I'm sorry, but people who talk about how GW2 has solved a lot of problems without even being out yet are not someone I would trust with critical thinking.
The game might be great in the short term, but until people play it long-term - I think they need to be careful expecting the dream-like vision of no grind and the amazing fun of having an extremely limited power progression to be an actual "solution" to problems. I mean, people might be really sick of WoW and games like it - and yet so many millions enjoyed it for several years BEFORE getting tired of it.
Let's see how long GW2 lasts, shall we?
I'm perfectly capable of critical thinking and analysis, thank you.
GW2 has solved a lot of MY PERSONAL problems with MMOs, and I'll toss a couple out there that you can't actually argue with, and that anybody, even with limited experience with the beta... or even merely Youtube... can verify are true.
1. I'm sort of a slow PvE player. (Well, okay, you could argue I'm actually a really FAST player, though I would think it'd be strange of you to do so. Let's just assume for a moment that there is such a thing as slow PvE players, and I'm one of them, okay?) This means that content takes me a little longer than usual. This means that playing sub games costs me more than normal people to reach the same point. So I have to spend more money to say... reach the end of SWTOR story, as an example.
2. I get decreasing amounts of enjoyment from MMOs as time goes along. Eventually, I'm going to reach a point where I'm unable to justify paying a quarter the price of a game per month for the amount of entertainment I'm getting that month.
3. I like being able to go back and check in on older games. (I do this with my game catalogue a lot) I dont' like having to pay 15 dollars just to do so.
4. I like being able to do PvP on equal footing where skill (And maybe some luck) is the deciding factor. Some examples of kinds I enjoy are Starcraft (and other RTSs), chess (and other board games), various card games, and FPS games. I even enjoy it in a game with MMORPG like combat, as evidenced that I put over 1000 hours into GW before I ever even beat one of the campaigns (I told you I was slow at PvE) The earlier I can start that in a game, the better to me (GW2 lets you start this at level 2)
5. I like being able to play with my friends. Most MMORPGs separate me from my friends, in a variety of methods. They use servers, take time sinks to reach where people are, are divided into factions, make high level people incapable of meaningfully doing low level content or helping friends, or they have a subscription so it's harder to convince a friend to 'just drop in and see me' if they've quit.
I'm not expecting an MMO to magically occupy me forever, and people who say things like 'GW2 won't last many people past 3 months' are conveniently ignoring the fact that there isn't a single MMORPG EVER that lasts the majority of people past 3 months.
In fact, my expectations are far more sane than I've seen expressed so many times here. 'I want a game that amuses me for as long as it amuses me, and that is convenient to pick back up when I want it to amuse me again'. Huh. How delightfully unspecific.
You can't accuse people of a lack of critical thinking because they're not expecting what you're expecting. I just have different tastes and desires than you.
Great post. Accessibility and the ability to play with friends no matter what (and still progress) are 2 things 99% of all MMO's fail at. It is going to be a big deal for me, and most people. Nothing else matters, these features alone are going to make the game incredibly popular. Even if I stop playing it in a month. I can come back a year from now and get right in and play with my friends ... for NOTHING. That is a game changer, no matter what anyone says.
its good to see you realised this game is utter trash, now move on and never return..
People talking about quests in GW2 have obviously not played the game, the open world system is so much different from the normal questing hubs that just calling them boring quests proves you have had absolutely no hands on experience.
The results are the same as if you were told to go kill x amount of mobs to comeplete this quest. The only thing different is that it is a touch more interactive on how you complete the task. Different path same result = same old same old. It is only an illusion that it seems different but it isn't.
A different combat system and no trinity, the end.
I find the combatsystem the biggest weekness of this game,it is no strategy,just run around and hit few buttoms.
Guess one can get used to it but not sure if it is fun in the long run.
I'm gonna just have to be frank here....you're wrong.
If you think that the combat system in GW2 boils down to "just running around and hitting a few buttons." Then you're wrong.
What I would reccommend is that you endeavor to learn what those buttons you are hitting actually do. You may be surprised to discover that they do very different things that are useful in very different situations. Then you can start to try to hit those buttons in a...you know, strategic way.
Ok I correct my last statment, I find the combat system of GW2 very boring anoying and lacking entertainment. With those words I only speak for myself.
Since I allredy bought the game I will play from release and will se what happens,not optimistic that I will buy any expansions tho.
I fully respect all people that love this game and it mecanism,but I dont think it fits my apeal for games.
A different combat system and no trinity, the end.
I find the combatsystem the biggest weekness of this game,it is no strategy,just run around and hit few buttoms.
Guess one can get used to it but not sure if it is fun in the long run.
I'm gonna just have to be frank here....you're wrong.
If you think that the combat system in GW2 boils down to "just running around and hitting a few buttons." Then you're wrong.
What I would reccommend is that you endeavor to learn what those buttons you are hitting actually do. You may be surprised to discover that they do very different things that are useful in very different situations. Then you can start to try to hit those buttons in a...you know, strategic way.
Agree. The combat in GW2, TERA, and a couple other games are actually an improvement on combat in the genre. Combat has been the weakest part of mmorpgs for a long time. Glad to see it beefing up a bit.
The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true.
The results are the same as if you were told to go kill x amount of mobs to comeplete this quest. The only thing different is that it is a touch more interactive on how you complete the task. Different path same result = same old same old. It is only an illusion that it seems different but it isn't.
So your problem with games is not implementation or interactivity or how things are displayed, but your problem is you don't like actually killing things?
I'd suggest A Tale In The Desert, a 100% non-killing sandbox game. Good luck man!
I'm sorry, but people who talk about how GW2 has solved a lot of problems without even being out yet are not someone I would trust with critical thinking.
The game might be great in the short term, but until people play it long-term - I think they need to be careful expecting the dream-like vision of no grind and the amazing fun of having an extremely limited power progression to be an actual "solution" to problems. I mean, people might be really sick of WoW and games like it - and yet so many millions enjoyed it for several years BEFORE getting tired of it.
Let's see how long GW2 lasts, shall we?
I'm perfectly capable of critical thinking and analysis, thank you.
GW2 has solved a lot of MY PERSONAL problems with MMOs, and I'll toss a couple out there that you can't actually argue with, and that anybody, even with limited experience with the beta... or even merely Youtube... can verify are true.
1. I'm sort of a slow PvE player. (Well, okay, you could argue I'm actually a really FAST player, though I would think it'd be strange of you to do so. Let's just assume for a moment that there is such a thing as slow PvE players, and I'm one of them, okay?) This means that content takes me a little longer than usual. This means that playing sub games costs me more than normal people to reach the same point. So I have to spend more money to say... reach the end of SWTOR story, as an example.
2. I get decreasing amounts of enjoyment from MMOs as time goes along. Eventually, I'm going to reach a point where I'm unable to justify paying a quarter the price of a game per month for the amount of entertainment I'm getting that month.
3. I like being able to go back and check in on older games. (I do this with my game catalogue a lot) I dont' like having to pay 15 dollars just to do so.
4. I like being able to do PvP on equal footing where skill (And maybe some luck) is the deciding factor. Some examples of kinds I enjoy are Starcraft (and other RTSs), chess (and other board games), various card games, and FPS games. I even enjoy it in a game with MMORPG like combat, as evidenced that I put over 1000 hours into GW before I ever even beat one of the campaigns (I told you I was slow at PvE) The earlier I can start that in a game, the better to me (GW2 lets you start this at level 2)
5. I like being able to play with my friends. Most MMORPGs separate me from my friends, in a variety of methods. They use servers, take time sinks to reach where people are, are divided into factions, make high level people incapable of meaningfully doing low level content or helping friends, or they have a subscription so it's harder to convince a friend to 'just drop in and see me' if they've quit.
I'm not expecting an MMO to magically occupy me forever, and people who say things like 'GW2 won't last many people past 3 months' are conveniently ignoring the fact that there isn't a single MMORPG EVER that lasts the majority of people past 3 months.
In fact, my expectations are far more sane than I've seen expressed so many times here. 'I want a game that amuses me for as long as it amuses me, and that is convenient to pick back up when I want it to amuse me again'. Huh. How delightfully unspecific.
You can't accuse people of a lack of critical thinking because they're not expecting what you're expecting. I just have different tastes and desires than you.
Well, to be fair, I think you do have reasonable expectations.
I'm not "accusing" you of anything, it's just that you seem to think you know exactly how the game will be for you - based on a few betas.
Unfortunately, the reality of the genre is such that you generally need the full game to evaluate the long-term entertainment value. That's just something you have to accept if you want to appear to have critical thinking
That said, you DO specifically mention that you tend to lose interest in these games relatively quickly - and in that specific case, I suppose it doesn't matter whether GW2 is fun in the long-term for you.
So, maybe you're lucky and you get exactly what you want out of the game - I just think it's wise to wait until the release version is in your hands and you can verify that everything works to your satisfaction and they haven't skimped on some areas they've been cleverly avoiding in their hype campaign.
I can't tell you how many times I've felt absolutely certain a game was great or "for me" - only to discover it lacked something profound or fundamental that I just didn't have the imagination to predict would be a problem.
For instance, with SWtOR - I really thought it'd be a fun PvP game - because I hadn't dreamed it would perform so abysmally bad with only a handful of players on screen. The videos didn't seem to reveal that at all - and I was shocked to find the actual experience was almost unplayable. I also didn't expect them to flat out lie about the state of world PvP. They literally promised world PvP "to die for" - and let's just say the reality was very, very different.
A different combat system and no trinity, the end.
I find the combatsystem the biggest weekness of this game,it is no strategy,just run around and hit few buttoms.
Guess one can get used to it but not sure if it is fun in the long run.
I'm gonna just have to be frank here....you're wrong.
If you think that the combat system in GW2 boils down to "just running around and hitting a few buttons." Then you're wrong.
What I would reccommend is that you endeavor to learn what those buttons you are hitting actually do. You may be surprised to discover that they do very different things that are useful in very different situations. Then you can start to try to hit those buttons in a...you know, strategic way.
Ok I correct my last statment, I find the combat system of GW2 very boring anoying and lacking entertainment. With those words I only speak for myself.
Since I allredy bought the game I will play from release and will se what happens,not optimistic that I will buy any expansions tho.
I fully respect all people that love this game and it mecanism,but I dont think it fits my apeal for games.
Action packed combat that is 100% skill based is boring, annoying and lacking entertainment? You apparently are just bad.
I do think it is pretty boring at lower levels. But once you get up to 15+ and out of the newbie zone, things get much more interesting. Play some SPvP matches and you will see there is A LOT of customization and skill involved with this system.
Most other games, I literally just spam 1-3 buttons 90% of the time. I don't see how it is any better. At least in GW2 CD's force you to use other skills, swap weapons and set the pace of combat. I think you need to spend some more time with the game before rushing to conclusions. You obviously have not done any of the higher content.
For instance, with SWtOR - I really thought it'd be a fun PvP game - because I hadn't dreamed it would perform so abysmally bad with only a handful of players on screen. The videos didn't seem to reveal that at all - and I was shocked to find the actual experience was almost unplayable. I also didn't expect them to flat out lie about the state of world PvP. They literally promised world PvP "to die for" - and let's just say the reality was very, very different.
You make fun of people saying they are unable to "critically think" and you thought Bioware could make a good MMO, let a lone a PvP game, on their first try? Apparently, you need to look in the mirror :P
The only reason I played SWTOR is because friend's were. I found it completely bad and not fun when playing it in the beta. If a game fails to hold your attention and make it fun in the first 16 levels ... that isn't a good thing. And what do you know, everyone that I knew quit inside 1-2 months. I hate to say that I told you so :P
You took the dev's word on how "World PvP" was? That is obviously going to be a lie, especially if it was never tested or played by anyone. It is pretty apparent that WvWvW works fine in GW2, and is playable and testable in the betas.
The only thing they are hiding is the later game content, mainly to give us something exciting when we finally get in to play. Could it be really buggy and bad? Yes. But from what I have seen of the lower content, if it is even half as polished, it is going to be just fine.
I have way more faith in ArenaNet than Bioware. GW was at least fun back in the day. I have never enjoyed a Bioware game, ever. So yea.To each their own, I guess.
Well, to be fair, I think you do have reasonable expectations.
I'm not "accusing" you of anything, it's just that you seem to think you know exactly how the game will be for you - based on a few betas.
Unfortunately, the reality of the genre is such that you generally need the full game to evaluate the long-term entertainment value. That's just something you have to accept if you want to appear to have critical thinking
That said, you DO specifically mention that you tend to lose interest in these games relatively quickly - and in that specific case, I suppose it doesn't matter whether GW2 is fun in the long-term for you.
So, maybe you're lucky and you get exactly what you want out of the game - I just think it's wise to wait until the release version is in your hands and you can verify that everything works to your satisfaction and they haven't skimped on some areas they've been cleverly avoiding in their hype campaign.
I can't tell you how many times I've felt absolutely certain a game was great or "for me" - only to discover it lacked something profound or fundamental that I just didn't have the imagination to predict would be a problem.
For instance, with SWtOR - I really thought it'd be a fun PvP game - because I hadn't dreamed it would perform so abysmally bad with only a handful of players on screen. The videos didn't seem to reveal that at all - and I was shocked to find the actual experience was almost unplayable. I also didn't expect them to flat out lie about the state of world PvP. They literally promised world PvP "to die for" - and let's just say the reality was very, very different.
There may be areas that GW2 are lacking in, that's true. I have, indeed, not played the whole game. ... but I'll be honest, if MMORPGs were B2P, I'd probably own and play a lot more.
I own and play quite a few single player games, often on a rotating basis. At one point in time I had about 5 current subs, and then I realized I was paying 75 dollars a MONTH to play games just a little bit. Awkward.
I've already gotten enough amusement out of the beta weekends to justify the box price for a single player game, so I don't feel like I've lost out in GW2.
I like most MMOs at least a little bit, I just don't feel they're worth the subscription.
... and even if GW2 DOES fail in some ways, there's ways it definitely delivers that I specifically like. A failure in one area doesn't automatically take away a success in another area. It might reduce the overall worth of a game, but even in a crappy game, I can still say 'I like the camera and wish more games used that camera system'.
FWIW, I also found combat to be pretty "meh" - based on my 20-30 hours with the betas.
Oh, it actually looked pretty cool and felt pretty good - but your arsenal (I played Thief and Ranger) is WAY too limited.
I also have a very hard time figuring out why they put a significant cooldown on weapon switching if they want it to be an integral part of combat. That seems completely counterproductive and made the process awkward and uncomfortable.
In 95% of the PvE content (can't remember my max level - but around 18) - I spammed 3 skills pretty much all the time. Wow, isn't that amazing combat!
Oh, I know how the "late" content will be super fantastic and mega challenging - because ArenaNet said so, right?
My experience with PvP was too limited to form a solid opinion, but my impression is that it's a numbers game. Meaning, individual skill means nothing against superior numbers. Almost all my 1-1 fights were interrupted by either a friend or an enemy - and that was the end of that fight.
Well, to be fair, I think you do have reasonable expectations.
I'm not "accusing" you of anything, it's just that you seem to think you know exactly how the game will be for you - based on a few betas.
Unfortunately, the reality of the genre is such that you generally need the full game to evaluate the long-term entertainment value. That's just something you have to accept if you want to appear to have critical thinking
That said, you DO specifically mention that you tend to lose interest in these games relatively quickly - and in that specific case, I suppose it doesn't matter whether GW2 is fun in the long-term for you.
So, maybe you're lucky and you get exactly what you want out of the game - I just think it's wise to wait until the release version is in your hands and you can verify that everything works to your satisfaction and they haven't skimped on some areas they've been cleverly avoiding in their hype campaign.
I can't tell you how many times I've felt absolutely certain a game was great or "for me" - only to discover it lacked something profound or fundamental that I just didn't have the imagination to predict would be a problem.
For instance, with SWtOR - I really thought it'd be a fun PvP game - because I hadn't dreamed it would perform so abysmally bad with only a handful of players on screen. The videos didn't seem to reveal that at all - and I was shocked to find the actual experience was almost unplayable. I also didn't expect them to flat out lie about the state of world PvP. They literally promised world PvP "to die for" - and let's just say the reality was very, very different.
There may be areas that GW2 are lacking in, that's true. I have, indeed, not played the whole game. ... but I'll be honest, if MMORPGs were B2P, I'd probably own and play a lot more.
I own and play quite a few single player games, often on a rotating basis. At one point in time I had about 5 current subs, and then I realized I was paying 75 dollars a MONTH to play games just a little bit. Awkward.
I've already gotten enough amusement out of the beta weekends to justify the box price for a single player game, so I don't feel like I've lost out in GW2.
I like most MMOs at least a little bit, I just don't feel they're worth the subscription.
... and even if GW2 DOES fail in some ways, there's ways it definitely delivers that I specifically like. A failure in one area doesn't automatically take away a success in another area. It might reduce the overall worth of a game, but even in a crappy game, I can still say 'I like the camera and wish more games used that camera system'.
Well, if all you're looking to do is justify the purchase price - then there's really no point of contention. I'm 99% certain GW2 will be worth the money for most people - even myself.
Personally, I'm not particularly concerned with how much I get out of my money - just as long as the price is within reason. I think the B2P model is fantastic - but I can't deny that I'd much rather have a strong long-term game and pay a subscription for it (even an expensive subscription) than get a good return on my investment with a short-term MMO.
Then again, I'm not into the MMO genre for the short stints hopping between games. I'm looking for a much more meaningful and long-term home, that I find to be worth the investment of my time.
The only game on the horizon that SEEMS to potentially be that - is ArcheAge.
Well said. But you are wasting your posting time it's still NOT a sandbox so "it can't be amazing" for many people. For some obscure reason only Sandboxes can be amazing
By definition, it actually is a sandbox game, because you can do whatever you want to do, when you want to do it. Nothing else is hidden behind the term sandbox.
Yeah I know but lots of people think of a sandbox as something different and just because GW2 is not like their definition of sandbox it can't be amazing.... they see as something it isn't, not as something it is
Reason being sandboxes (the type people have been asking for for years) typically have a greater focus on community building, and lend themselves to long term play as content is player driven and truly dynamic due to it.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Well, if all you're looking to do is justify the purchase price - then there's really no point of contention. I'm 99% certain GW2 will be worth the money for most people - even myself.
Personally, I'm not particularly concerned with how much I get out of my money - just as long as the price is within reason. I think the B2P model is fantastic - but I can't deny that I'd much rather have a strong long-term game and pay a subscription for it (even an expensive subscription) than get a good return on my investment with a short-term MMO.
Then again, I'm not into the MMO genre for the short stints hopping between games. I'm looking for a much more meaningful and long-term home, that I find to be worth the investment of my time.
The only game on the horizon that SEEMS to potentially be that - is ArcheAge.
Well, this is the nice thing about GW2 and the B2P model. Invariably, barring the game sucking on a level so collosal that developers for games like WAR and Xyson, there are going to be some people who find their new home in GW2 (There's some people still playing pretty much any MMORPG that isn't actually closed down).
Those people will be super happy. Even the people who DON'T turn it into their long term home (This is true for most players of ANY MMORPG... you can't name a single MMORPG with even a 50% retention rate between played and playing, once you get past the first couple months) will at least be able to get their money's worth.
... and it makes a great game for meeting up with friends, because anybody who bought it still owns it.
For somebody like you, you have risky, semi-unrealistic expectations (A lifetime home), but for somebody like me who wouldn't MIND a lifetime home, but isn't holding their breath, my expectations remain safely doable.
It's not that I'm opposed to GW2 becoming my long term MMORPG, or that I think it can't, I'm just happy at a lower base level at you.
Probably my longest term MMORPGs were CoH and CO, and it wasn't because of the gameplay... it was because of character creation and RPing, and because of friends.
For other insanely long term multiplayer games, there have been PSO and GW1... both because of playing with friends. Honestly, I have more faith on my friends being entertaining than any one given game.
I have friends I've kept up with for almost 20 years, find me an MMORPG with that sort of longterm longevity.
FWIW, I also found combat to be pretty "meh" - based on my 20-30 hours with the betas.
Oh, it actually looked pretty cool and felt pretty good - but your arsenal (I played Thief and Ranger) is WAY too limited.
I also have a very hard time figuring out why they put a significant cooldown on weapon switching if they want it to be an integral part of combat. That seems completely counterproductive and made the process awkward and uncomfortable.
In 95% of the PvE content (can't remember my max level - but around 18) - I spammed 3 skills pretty much all the time. Wow, isn't that amazing combat!
Oh, I know how the "late" content will be super fantastic and mega challenging - because ArenaNet said so, right?
My experience with PvP was too limited to form a solid opinion, but my impression is that it's a numbers game. Meaning, individual skill means nothing against superior numbers. Almost all my 1-1 fights were interrupted by either a friend or an enemy - and that was the end of that fight.
You only got to 18, which is basically still the first zone in the game. There is actually difficult stuff later. I got to 34 on my guardian and in the "final beta zone" there were many fights where I had to basically time all my abilities right, or I would die. In between timing abilities, I had to use dodge toavoid attacks if I didn't have a CD ready to go to interrupt. There were some spots where I would get 1 shotted by many things, even as a more defensive build.
In the AC dungeon (level 30) there is a lot of group team work in terms of laying down combo fields and what not. Sure, you might be able to do it NOT doing that, but all those heals/boons/conditions help a lot in fights. It is just different, it is like working together, but not actually having to say "ok you do this", you just kind of "go with the flow" making it more chaotic and dynamic I think.
In every game, you spam 3 skills 95% of the time. The thing is, GW2 only has 5 skills per weapon, and CD's on all of them. So you are constantly timing abilities and using all of them. I really don't see how it is "worse" than other combat systems. Watch some high level PvP videos and you will see there is more skill in this game than pretty much any MMO I have played. It isn't just spamming skills, it is timing your skills, using CC's, using boons/conditions, teamwork and dodging. Maybe that is why you lost so badly in PvP all the time?
And ... Welcome to PvP, where it is ALWAYS a numbers game ... you are saying in any other game you can just roll up X amount of people by yourself (equally skilled/geared people) ... no. If you make your build right, you can in fact keep 3 people busy for quite a while. I know my defensive built guardian could take 3v1 for quite a while before dying or having to retreat. I don't think I ever lost a 1v1 fight in SPvP either. You make it sound like other PvP games are different ... but they are not.
So basically, you are expecting a game that is unlike any game ever made. So it doesn't live up to your ridiculously unrealistic expectations ... welcome to reality.
Well, if all you're looking to do is justify the purchase price - then there's really no point of contention. I'm 99% certain GW2 will be worth the money for most people - even myself.
Personally, I'm not particularly concerned with how much I get out of my money - just as long as the price is within reason. I think the B2P model is fantastic - but I can't deny that I'd much rather have a strong long-term game and pay a subscription for it (even an expensive subscription) than get a good return on my investment with a short-term MMO.
Then again, I'm not into the MMO genre for the short stints hopping between games. I'm looking for a much more meaningful and long-term home, that I find to be worth the investment of my time.
The only game on the horizon that SEEMS to potentially be that - is ArcheAge.
Well, this is the nice thing about GW2 and the B2P model. Invariably, barring the game sucking on a level so collosal that developers for games like WAR and Xyson, there are going to be some people who find their new home in GW2 (There's some people still playing pretty much any MMORPG that isn't actually closed down).
Those people will be super happy. Even the people who DON'T turn it into their long term home (This is true for most players of ANY MMORPG... you can't name a single MMORPG with even a 50% retention rate between played and playing, once you get past the first couple months) will at least be able to get their money's worth.
... and it makes a great game for meeting up with friends, because anybody who bought it still owns it.
For somebody like you, you have risky, semi-unrealistic expectations (A lifetime home), but for somebody like me who wouldn't MIND a lifetime home, but isn't holding their breath, my expectations remain safely doable.
It's not that I'm opposed to GW2 becoming my long term MMORPG, or that I think it can't, I'm just happy at a lower base level at you.
Probably my longest term MMORPGs were CoH and CO, and it wasn't because of the gameplay... it was because of character creation and RPing, and because of friends.
For other insanely long term multiplayer games, there have been PSO and GW1... both because of playing with friends. Honestly, I have more faith on my friends being entertaining than any one given game.
I have friends I've kept up with for almost 20 years, find me an MMORPG with that sort of longterm longevity.
First of all, yes, I can mention a game with more than 50% retention rate at launch, and that was WoW
But even if it wasn't - that number is arbitrary and pointless to the discussion. I'm saying GW2 will most likely NOT be a long-term MMO for all the people expecting it to be - and I don't care what other games did or didn't do. We're talking about GW2 - and it's not a competition.
Also, you need to appreciate the difference between hope and expectation. I'm NOT expecting any game to be my long-term home for the genre. Also, try not to exaggerate - as no game will ever be a "lifetime" home. Long-term means more than a few months, to me anyway.
I said ArcheAge looks like it could potentially be a long-term home - and that's pretty far from expecting it to be.
I'm not generating my hope out of some kind of tactical desire to be happy. It's not choice - it's who I am as a gamer. I can't decide I want something less than I want - it's not possible.
So, if you're truly a happier person for having lower demands on gaming - then I envy you, I suppose. I'd love to make do with something less - I just can't manage that.
FWIW, I also found combat to be pretty "meh" - based on my 20-30 hours with the betas.
Oh, it actually looked pretty cool and felt pretty good - but your arsenal (I played Thief and Ranger) is WAY too limited.
I also have a very hard time figuring out why they put a significant cooldown on weapon switching if they want it to be an integral part of combat. That seems completely counterproductive and made the process awkward and uncomfortable.
In 95% of the PvE content (can't remember my max level - but around 18) - I spammed 3 skills pretty much all the time. Wow, isn't that amazing combat!
Oh, I know how the "late" content will be super fantastic and mega challenging - because ArenaNet said so, right?
My experience with PvP was too limited to form a solid opinion, but my impression is that it's a numbers game. Meaning, individual skill means nothing against superior numbers. Almost all my 1-1 fights were interrupted by either a friend or an enemy - and that was the end of that fight.
You only got to 18, which is basically still the first zone in the game. There is actually difficult stuff later. I got to 34 on my guardian and in the "final beta zone" there were many fights where I had to basically time all my abilities right, or I would die. In between timing abilities, I had to use dodge toavoid attacks if I didn't have a CD ready to go to interrupt. There were some spots where I would get 1 shotted by many things, even as a more defensive build.
In the AC dungeon (level 30) there is a lot of group team work in terms of laying down combo fields and what not. Sure, you might be able to do it NOT doing that, but all those heals/boons/conditions help a lot in fights. It is just different, it is like working together, but not actually having to say "ok you do this", you just kind of "go with the flow" making it more chaotic and dynamic I think.
In every game, you spam 3 skills 95% of the time. The thing is, GW2 only has 5 skills per weapon, and CD's on all of them. So you are constantly timing abilities and using all of them. I really don't see how it is "worse" than other combat systems. Watch some high level PvP videos and you will see there is more skill in this game than pretty much any MMO I have played. It isn't just spamming skills, it is timing your skills, using CC's, using boons/conditions, teamwork and dodging. Maybe that is why you lost so badly in PvP all the time?
And ... Welcome to PvP, where it is ALWAYS a numbers game ... you are saying in any other game you can just roll up X amount of people by yourself (equally skilled/geared people) ... no. If you make your build right, you can in fact keep 3 people busy for quite a while. I know my defensive built guardian could take 3v1 for quite a while before dying or having to retreat. I don't think I ever lost a 1v1 fight in SPvP either. You make it sound like other PvP games are different ... but they are not.
So basically, you are expecting a game that is unlike any game ever made. So it doesn't live up to your ridiculously unrealistic expectations ... welcome to reality.
All I have is my experience with the beta - and though you may very well be right, I can't just take your word for it. I have to see it for myself.
The combat I experienced during those 20-30 hours was "meh". If that's intentional, fine.
As for PvP - no, not all games are strictly a numbers game. That's because other games have much faster fights. Time is a key factor - because if a fight is fast, you'll get a lot of 1-1 or 1-2 fights without other people interfering.
As I said, my experience with GW2 PvP is limited - but I can say with absolute certainty that the fights were much longer than a game like Age of Conan, Secret World, or World of Warcraft. Age of Conan, in particular, had fantastic combat from the very beginning and it didn't feel like spamming abilities at all.
Of course, I'm not expecting GW2 PvP to be spamming 3 skills over and over - but there's no way around a severely limted arsenal - at least for the two classes I tried.
GW2 combat doesn't impress everyone equally, welcome to reality.
First of all, yes, I can mention a game with more than 50% retention rate at launch, and that was WoW
But even if it wasn't - that number is arbitrary and pointless to the discussion. I'm saying GW2 will most likely NOT be a long-term MMO for all the people expecting it to be - and I don't care what other games did or didn't do. We're talking about GW2 - and it's not a competition.
Also, you need to appreciate the difference between hope and expectation. I'm NOT expecting any game to be my long-term home for the genre. Also, try not to exaggerate - as no game will ever be a "lifetime" home. Long-term means more than a few months, to me anyway.
I said ArcheAge looks like it could potentially be a long-term home - and that's pretty far from expecting it to be.
I'm not generating my hope out of some kind of tactical desire to be happy. It's not choice - it's who I am as a gamer. I can't decide I want something less than I want - it's not possible.
So, if you're truly a happier person for having lower demands on gaming - then I envy you, I suppose. I'd love to make do with something less - I just can't manage that.
My demands on gaming is to have fun. Ideally with my friends. Honestly, I've had more fun with board game/RPG night than any MMORPG ever. Ever.
Sadly, it's a lot less convenient to organize, and out of our group, all FIVE of us moved. 3 different states and 2 to Korea. Not a problem you run into with MMORPGs so much.
My demands aren't LESS, we both have the exact same goal, I suspect. To have fun.
... and when I said 'lifetime home', I meant... well, even 2 years.
Also, I don't think even the mighty WoW has had 50% player retention. They've had a lot of players, true, but more people have quit than continue playing. When they got more players, it was because they held onto a decent amount =while gaining new people=. Yes, 50% is arbitrary, but it's just an example. My whole point is that most people just don't play MMORPGs long term. It's a tiny percent of players that do that, and I think GW2 at least acknowledges and admits that, which I believe is a start.
I agree with you that GW2 won't be the long term home for everybody who wants it... but I think from the pricing model to the structure of PvP to the way gear works, there's many ways the game actually takes that into account, unlike your average MMORPG.
... and of course, there WILL be some people who are right, and it will be their long term home. The only real question, and one that is unanswerable until a couple years out, is how many will?
Also, GW2 at least makes a good vacation home. Something you own long term and visit whenever you're in the mood, but where you don't neccessarily live there nonstop.
FWIW, I also found combat to be pretty "meh" - based on my 20-30 hours with the betas.
Oh, it actually looked pretty cool and felt pretty good - but your arsenal (I played Thief and Ranger) is WAY too limited.
I also have a very hard time figuring out why they put a significant cooldown on weapon switching if they want it to be an integral part of combat. That seems completely counterproductive and made the process awkward and uncomfortable.
My experience with PvP was too limited to form a solid opinion, but my impression is that it's a numbers game. Meaning, individual skill means nothing against superior numbers. Almost all my 1-1 fights were interrupted by either a friend or an enemy - and that was the end of that fight.
I only played sPvP, so I can only comment a bit on that.
The cooldown on weapon switching is intended to allow you to counter or mess up your opponents (for example, if you're using range attacks and your opponent only has melee but can't catch up to you). In general, melee does 2x the damage of range attacks, so if a player is using melee and is able to hit his opponent, then he has an advantage.
One tactic is to encircle closely to your opponent (literally flanking them in melee range whether you have a range or melee weapon). If they're melee, and are not fast enough at rotating, then they'll miss you. If they're range and they're using projectiles, then they'll almost definitely miss you with their attacks.
Also, you can also take a hit for someone else if you stand infront of a projectile aimed for them.
To mitigate your opponent's strong attacks, you can dodge the attack, blind them, stun them, block, teleport, activate the protection boon, etc. depending on the circumstance/situation, assuming you've saved those resources so that you can use them when appropriate.
So, in pvp, clearly it's important to figure out your opponent's build and ways you can counter them. For example, if your opponent is based on damaging range attacks with little CC capabilities, then playing melee may be your best bet. Alternatively, if they have a lot of crippling and escape abilities then they're probably sacrificing some damage, so if you have a range build that can do heavy damage, then you can take the advantage.
I've noticed that each class has a trait where they activate some effect when taking falling damage. In sPvP, notice that at every control point, there's a high platform where you can drop from. I haven't seen anyone make use of it, but maybe there's some builds that can make good use of them.
There's also combo fields and combo finishers (i.e., projectile, leap, blast, and whirl finishers).
There's a lot more to pvp combat than what I have discussed, but the things I've discussed should give people a good idea of what is intended by the design.
A different combat system and no trinity, the end.
I find the combatsystem the biggest weekness of this game,it is no strategy,just run around and hit few buttoms.
Guess one can get used to it but not sure if it is fun in the long run.
I'm gonna just have to be frank here....you're wrong.
If you think that the combat system in GW2 boils down to "just running around and hitting a few buttons." Then you're wrong.
What I would reccommend is that you endeavor to learn what those buttons you are hitting actually do. You may be surprised to discover that they do very different things that are useful in very different situations. Then you can start to try to hit those buttons in a...you know, strategic way.
Ok I correct my last statment, I find the combat system of GW2 very boring anoying and lacking entertainment. With those words I only speak for myself.
Since I allredy bought the game I will play from release and will se what happens,not optimistic that I will buy any expansions tho.
I fully respect all people that love this game and it mecanism,but I dont think it fits my apeal for games.
Action packed combat that is 100% skill based is boring, annoying and lacking entertainment? You apparently are just bad.
I do think it is pretty boring at lower levels. But once you get up to 15+ and out of the newbie zone, things get much more interesting. Play some SPvP matches and you will see there is A LOT of customization and skill involved with this system.
Most other games, I literally just spam 1-3 buttons 90% of the time. I don't see how it is any better. At least in GW2 CD's force you to use other skills, swap weapons and set the pace of combat. I think you need to spend some more time with the game before rushing to conclusions. You obviously have not done any of the higher content.
Mate do you call hitting buttoms on your keyboard a good skill? Hm skills is imo something very different,hitting 4-6 different buttoms buttoms is not what I would call skilled players no matter how fast you can hit those. Those kind of skills we all used back in the 80' playing super mario and sonic.
its good to see you realised this game is utter trash, now move on and never return..
People talking about quests in GW2 have obviously not played the game, the open world system is so much different from the normal questing hubs that just calling them boring quests proves you have had absolutely no hands on experience.
The results are the same as if you were told to go kill x amount of mobs to comeplete this quest. The only thing different is that it is a touch more interactive on how you complete the task. Different path same result = same old same old. It is only an illusion that it seems different but it isn't.
Its not about the results, its about the way to the results... its coop play versus solo play. And then with this system sometimes surprises happen, even tough you traveled a zone 10 times over sudden things are happening that have never happened before.
Its so bloody much different, you cant even imagine. It makes theworld feel vinramt and alive compared to the ! ! ! static questgivers. Things happen all around you and you join them.
Its not about the result, as the rtesult of every task/question whatever are either you succeed or you don´t . Its the way how you succeed and play with others to get to the result.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
A different combat system and no trinity, the end.
I find the combatsystem the biggest weekness of this game,it is no strategy,just run around and hit few buttoms.
Guess one can get used to it but not sure if it is fun in the long run.
I'm gonna just have to be frank here....you're wrong.
If you think that the combat system in GW2 boils down to "just running around and hitting a few buttons." Then you're wrong.
What I would reccommend is that you endeavor to learn what those buttons you are hitting actually do. You may be surprised to discover that they do very different things that are useful in very different situations. Then you can start to try to hit those buttons in a...you know, strategic way.
Ok I correct my last statment, I find the combat system of GW2 very boring anoying and lacking entertainment. With those words I only speak for myself.
Since I allredy bought the game I will play from release and will se what happens,not optimistic that I will buy any expansions tho.
I fully respect all people that love this game and it mecanism,but I dont think it fits my apeal for games.
Action packed combat that is 100% skill based is boring, annoying and lacking entertainment? You apparently are just bad.
I do think it is pretty boring at lower levels. But once you get up to 15+ and out of the newbie zone, things get much more interesting. Play some SPvP matches and you will see there is A LOT of customization and skill involved with this system.
Most other games, I literally just spam 1-3 buttons 90% of the time. I don't see how it is any better. At least in GW2 CD's force you to use other skills, swap weapons and set the pace of combat. I think you need to spend some more time with the game before rushing to conclusions. You obviously have not done any of the higher content.
Mate do you call hitting buttoms on your keyboard a good skill? Hm skills is imo something very different,hitting 4-6 different buttoms buttoms is not what I would call skilled players no matter how fast you can hit those. Those kind of skills we all used back in the 80' playing super mario and sonic.
If we're reducing skill down to button presses...
Then Super Mario only have TWO buttons that weren't movement...jump and shoot. So Super Mario must have taken no skill and been incredibly simple .
Just pointing out the silliness of that argument.
Also...where did you get the idea that you properly play GW2 by just hitting 4-6 buttons, seemingly at random, as fast as you can?
Comments
Its fun, thats whats so amazing about this game.
Great post. Accessibility and the ability to play with friends no matter what (and still progress) are 2 things 99% of all MMO's fail at. It is going to be a big deal for me, and most people. Nothing else matters, these features alone are going to make the game incredibly popular. Even if I stop playing it in a month. I can come back a year from now and get right in and play with my friends ... for NOTHING. That is a game changer, no matter what anyone says.
The results are the same as if you were told to go kill x amount of mobs to comeplete this quest. The only thing different is that it is a touch more interactive on how you complete the task. Different path same result = same old same old. It is only an illusion that it seems different but it isn't.
Grim Dawn, the next great action rpg!
http://www.grimdawn.com/
Ok I correct my last statment, I find the combat system of GW2 very boring anoying and lacking entertainment. With those words I only speak for myself.
Since I allredy bought the game I will play from release and will se what happens,not optimistic that I will buy any expansions tho.
I fully respect all people that love this game and it mecanism,but I dont think it fits my apeal for games.
Agree. The combat in GW2, TERA, and a couple other games are actually an improvement on combat in the genre. Combat has been the weakest part of mmorpgs for a long time. Glad to see it beefing up a bit.
My theme song.
OP was successful, this thread is thriving.
The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true.
Carl Sagan-
So your problem with games is not implementation or interactivity or how things are displayed, but your problem is you don't like actually killing things?
I'd suggest A Tale In The Desert, a 100% non-killing sandbox game.
Good luck man!
Well, to be fair, I think you do have reasonable expectations.
I'm not "accusing" you of anything, it's just that you seem to think you know exactly how the game will be for you - based on a few betas.
Unfortunately, the reality of the genre is such that you generally need the full game to evaluate the long-term entertainment value. That's just something you have to accept if you want to appear to have critical thinking
That said, you DO specifically mention that you tend to lose interest in these games relatively quickly - and in that specific case, I suppose it doesn't matter whether GW2 is fun in the long-term for you.
So, maybe you're lucky and you get exactly what you want out of the game - I just think it's wise to wait until the release version is in your hands and you can verify that everything works to your satisfaction and they haven't skimped on some areas they've been cleverly avoiding in their hype campaign.
I can't tell you how many times I've felt absolutely certain a game was great or "for me" - only to discover it lacked something profound or fundamental that I just didn't have the imagination to predict would be a problem.
For instance, with SWtOR - I really thought it'd be a fun PvP game - because I hadn't dreamed it would perform so abysmally bad with only a handful of players on screen. The videos didn't seem to reveal that at all - and I was shocked to find the actual experience was almost unplayable. I also didn't expect them to flat out lie about the state of world PvP. They literally promised world PvP "to die for" - and let's just say the reality was very, very different.
Action packed combat that is 100% skill based is boring, annoying and lacking entertainment? You apparently are just bad.
I do think it is pretty boring at lower levels. But once you get up to 15+ and out of the newbie zone, things get much more interesting. Play some SPvP matches and you will see there is A LOT of customization and skill involved with this system.
Most other games, I literally just spam 1-3 buttons 90% of the time. I don't see how it is any better. At least in GW2 CD's force you to use other skills, swap weapons and set the pace of combat. I think you need to spend some more time with the game before rushing to conclusions. You obviously have not done any of the higher content.
You make fun of people saying they are unable to "critically think" and you thought Bioware could make a good MMO, let a lone a PvP game, on their first try? Apparently, you need to look in the mirror :P
The only reason I played SWTOR is because friend's were. I found it completely bad and not fun when playing it in the beta. If a game fails to hold your attention and make it fun in the first 16 levels ... that isn't a good thing. And what do you know, everyone that I knew quit inside 1-2 months. I hate to say that I told you so :P
You took the dev's word on how "World PvP" was? That is obviously going to be a lie, especially if it was never tested or played by anyone. It is pretty apparent that WvWvW works fine in GW2, and is playable and testable in the betas.
The only thing they are hiding is the later game content, mainly to give us something exciting when we finally get in to play. Could it be really buggy and bad? Yes. But from what I have seen of the lower content, if it is even half as polished, it is going to be just fine.
I have way more faith in ArenaNet than Bioware. GW was at least fun back in the day. I have never enjoyed a Bioware game, ever. So yea.To each their own, I guess.
There may be areas that GW2 are lacking in, that's true. I have, indeed, not played the whole game. ... but I'll be honest, if MMORPGs were B2P, I'd probably own and play a lot more.
I own and play quite a few single player games, often on a rotating basis. At one point in time I had about 5 current subs, and then I realized I was paying 75 dollars a MONTH to play games just a little bit. Awkward.
I've already gotten enough amusement out of the beta weekends to justify the box price for a single player game, so I don't feel like I've lost out in GW2.
I like most MMOs at least a little bit, I just don't feel they're worth the subscription.
... and even if GW2 DOES fail in some ways, there's ways it definitely delivers that I specifically like. A failure in one area doesn't automatically take away a success in another area. It might reduce the overall worth of a game, but even in a crappy game, I can still say 'I like the camera and wish more games used that camera system'.
FWIW, I also found combat to be pretty "meh" - based on my 20-30 hours with the betas.
Oh, it actually looked pretty cool and felt pretty good - but your arsenal (I played Thief and Ranger) is WAY too limited.
I also have a very hard time figuring out why they put a significant cooldown on weapon switching if they want it to be an integral part of combat. That seems completely counterproductive and made the process awkward and uncomfortable.
In 95% of the PvE content (can't remember my max level - but around 18) - I spammed 3 skills pretty much all the time. Wow, isn't that amazing combat!
Oh, I know how the "late" content will be super fantastic and mega challenging - because ArenaNet said so, right?
My experience with PvP was too limited to form a solid opinion, but my impression is that it's a numbers game. Meaning, individual skill means nothing against superior numbers. Almost all my 1-1 fights were interrupted by either a friend or an enemy - and that was the end of that fight.
Well, if all you're looking to do is justify the purchase price - then there's really no point of contention. I'm 99% certain GW2 will be worth the money for most people - even myself.
Personally, I'm not particularly concerned with how much I get out of my money - just as long as the price is within reason. I think the B2P model is fantastic - but I can't deny that I'd much rather have a strong long-term game and pay a subscription for it (even an expensive subscription) than get a good return on my investment with a short-term MMO.
Then again, I'm not into the MMO genre for the short stints hopping between games. I'm looking for a much more meaningful and long-term home, that I find to be worth the investment of my time.
The only game on the horizon that SEEMS to potentially be that - is ArcheAge.
Reason being sandboxes (the type people have been asking for for years) typically have a greater focus on community building, and lend themselves to long term play as content is player driven and truly dynamic due to it.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Well, this is the nice thing about GW2 and the B2P model. Invariably, barring the game sucking on a level so collosal that developers for games like WAR and Xyson, there are going to be some people who find their new home in GW2 (There's some people still playing pretty much any MMORPG that isn't actually closed down).
Those people will be super happy. Even the people who DON'T turn it into their long term home (This is true for most players of ANY MMORPG... you can't name a single MMORPG with even a 50% retention rate between played and playing, once you get past the first couple months) will at least be able to get their money's worth.
... and it makes a great game for meeting up with friends, because anybody who bought it still owns it.
For somebody like you, you have risky, semi-unrealistic expectations (A lifetime home), but for somebody like me who wouldn't MIND a lifetime home, but isn't holding their breath, my expectations remain safely doable.
It's not that I'm opposed to GW2 becoming my long term MMORPG, or that I think it can't, I'm just happy at a lower base level at you.
Probably my longest term MMORPGs were CoH and CO, and it wasn't because of the gameplay... it was because of character creation and RPing, and because of friends.
For other insanely long term multiplayer games, there have been PSO and GW1... both because of playing with friends. Honestly, I have more faith on my friends being entertaining than any one given game.
I have friends I've kept up with for almost 20 years, find me an MMORPG with that sort of longterm longevity.
You only got to 18, which is basically still the first zone in the game. There is actually difficult stuff later. I got to 34 on my guardian and in the "final beta zone" there were many fights where I had to basically time all my abilities right, or I would die. In between timing abilities, I had to use dodge toavoid attacks if I didn't have a CD ready to go to interrupt. There were some spots where I would get 1 shotted by many things, even as a more defensive build.
In the AC dungeon (level 30) there is a lot of group team work in terms of laying down combo fields and what not. Sure, you might be able to do it NOT doing that, but all those heals/boons/conditions help a lot in fights. It is just different, it is like working together, but not actually having to say "ok you do this", you just kind of "go with the flow" making it more chaotic and dynamic I think.
In every game, you spam 3 skills 95% of the time. The thing is, GW2 only has 5 skills per weapon, and CD's on all of them. So you are constantly timing abilities and using all of them. I really don't see how it is "worse" than other combat systems. Watch some high level PvP videos and you will see there is more skill in this game than pretty much any MMO I have played. It isn't just spamming skills, it is timing your skills, using CC's, using boons/conditions, teamwork and dodging. Maybe that is why you lost so badly in PvP all the time?
And ... Welcome to PvP, where it is ALWAYS a numbers game ... you are saying in any other game you can just roll up X amount of people by yourself (equally skilled/geared people) ... no. If you make your build right, you can in fact keep 3 people busy for quite a while. I know my defensive built guardian could take 3v1 for quite a while before dying or having to retreat. I don't think I ever lost a 1v1 fight in SPvP either. You make it sound like other PvP games are different ... but they are not.
So basically, you are expecting a game that is unlike any game ever made. So it doesn't live up to your ridiculously unrealistic expectations ... welcome to reality.
First of all, yes, I can mention a game with more than 50% retention rate at launch, and that was WoW
But even if it wasn't - that number is arbitrary and pointless to the discussion. I'm saying GW2 will most likely NOT be a long-term MMO for all the people expecting it to be - and I don't care what other games did or didn't do. We're talking about GW2 - and it's not a competition.
Also, you need to appreciate the difference between hope and expectation. I'm NOT expecting any game to be my long-term home for the genre. Also, try not to exaggerate - as no game will ever be a "lifetime" home. Long-term means more than a few months, to me anyway.
I said ArcheAge looks like it could potentially be a long-term home - and that's pretty far from expecting it to be.
I'm not generating my hope out of some kind of tactical desire to be happy. It's not choice - it's who I am as a gamer. I can't decide I want something less than I want - it's not possible.
So, if you're truly a happier person for having lower demands on gaming - then I envy you, I suppose. I'd love to make do with something less - I just can't manage that.
All I have is my experience with the beta - and though you may very well be right, I can't just take your word for it. I have to see it for myself.
The combat I experienced during those 20-30 hours was "meh". If that's intentional, fine.
As for PvP - no, not all games are strictly a numbers game. That's because other games have much faster fights. Time is a key factor - because if a fight is fast, you'll get a lot of 1-1 or 1-2 fights without other people interfering.
As I said, my experience with GW2 PvP is limited - but I can say with absolute certainty that the fights were much longer than a game like Age of Conan, Secret World, or World of Warcraft. Age of Conan, in particular, had fantastic combat from the very beginning and it didn't feel like spamming abilities at all.
Of course, I'm not expecting GW2 PvP to be spamming 3 skills over and over - but there's no way around a severely limted arsenal - at least for the two classes I tried.
GW2 combat doesn't impress everyone equally, welcome to reality.
My demands on gaming is to have fun. Ideally with my friends. Honestly, I've had more fun with board game/RPG night than any MMORPG ever. Ever.
Sadly, it's a lot less convenient to organize, and out of our group, all FIVE of us moved. 3 different states and 2 to Korea. Not a problem you run into with MMORPGs so much.
My demands aren't LESS, we both have the exact same goal, I suspect. To have fun.
... and when I said 'lifetime home', I meant... well, even 2 years.
Also, I don't think even the mighty WoW has had 50% player retention. They've had a lot of players, true, but more people have quit than continue playing. When they got more players, it was because they held onto a decent amount =while gaining new people=. Yes, 50% is arbitrary, but it's just an example. My whole point is that most people just don't play MMORPGs long term. It's a tiny percent of players that do that, and I think GW2 at least acknowledges and admits that, which I believe is a start.
I agree with you that GW2 won't be the long term home for everybody who wants it... but I think from the pricing model to the structure of PvP to the way gear works, there's many ways the game actually takes that into account, unlike your average MMORPG.
... and of course, there WILL be some people who are right, and it will be their long term home. The only real question, and one that is unanswerable until a couple years out, is how many will?
Also, GW2 at least makes a good vacation home. Something you own long term and visit whenever you're in the mood, but where you don't neccessarily live there nonstop.
I only played sPvP, so I can only comment a bit on that.
The cooldown on weapon switching is intended to allow you to counter or mess up your opponents (for example, if you're using range attacks and your opponent only has melee but can't catch up to you). In general, melee does 2x the damage of range attacks, so if a player is using melee and is able to hit his opponent, then he has an advantage.
One tactic is to encircle closely to your opponent (literally flanking them in melee range whether you have a range or melee weapon). If they're melee, and are not fast enough at rotating, then they'll miss you. If they're range and they're using projectiles, then they'll almost definitely miss you with their attacks.
Also, you can also take a hit for someone else if you stand infront of a projectile aimed for them.
To mitigate your opponent's strong attacks, you can dodge the attack, blind them, stun them, block, teleport, activate the protection boon, etc. depending on the circumstance/situation, assuming you've saved those resources so that you can use them when appropriate.
So, in pvp, clearly it's important to figure out your opponent's build and ways you can counter them. For example, if your opponent is based on damaging range attacks with little CC capabilities, then playing melee may be your best bet. Alternatively, if they have a lot of crippling and escape abilities then they're probably sacrificing some damage, so if you have a range build that can do heavy damage, then you can take the advantage.
I've noticed that each class has a trait where they activate some effect when taking falling damage. In sPvP, notice that at every control point, there's a high platform where you can drop from. I haven't seen anyone make use of it, but maybe there's some builds that can make good use of them.
There's also combo fields and combo finishers (i.e., projectile, leap, blast, and whirl finishers).
There's a lot more to pvp combat than what I have discussed, but the things I've discussed should give people a good idea of what is intended by the design.
Mate do you call hitting buttoms on your keyboard a good skill? Hm skills is imo something very different,hitting 4-6 different buttoms buttoms is not what I would call skilled players no matter how fast you can hit those. Those kind of skills we all used back in the 80' playing super mario and sonic.
Its not about the results, its about the way to the results... its coop play versus solo play. And then with this system sometimes surprises happen, even tough you traveled a zone 10 times over sudden things are happening that have never happened before.
Its so bloody much different, you cant even imagine. It makes theworld feel vinramt and alive compared to the ! ! ! static questgivers. Things happen all around you and you join them.
Its not about the result, as the rtesult of every task/question whatever are either you succeed or you don´t . Its the way how you succeed and play with others to get to the result.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
If we're reducing skill down to button presses...
Then Super Mario only have TWO buttons that weren't movement...jump and shoot. So Super Mario must have taken no skill and been incredibly simple
.
Just pointing out the silliness of that argument.
Also...where did you get the idea that you properly play GW2 by just hitting 4-6 buttons, seemingly at random, as fast as you can?
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
The Skill in MMO's comes from knowing what each of those 4-6 abilities does, and what the 4-6 abilities of EVERY OTHER profession combination do .
Then reacting quickly and dynamically in combat armed with this knowledge.
Luckilly we have dozens of abbilities for every class, and even better most classes have acces to 1 1/2 to 2 dozen or more at any moment ingame.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)