Pretty well thought out list, if you have the attention span to read it.  Even if I don't agree with all of it 100%, a lot of it makes sense to me.  

One of the first comments I noticed was about Skyrim, and how it could easily be said to have a lot more flaws (bigger, more glaring flaws, I might add) and yet still manages to be a top-rated best seller - but if you take that list of Skyrim's flaws to a Skyrim forum, it'd be hard to discuss much of anything over the noise of fanboys trying to shout it down.

There's always room for improvement, and that's the only way for progress to happen.  No matter how good something is, it will get old and weak under the weight of its flaws, if it doesn't keep improving.  GW2 may not have to worry about that for quite a while, but still, I think it's too bad that it is so hard for so many people to think critically about the things they like.

Originally posted by mrxennon

Its very easy to give negative criticism but a lot harder to give positive criticism,  the game isnt out and its shown some vids, until a game has been fully released to the general public and is considered finished then people shouldnt have a right to complain about different elements of the game until it is.  I really dont understand why we are seeing all these posts with such negativity to a game that hasnt been released yet.  None of the other games due for release in the next 6 months are getting this much negative attention.

Go take a look over in the TOR forums, that game has so many haters to the point, to where they could start their own nation. And it has gotten even worst since the NDA has lefted. These type of people will not be happy no matter what type of game comes out, maybe they should go play some of those Asian grinders a couple of those are due to drop next year anyways.

Some valid points here that I haven't considered before... well supported as well.

I mean, theres nothing that scares me or dampens my interest at all, not yet, and Anet still has plenty of clear water to hear the players who have hands on and react to anything that needs attention.

Better to be honest about potholes when they can be fixed properly.

I mean... it's not like they are launching next month or anything with a frighteningly dull and pedestrian effort being floated on a big IP alone.

Originally posted by Naral

I would rather they innovate and struggle, but succeed, than take the easy way and bring nothing new to the genre.

I am looking forward to this title, but I am a bit more reserved. The fact that they are doing so many new things does not guarantee an awesome game. I am eager to play this  but my friend, he thinks this will be the second coming. 

In the end, there are only so many things you *can* do with this genre, given the practicalities of technology and interface. To expect it will be a flawless, totally new experience that will be the second coming, is probably setting yourself up for as much disappointment as all the folks who wanted SWTOR to be SWG2 are experiencing.

The funny thing about that was Bioware stated upfront that they weren't making a SWG, and that they were following the WoW model. So those folks that were expecting something else set themselves up for disappointment.

Originally posted by Naral

I would rather they innovate and struggle, but succeed, than take the easy way and bring nothing new to the genre.

Yes, absolutely.

Far better to stumble while reaching for the sky then be happy to just lie in the gutter.

The author really tried hard to find any flaws in a game that isn't out yet and which has so far a perfect development track (solid and groundbreaking promises that are consistently being implemented).

Some of these 'flaws' could easily be seen as 'perks', like the skill needed to aim correctly, myself I'm sick of trivial games.

Also one could easily write a list of 30+ flaws for every ther MMO out and in the making, without resorting to really desperate grapsing at straws like 'it's not guild wars' ;) Therefore this game is at least 3 times better than every other MMO! What's the problem? ;)

Originally posted by Pilnkplonk

These "flaws" are all pretty vague and in several I couldn't really make what the author is trying to say. #7 for example, now what is THAT all about?

#6 seems the only valid concern until you realize that ALL the PvP maps in WAR were conquest as well and they were incredibly varied. You can stick quite a lot into the basic old "conquest" model. For example, TF2's "push-the-cart" maps can also be considered "conquest" maps with a moveable objective...

#5 is just ludicrous. He just described the normal way modern mmo controls work in a very convoulted long-winded way which proves... nothing except that he considers wow-style movement and skills to be "fighting the controls".. maybe.. because I'm still not sure what is his point - maybe that mmorpgs use more keyboard buttons than FPSs? If so, he is right.

etc etc...

Yawn, anywayz we'll see...

I agree especially on point 5. It's like he's saying moving sideways a mage in WoW and hitting ice lance on the move while moving the camera is something that requires exceptional skill to do! Or hitting skills on the run with a hunter for that matter. Also the part about targetting is ridiculous as well, I've played WoW before and the game has all sorts of pets, totems, illusions and whatnot and targetting was never a problem, not to mention that you could target an ally and perform a defensive move, temporary boost even with a dps class while in the heat of combat. GW2 makes all this easier and he still complains.

Originally posted by Pilnkplonk

These "flaws" are all pretty vague and in several I couldn't really make what the author is trying to say. #7 for example, now what is THAT all about?

#6 seems the only valid concern until you realize that ALL the PvP maps in WAR were conquest as well and they were incredibly varied. You can stick quite a lot into the basic old "conquest" model. For example, TF2's "push-the-cart" maps can also be considered "conquest" maps with a moveable objective...

#5 is just ludicrous. He just described the normal way modern mmo controls work in a very convoulted long-winded way which proves... nothing except that he considers wow-style movement and skills to be "fighting the controls".. maybe.. because I'm still not sure what is his point - maybe that mmorpgs use more keyboard buttons than FPSs? If so, he is right.

etc etc...

Yawn, anywayz we'll see...

Agreed.  You saw the same flaws in this article that I saw.  Half of the stuff he claimed as wrong I found either intriguing or similar to issues I had in other betas that were fixed before their launch.  Most recent was SWTOR, I had issues with targeting 2 builds ago but they fixed it and it's nicer now and flows better.  So stuff like that is always in flux and can be changed.

Originally posted by DeaconX

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Somehow the poster seems to not understand the game.  Most of these problems are feautures i am looking forward to.

I cocnur - I understand where the OP is coming from but I'm personally looking forward to it all and hoping ArenaNet makes it work right.  From what I've seen/heard/read so far, they know what they're doing.

Personally, I think the author of the article is stuck in Guild Wars 1 mode and can't break free.  I for one am glad they are not making it anything like GW1 as I want an MMORPG not another co-op rpg with annoying instancing and boring combat(my opinion of GW1).  LOVE the lore, setting and music hence why I can't wait for GW2.

Originally posted by Meowhead

I think it's an interesting demonstration of how there's a large segment of the GW population (Not the biggest segment, just... a segment that is noticable in size) that really wishes GW2 was more like GW, rather than less. :D

Pretty much this. There are probably some good points in that article but it's fairly hard to make out. In addition, the game isn't even in a closed beta yet so no one has been able to test it.

That site is a GW pvp site so take that into consideration when you read that article. Not everything that he states as a flaw will be a flaw to everyone.

Flaw No.1

You misspelt 'article' :P

In reply to the article itself.

All the arguments in the article is subjective viewpoints, meaning it is simply a personal take on one mechanic, there isn't actually any flaws, but simply a player don't want to deal with certain aspect of the game.

#10 Profession overlap is something GW2 player loved about the game, the idea that everyone can do everything, but together to concentrate certain aspects, it simplifies the trinity concept. But in the article, you are simply using the exact same argument, but saying you don't like it.

#9 Saying it isn't Guild Wars is a fact, but that doesn't make it a flaw. The devs have specifically stated they don't want to just do a reharsh of Guild Wars, because those players can just play Guild Wars instead. GW2 is selling innovation, changing the paradiam of MMORPG. You don't like its selling point, that doesn't make it a flaw.

#8 Firstly, you are presuming all Elite Skills are damage or killing skills, it could just as easily be support or CC skill that doesn't do damage. Secondly, if you look at League of Legends, not all ultimate skills are one hit skills that you must run away or use your own to defend from, some of them are setup skills to make their character's combo faster and easier to execute. Lastly, you should attempt to dodge every single attack anyway, the argument saying I don't like elite skill because I have to run away from it is like saying I just want to play a game where I should just stand there and take everything like a boss.

#7 The idea of choice is complex.

For your first point about choice in story progression, that is actually the player's min-max attitude's fault. Forcing players to make a choice is to ask them to make a progression for their character, to define their character. Players who want to make every single choice shouldn't even play a RPG, simple as that.

Weapons, you can change where the skill is slotted, so research first. Also the skill can be altered using the traits system, combination of different weapons gives you different skill, sword and dagger is different to sword and mace.

Attribute, you are discussing this mechanic under the assumption of the normal trinity setup. You have mentioned the profession overlap, so all players have potential to do the different roles. So speccing into different attributes can just as viable as making it a certain build for each class.

And if you don't want choice in a game, don't play RPG. Its like saying I don't want oxygen in air, doesn't make sense.

#6 Conquest, every type of PvP involves elements of conquest, thats why you are playing against other players. If they put an arena like DOTA, is it not conquest? You have to destory opponent's towers, it isn't capturing flags, but it is still conquest. Conquest presents objective, which is essential in any kind of game.

#5 lol controls, this argument is almost turn into mush when you compare this to normal MMORPG controls, 1-0, shift 1-0, ctrl 1-0, hotkey qertfgzxcvb, with shift and ctrl combinations, how is it any less simple. You don't have to change weapons often, for the main hotkeys are your movements and 10 hotkeys keybind. The combat design is design to value timing and usage of skills, not how often you use them. Rotations isn't needed, so 10 keys is easy to use.

#4 Targetting, I see someone need to take out a fps and do some training. Players are so cartered to when palying games like WoW or Rift, that they simply think 95% of their attacks should land no matter what. Successful targetting differentiates skilfull from the unskillfull. But I doubt aiming computer AI will pose any kind of trouble to players.

#3 By Cues you mean numerous amount of interface addons that tells you down to the exact numbering of damage outputs and status effects. The combat was designed to be visceral, minimalist UI design was a way to engage the player to actuallly look at the screen for cues, if you are on fire, you are on fire, nothing can be more clear than that. Do you really need to know more than that? Do you really need to know how much exact health does the enemy have left? Just worry about killing the damn enemy.

#2 Combat is illegible

They have already stated visual effects will be colour coded, enemy visual effect like fire wall or traps will have a red hue while the friendly elements will have green (or was it blue?) hue

As for damage floaters, again, it is a player min max attitude that is the problem, I sometimes not even sure what people need damage floaters, you don't really read them much anyway. You just argue targetting is a problem, should you first worry about hitting the target before even worrying about how much damage you are doing?

Health, this is honestly a stupid argument, you can read how much health you have left? Just to put it this way, if its empty, or no red stuff in the orb, you will go into the injured state. Anyone who have even just watched a gameplay video will realise the orb's shape makes no impact on how the health is decreased, the health display is scaled to the height of the orb, not the area of the orb. The closing in of the top and bottom makes no impact to how much health is decreased. 10 damage lowers the height by 5mm, whether is is an orb or a prism.

#1 Skill Design

I think there are like 100? skill design that players know about, I don't think that is even remotely enough to make a decision. But saying there are two damage skill overlaps the combat relying on efficiency than timing is contradictoy ot your previous argumnts. Timing is required in targetting and aiming of attacks, you can't be efficient if you are just spamming everywhere.

You are contradicting yourself in this point.

Many words doesn't make it a well though argument. The propose flaws aren't even flaws in the first place, it is simply the author unwilling to accept the game design.

Originally posted by Meowhead

I think it's an interesting demonstration of how there's a large segment of the GW population (Not the biggest segment, just... a segment that is noticable in size) that really wishes GW2 was more like GW, rather than less. :D

How is that strange? It happens every time.

How many "I wish Diablo 3 were more like Diablo 1 or 2" posts have you read? I read plenty just here.

When you make a sequel there will always be some people that wants exactly the same game but with better graphics, some that want a completely different game and a whole bunch of people in between.

I am a GW1 fan, most of the new stuff sounds better to me but not all. "I wish I could select my 5 skills for each weapon myself" is the top on my wishlist. Unlike many other do I think it is a good idea to remove multiclassing, to make the classes more unique.

But if you ask other GW1 fans they will have different opinions, that is just how things are.

Read the all thing, didn't agree with any.

Not because i'm a fanboy or anything like it.

I didn't agree because the writer of the article was clearly hoping for Warhammer / DAOC with a set trinity and roles, and all of the complaints come from that.

He's not analizing any gameplay, he's just ranting on how the game is not how he wanted it to be.

That was a great read, and brought up some of the concerns I have with the game.  

Originally posted by xKingdomx

Many words doesn't make it a well though argument. The propose flaws are even flaws in the first place, it is simply the author unwilling to accept the game design.

Preety much this.

A few points are valid. The rest seem to me that the player simply isn't good enough. Just about all the qualms about the game were related to it being "difficult" for the player.

It is difficult to decipher the classes since they can share armor and roles. It's been known for a while now that each proffesion is only a playstyle. I don't need to decipher a warrior from a guardian, as the article says... they both can fill each role neatly. If I need to get specific for a PvP build, then the team tlaks about it. Can you list a game where top PvP teams never talked?

Elites are too difficult to counter...? Tornado forms makes you completely vulnerable for a long time. You cannot defend nor stop the tornado form, you are simply a tornado for the given time. Lich form is similar, except with Lich Form, you lose your weapon skills. There isn't a single elite that can't be downsized and balanced. The question of balance is a completely different story though... so I won't assume anything yet.

Choices make it too difficult to play? That is what Guild Wars has always been about. Nearly every other game goes and gives you a line of skills to choose from, Guild Wars has always been about picking skills from a pool.

Fighting the controls is just rediculous. Learn to use the keyboard nad mouse or don't bother writing flaws about a computer game. I haven't heard a single person (including myself) believe the controls were too difficult. Same goes for targetting.

To difficult to detect skill cues? I've played all of 20 matches or so and I can already detect a dozen skills. Most skills I have only encountered once or twice, but the common ones are down already. I guess it is fair to say that since the skills launch so quickly, it is hard to react. However, when talking about skills cues, every single skill has a different look, animation, or visual effect. If you come from a game where Critical Chop was the same animation as Savage Chop, then I guess it's understandable to not notice cues.

Again with how difficult it is to notice conditions... learn to play or don't bother writing an article. I guess if the conditions are hidden away in your character window, then it would be difficult to see the cue. But when the conditions are EFFECTS and ANIMATIONS that take play on your actual character, you can't really miss it.

That is what I got out of the article. The game is too "hardcore" for the guy. There's a reason why GW1 had million dollar tournaments... it was built to be a very challenging and competitive game. :)

This may suprise some of you (esp the anti-gw2 trolls) but I agree with alot in this article.  However with that being said the majority of these issues are perceived problems and we dont know how it will play out.  I will say I sure as hell would want to have some of those issues as compared to the myriad of issues a game like SWToR will have.  Longevity vs the been-there-done-that problem ToR has is quite a bit different a problem especially in the eye of the beholder.

What a  shower of sh!t.

Can't even be bothered to fully read an essay that slates a game the author hasn't even played yet.

Says more about the guy writing it than it does about the game tbh.

The word 'ghey' was invented for stuff like this.

Aryas

That was a nice read thanks for posting. However even reading that I still feel this game is too overhyped and once it launches people will be dissapointed. I guess we will see as the months go by how well it is going to fair.

Originally posted by Aryas

What a  shower of sh!t.

 

Can't even be bothered to fully read an essay that slates a game the author hasn't even played yet.

 

Says more about the guy writing it than it does about the game tbh.

 

The word 'ghey' was invented for stuff like this.

 

Aryas

Bump!

(ya what he said    ^^)

.....but i did read it all......