely no variation in content during the leveling process. Each event had the same objective and outcome each time I came across them.
I'll definitely agree that ANet has taken quest design to the next level but you simply cannot continue to try to sell it as "dynamic" content.
Define Dynamic.
Well here is the part of the official definition from the GW2 site: "Dynamic events change and evolve in response to how you interact with them, leaving lasting effects in the game world."
The thing is there not really Dynamic. They are static. They dont "evolve". Take the egg one for example, when you complete stage one a script kicks in to start stage 2. Theres nothing dynamic about that. Just like rifts they happen multiple times NEVER chaning stages and happen in the same spot.
If they were "dynamic" then how come I could farm the Giant fish DE in the Fields of Ruin? If they were Dynamic it would happen ONCE then evolve. The centaur attacks would change, their strategys would chnage but they dont. There just prettier versions of Rifts and PQs.
but they are not static when they are active and that's the point.. yes they repeat and don't have as "lasting" consequences as I and many would like but the whole point is they are continuouslly in a state of change going from not even there to in motion to complete state to fail state. Rifts concept was fine but they are all the same no story no nothing so it gets stale after a couple zones.. sure many feel the same for GW2 but overall at least each DE has a story tied to it in some form and the majority do have multiple states dependent on whether they fail or not.. again i think so many played just during launch and just saw the oversaturation of the DEs and never saw the fail states on any of them but most have them and it generally leads to a differn't event
HAve you played Rift at all, Some of there events span across entire zones .. That encompass the entire zone from complete state to fail state and are in contiunuos change .. Go watch a dragon attack encampments across an entire zone while wave after wave of its minions swarm into camp and if you lose camp is gone until folks come and fight and defend to reclaim it..(which isnt event realted .. but if you want that camp you recaptire it.. outside of the events progress..Rift did DE first and better imo than GW2 ..
RIFTs zone invasions are very simplistic.
The mobs only have a few set targets they try to take over and the mobs use the roads.lol
Besides a zone can't be contested indefently If players havent manage to clear the zone, the zone returns to it's orginal state ony a few footholds remains so people can do their dailes.
Not talking about zone invasions , we are talking about Rifts Dyanamic World Events .. whcich zone invasions are not a part of.. Please follow along and know what you are talking about... And yes in the World events on Ember Isle and forward .. A failed World Event can leave camps acroos the zone in the hands of the enemy .. that will build on the Arch there and send out more mobs .. And each camp must be taken back individually..
The thing is there not really Dynamic. They are static. They dont "evolve". Take the egg one for example, when you complete stage one a script kicks in to start stage 2. Theres nothing dynamic about that. Just like rifts they happen multiple times NEVER chaning stages and happen in the same spot.
If they were "dynamic" then how come I could farm the Giant fish DE in the Fields of Ruin? If they were Dynamic it would happen ONCE then evolve. The centaur attacks would change, their strategys would chnage but they dont. There just prettier versions of Rifts and PQs.
but they are not static when they are active and that's the point.. yes they repeat and don't have as "lasting" consequences as I and many would like but the whole point is they are continuouslly in a state of change going from not even there to in motion to complete state to fail state. Rifts concept was fine but they are all the same no story no nothing so it gets stale after a couple zones.. sure many feel the same for GW2 but overall at least each DE has a story tied to it in some form and the majority do have multiple states dependent on whether they fail or not.. again i think so many played just during launch and just saw the oversaturation of the DEs and never saw the fail states on any of them but most have them and it generally leads to a differn't event
HAve you played Rift at all, Some of there events span across entire zones .. That encompass the entire zone from complete state to fail state and are in contiunuos change .. Go watch a dragon attack encampments across an entire zone while wave after wave of its minions swarm into camp and if you lose camp is gone until folks come and fight and defend to reclaim it..(which isnt event realted .. but if you want that camp you recaptire it.. outside of the events progress..Rift did DE first and better imo than GW2 ..
i played Rift for 9 months and enjoyed it very much.. but again every Rift is the same there is no story it spawns and thats it.. zone invasions same thing.. yes they can take over whole zones but it still is the exact same every single time a bunch of enemies spawn and do sweeps of the zone.. no story nothing.. guess it's just what you feel is important in quests.. i like the stories
There are stoires behind them and activley dialouged during the vent .. you douldnt of gotten very far or done any events from the first expansion ... or any Raid Rifts ..... you may want to read up or do a lil more research on Rifts events to date
Played Rift for over 1 year. The Rifts and zone invasions are timed by population and time of day. You can set your clock by them. Some of them made no sense in the lore of Rift and Rift's lore is very spotty, if you tink GW2's lore is bad, rift's is worse. It is a good game and I liked it, don't get me wrong, but the events in Rift are not chained like GW2's and that is a big difference. In GW2, if you win one DE, then it leads to another where it branches again. So it really all depends.
The events are chained , especially the World Events and particularly in both expansions .. so do some research .. Have you done any of the World Events in the New Lands from either expansion .. im gussing No ..
I played them from the first expansion and they were not chained there or Dynamic - please don't insult me. I was grinding Hammerknell with a guild when I decided to quit. THEY ARE NOT DYNAMIC - especially on Ember Isle. I don't have to do research I played there - I KNOW.
Hammerknell has nothin do with this as it is a closed raid instance..
Ember ISles World Events are every bit if not more Dynamic than GW2 in the loose way you fanbois want to describe dynamic event..
They chain events to players by failing or succeeding and actully some the events pit the players against each other in gathering resources or defeating mobs in a race to push the Event in your Factions favor.... Which will pit differnet World Boss mobs agaist each other...
Yet another person trying to pass his opinion off as a fact. What's backing up your argument? "Well I think they're really great, so they're the bestest ever!"
Its a simple PQ of warhammer, like i can guess 99% of the gw2 fans didnt even play warhammer and dont want the fact that they are very similar. Yes pqs started over and over on the same place with a special timer. The diffrence is that in gw2 they activate when some1 walks trough.... the steps of the de are similar to the steps of pqs and the rewards with gold and silver and bronze is even same:)
Originally posted by Vapors Its a simple PQ of warhammer, like i can guess 99% of the gw2 fans didnt even play warhammer and dont want the fact that they are very similar. Yes pqs started over and over on the same place with a special timer. The diffrence is that in gw2 they activate when some1 walks trough.... the steps of the de are similar to the steps of pqs and the rewards with gold and silver and bronze is even same:)
Some DEs trigger with or without players.
Currently playing: GW2 Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
I can't believe there's so much pointless discussion and so little gaming going on these days... I think people are a little obsessed with pointing out flaws and not enjoying things, but that's how the world works these days. All I know when I play the game is I have worlds more fun than I did just scrolling through quest text in WoW and doing one thing, then going back. Is it the biggest change in MMO history? Maybe not, but when a successful series like GW does it, people will take notice. Things are getting better, and more varied, that's what I'm happy about.
The thing is there not really Dynamic. They are static. They dont "evolve". Take the egg one for example, when you complete stage one a script kicks in to start stage 2. Theres nothing dynamic about that. Just like rifts they happen multiple times NEVER chaning stages and happen in the same spot.
If they were "dynamic" then how come I could farm the Giant fish DE in the Fields of Ruin? If they were Dynamic it would happen ONCE then evolve. The centaur attacks would change, their strategys would chnage but they dont. There just prettier versions of Rifts and PQs.
but they are not static when they are active and that's the point.. yes they repeat and don't have as "lasting" consequences as I and many would like but the whole point is they are continuouslly in a state of change going from not even there to in motion to complete state to fail state. Rifts concept was fine but they are all the same no story no nothing so it gets stale after a couple zones.. sure many feel the same for GW2 but overall at least each DE has a story tied to it in some form and the majority do have multiple states dependent on whether they fail or not.. again i think so many played just during launch and just saw the oversaturation of the DEs and never saw the fail states on any of them but most have them and it generally leads to a differn't event
HAve you played Rift at all, Some of there events span across entire zones .. That encompass the entire zone from complete state to fail state and are in contiunuos change .. Go watch a dragon attack encampments across an entire zone while wave after wave of its minions swarm into camp and if you lose camp is gone until folks come and fight and defend to reclaim it..(which isnt event realted .. but if you want that camp you recaptire it.. outside of the events progress..Rift did DE first and better imo than GW2 ..
i played Rift for 9 months and enjoyed it very much.. but again every Rift is the same there is no story it spawns and thats it.. zone invasions same thing.. yes they can take over whole zones but it still is the exact same every single time a bunch of enemies spawn and do sweeps of the zone.. no story nothing.. guess it's just what you feel is important in quests.. i like the stories
There are stoires behind them and activley dialouged during the vent .. you douldnt of gotten very far or done any events from the first expansion ... or any Raid Rifts ..... you may want to read up or do a lil more research on Rifts events to date
Played Rift for over 1 year. The Rifts and zone invasions are timed by population and time of day. You can set your clock by them. Some of them made no sense in the lore of Rift and Rift's lore is very spotty, if you tink GW2's lore is bad, rift's is worse. It is a good game and I liked it, don't get me wrong, but the events in Rift are not chained like GW2's and that is a big difference. In GW2, if you win one DE, then it leads to another where it branches again. So it really all depends.
The events are chained , especially the World Events and particularly in both expansions .. so do some research .. Have you done any of the World Events in the New Lands from either expansion .. im gussing No ..
I played them from the first expansion and they were not chained there or Dynamic - please don't insult me. I was grinding Hammerknell with a guild when I decided to quit. THEY ARE NOT DYNAMIC - especially on Ember Isle. I don't have to do research I played there - I KNOW.
Hammerknell has nothin do with this as it is a closed raid instance..
Ember ISles World Events are every bit if not more Dynamic than GW2 in the loose way you fanbois want to describe dynamic event..
They chain events to players by failing or succeeding and actully some the events pit the players against each other in gathering resources or defeating mobs in a race to push the Event in your Factions favor.... Which will pit differnet World Boss mobs agaist each other...
Sorry - Ember is not dynamic at all - it is static. The DE's in GW2 stay up until the foe is defeated and then another DE in the line is started. In Rift, if no one is there the boss goes away and it is just announced that is all - nothing else. They do no event chaining in Rift - sorry - and following a boss around to kill his minions is not chaining - it is one event. Rift is static - there is nothing dynamic about the events. The Bosses appear at the same time every day - how dynamic is that (they use an alarm clock to wake up is all).
Originally posted by Phry They may have more detail than Rifts dynamic events, but that doesnt really alter the fact that Rift created the concept. Maybe Arenanet took that idea and ran with it, but ultimately, it was Trion that brought about that revolution, if you can call it that. Whether it will catch on and evolve into something more in other games remains to be seen, i kind of hope it does.
Oh so it was Trion was it? Dear god...
I found the title amusing because i think it's the other way around; The dynamic events in GW2 has undergone an evolusion from earlier attempts such as those in Rift and WAR, the biggest change being that the Dynamic Events are the primary focus when questing (where Rift and WAR put them secondary to classic 'exclamation-mark' quests). So, they ARE evolutionary. They are NOT revolutionary, as they're almost completely the same as Public Events in WAR.
They happen at the same points over and over and over.. how on earth is that Dynamic?
You don't know what dynamic means.
Dynamic just means something in a state of flow.
It doesn't mean random, it doesn't mean unique.
Both are wrong really, maybe Cyclical or Recurrent Events.
how so just look u pthe definition of dynamic.. the one that fits the best would be
3. Characterized by continuous change or activity.
DEs in GW2 are in a continuous state of change and activity.. yes they repeat but aside from the dragons there not a set schedule, many are only even activited by players interacting with npcs. Don't see where is says "permanent" change = dynamic
They happen at the same points over and over and over.. how on earth is that Dynamic?
You don't know what dynamic means.
Dynamic just means something in a state of flow.
It doesn't mean random, it doesn't mean unique.
Both are wrong really, maybe Cyclical or Recurrent Events.
how so just look u pthe definition of dynamic.. the one that fits the best would be
3. Characterized by continuous change or activity.
DEs in GW2 are in a continuous state of change and activity.. yes they repeat but aside from the dragons there not a set schedule, many are only even activited by players interacting with npcs. Don't see where is says "permanent" change = dynamic
They happen at the same points over and over and over.. how on earth is that Dynamic?
You don't know what dynamic means.
Dynamic just means something in a state of flow.
It doesn't mean random, it doesn't mean unique.
Both are wrong really, maybe Cyclical or Recurrent Events.
how so just look u pthe definition of dynamic.. the one that fits the best would be
3. Characterized by continuous change or activity.
DEs in GW2 are in a continuous state of change and activity.. yes they repeat but aside from the dragons there not a set schedule, many are only even activited by players interacting with npcs. Don't see where is says "permanent" change = dynamic
People will still argue that it implies one thing instead of another.
True, I'd say DE's fit to the definition quite well though.
Oh, I agree on that. I think it's just that sandboxers can't get their head out of "the sand"box. so to speak. They want player driven content that is not feasible in a themepark system. The thing I don't understand is how some of them act like they were caught off guard by this.
The thing they should realize, is that by saying GW2 is great, it doesn't mean their sandbox is crap. It just means that GW2 is great.
It's a simple formula really
GW2 is great = GW2 is great.
GW2 isn't great = GW2 is great, but I don't want to let other sandboxers know that I would admit the truth.
EDIT: I'm just joking about the formula thing, don't take it personally or get offended.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
You know... dynamic... like they happen without scripting.
Sorry I just disagree, don't get me wrong GW2 Dynamic events can be entertaining, but they should be called "static" if anything. They lack much in the area of being Dynamic and even at their best, they don't pull off anything new.
It doesn't do much in terms of making any changes in how things work, unless you wish to push making them more 'level boosting' of sorts as revoluationary. They just offer so little to really make any 'revolutionary' change at all. To their credit though, making a dynamic event system that is truely dynamic would be quite a difficult task to do, at least to make it less obvious of it being scripted.
Pssssst. Ummm, I don't know if you're aware of this yet but GW2 is a THEMEPARK. Tell your friends.
EDIT: I don't want to sound too sarcastic though, english might be a second language for you and I have to be understanding for each person's individual circumstance, so please don't be offended if I say things that might seem rude in your native language.
I'll do my best to explain it and help you out.
Themeparks are games that are known for having "developer made content". That means, that if you are talking about a themepark, than you should be expecting scripted content because if they don't include scripted content, then it's not a themepark.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
You know... dynamic... like they happen without scripting.
Sorry I just disagree, don't get me wrong GW2 Dynamic events can be entertaining, but they should be called "static" if anything. They lack much in the area of being Dynamic and even at their best, they don't pull off anything new.
It doesn't do much in terms of making any changes in how things work, unless you wish to push making them more 'level boosting' of sorts as revoluationary. They just offer so little to really make any 'revolutionary' change at all. To their credit though, making a dynamic event system that is truely dynamic would be quite a difficult task to do, at least to make it less obvious of it being scripted.
Pssssst. Ummm, I don't know if you're aware of this yet but GW2 is a THEMEPARK. Tell your friends.
EDIT: I don't want to sound too sarcastic though, english might be a second language for you and I have to be understanding for each person's individual circumstance, so please don't be offended if I say things that might seem rude in your native language.
I'll do my best to explain it and help you out.
Themeparks are games that are known for having "developer made content". That means, that if you are talking about a themepark, than you should be expecting scripted content because if they don't include scripted content, then it's not a themepark.
Comments
Your next task is to look up the meaning of the word "or".
Besides, when an event is active, it tends to be continually changing.
Oderint, dum metuant.
You guys probably expect mountains to move after a DE is over...well, I'm sorry too but that doesn't happen. But it doesn't take away the DYNAMISM of Dynamic Events.
The number of World Bosses wandering around, as well as encampments overrun with enemies attest to this "lasting appeal". Unlike in some other MMOs they won't magically despawn; they will stay around untill some players come along and retake the camp.
I'm just scratching my head with all these overblown expectations of the word "Dynamic"-- everytime a discussion about it pops up in this forum. Everytime.
Yeah, you are right it depends on whether or not the dictionary meant " continuous change, continuous activity, or continuous progress" or simply what you implied. Both meanings would be written as "Characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress" if I remember the rules correctly.
As for "Besides, when an event is active, it tends to be continually changing.". It changes discretely from one phase to another, see mathematical definition of the terms "discrete" and "continuous", it doesn't transform smoothly from one phase to another, it makes a jump.
In the end, I suppose it very much depends on which definition of "dynamic" and what aspect of the thing you claim to be "dynamic". One could correctly state that a quest asking you to kill 100 mobs has a strong dynamic aspect in the sense that it contains a lot of combat which is gameplay characterized by activity and thus dynamic gameplay.
Yes, several effects are lasting and that's great because they live up to the given Arenanet definition of "Dynamic event". However, a lot reset in such way that people can farm them over and over again to get the same progress over and over again, which goes against the "lasting effect" aspect of their definition. So I would say, given Arenanet's definition there exists a significant amount of dynamic events such as those you mentioned, but there are a lot of events which are not dynamic as well. Arenanet tries to pass both as dynamic, when they really aren't given their own definition.
However, then again, it is nothing new that companies try to spin words in their favor and tell half-lies, so it simply puts Arenanet in the "neutral company" range in that aspect.
But then again, on the last point, let's take static and dynamic example of "kill n" quests. In a static system you'll go to a quest giver, get the quest to collect, say, ten livers from those pig-like creatures standing in the field right next to the quest giver (who obviously can't be bothered to get them himself). You go over to the boars, kill the ones you see, wait for them to respawn, eventually you get your ten livers and return to the quest giver. Make it 100, make it 1000... it's still static. You go to a set point, wait for respawns, and your kill or collection count only applies to you... someone else happening along that isn't on the quest may kill boars but they'll never see a liver or get credit towards the quest. You don't even have to finish it now... you can collect five livers, go to bed, and get the rest when you log in the next time.
In a dynamic example (I'll use a similar "kill n" style from the Norn area), at the end of a chain of events suddenly the village you're in begins to get overrun with bears. It doesn't matter if you took part in the events or not, if you're passing through, afk, whatever... here come the bears, and if you're there they'll attack you. You need to repel the bears, so start killing. Everyone participating is effected, and as more people join up the number of bears you need to repel increases as well. Finally, after enough are killed, the remaining bears actually turn around and run away, bring the event to a conclusion. This is an actively delivered "quest" where the content comes to you whether or not you're ready for it, and it required player interaction to bring it to a conclusion.
It's in the delivery. In a static system, you have to go find the content. In a dynamic system, the content finds you.
Oderint, dum metuant.
As a side note to this... one thing ANet is doing is adding new events in all the zones continually, and while doing so reducing the recurrance of existing events. As time progresses the feeling of "recycled" events should continue to diminish.
Oderint, dum metuant.
Most of them do exactly what they said they would do.
Lasting =/= permanent. In the GAME WORLD they can be quite lasting.
And its funny how many people try to change definition of "dynamic". Tell you what, apply your theory to science council, hey you never know, maybe you found out something completely new *whistle*
Simple display of "DYNAMIC" for those who have problem with words:
http://www.animations.physics.unsw.edu.au/mechanics/chapter4_simpleharmonicmotion.html
You like to play with words right then you should know there is a difference between lasting and permanently.
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
Not talking about zone invasions , we are talking about Rifts Dyanamic World Events .. whcich zone invasions are not a part of.. Please follow along and know what you are talking about... And yes in the World events on Ember Isle and forward .. A failed World Event can leave camps acroos the zone in the hands of the enemy .. that will build on the Arch there and send out more mobs .. And each camp must be taken back individually..
Hammerknell has nothin do with this as it is a closed raid instance..
Ember ISles World Events are every bit if not more Dynamic than GW2 in the loose way you fanbois want to describe dynamic event..
They chain events to players by failing or succeeding and actully some the events pit the players against each other in gathering resources or defeating mobs in a race to push the Event in your Factions favor.... Which will pit differnet World Boss mobs agaist each other...
Yet another person trying to pass his opinion off as a fact. What's backing up your argument? "Well I think they're really great, so they're the bestest ever!"
k
So this has turned into my dad is better than your dad arguments...GW2--RIFT.
Might aswell lock this thread now.
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
Some DEs trigger with or without players.
Currently playing: GW2
Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
Sorry - Ember is not dynamic at all - it is static. The DE's in GW2 stay up until the foe is defeated and then another DE in the line is started. In Rift, if no one is there the boss goes away and it is just announced that is all - nothing else. They do no event chaining in Rift - sorry - and following a boss around to kill his minions is not chaining - it is one event. Rift is static - there is nothing dynamic about the events. The Bosses appear at the same time every day - how dynamic is that (they use an alarm clock to wake up is all).
So revolutionary, you get bored of them in less than 3 months. Impressive. My game rocks yours sucks! /popcorn.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
Oh so it was Trion was it? Dear god...
I found the title amusing because i think it's the other way around; The dynamic events in GW2 has undergone an evolusion from earlier attempts such as those in Rift and WAR, the biggest change being that the Dynamic Events are the primary focus when questing (where Rift and WAR put them secondary to classic 'exclamation-mark' quests). So, they ARE evolutionary. They are NOT revolutionary, as they're almost completely the same as Public Events in WAR.
So yeah, it's the other way around.
The definition people are looking for is a developmental one.
http://www.techopedia.com/definition/27037/dynamic-content-gaming
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
People will still argue that it implies one thing instead of another.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Fixed it for you.
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
True, I'd say DE's fit to the definition quite well though.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Oh, I agree on that. I think it's just that sandboxers can't get their head out of "the sand"box. so to speak. They want player driven content that is not feasible in a themepark system. The thing I don't understand is how some of them act like they were caught off guard by this.
The thing they should realize, is that by saying GW2 is great, it doesn't mean their sandbox is crap. It just means that GW2 is great.
It's a simple formula really
GW2 is great = GW2 is great.
GW2 isn't great = GW2 is great, but I don't want to let other sandboxers know that I would admit the truth.
EDIT: I'm just joking about the formula thing, don't take it personally or get offended.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Pssssst. Ummm, I don't know if you're aware of this yet but GW2 is a THEMEPARK. Tell your friends.
EDIT: I don't want to sound too sarcastic though, english might be a second language for you and I have to be understanding for each person's individual circumstance, so please don't be offended if I say things that might seem rude in your native language.
I'll do my best to explain it and help you out.
Themeparks are games that are known for having "developer made content". That means, that if you are talking about a themepark, than you should be expecting scripted content because if they don't include scripted content, then it's not a themepark.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
I think you meant to type "English".