Originally posted by Valua

Don't get my wrong, I don't particually like Vanguard, but the person above did say Guild Wars 2 was innovative due to lack of instancing and being able to do what you want, when you want. 

You still get to do what you want when you want in Vanguard, you just have to travel a bit, like in real life (I would love map travelling in real life though, but for some reason I don't like it in games, spoils my immersion.)

But on the topic of Vanguard, I remember it having hype on the same level as Guild Wars 2, maybe that is another reason why I don't trust hype of this level? 

Like I said earlier, I've avoided much of the hype surrounding Guild Wars 2 which means it can only be better than I expected, if it's worse, then it's as good as Vanguard.

The thing is, you're missing the meaning to the 'when you want' part.

GW2 makes it ridiculously convenient to do most things, AND you can go backwards and do older things, without outleveling it.

That's the 'when you want' part.

Sandboxes are generally only 'when you want' if you assume what is, at times, an inhuman level of patience. :)

In games like that, often reaching the ability to do certain things is pretty much a monumental struggle, and hardly a 'Hey, I think I'll just go....' sort of moment.

The whole 'do whatever you want when you want' means something different if you're talking about a sandbox.  Different design goals. :)

Originally posted by Valua

Innovation - the act of starting something for the first time; introducing something new.

(Psst.  Going to let you in on a little secret.  Words can have multiple definitions.  Just saying.  Also, under your INCREDIBLY harsh rules for innovation, there is pretty much almost no innovation anywhere, ever, in the whole of human experience.  Isaac Newton?  Only ever got where he was in science because he stood on the shoulders of giants.  All of human knowledge is incremental, and built upon previous discoveries.)

Originally posted by Meowhead

Originally posted by Distopia

Well I too commend them for trying to step out of the box, that deserves my attention as an MMO fan in and of itself.

 As a gamer I think the fact they are trying to fill so many gaps shows gonads (sorry lack of a better family friendly term.)

I"m only saying as with any advertising, selective viewing, company hype,  etc.. Take it with some level of acknowledgment that it may not be as good as it sounds or seems.

This is the way I look at it.

GW1 is a highly divisive game.  There are a lot of people who would rather grate their eyeballs off with a cheese grater, than play it some more, even without having a subscription.

... and I will acknowledge it could really be improved, and if you look at it as an MMO, it is horrible (It's not an MMO though, thankfully. :P ).

The fact that they're doing a lot of the same design features that I enjoyed from GW1, then sticking it in an MMORPG... well...

... unless they actually backslide, and make GW2 worse than GW1 (With more money, more staffing, and a lot more time to develop it), I should be able to enjoy it, at minimum for all the reasons I enjoyed GW1. :)

Seriously, the vast majority of my gameplay in GW1?  PvP.  I just like the whole 'not having to grind your ass off to be able to fight in PvP without dying due to gear disparity' angle. :)

Well, I like a lot of things, and barring some catastrophic failure on their part, I'm not sure why what I want wouldn't be delivered.  I'm not asking for much to love the game, I just want a game that caters to my taste.

Being an excellent game on top of it would just be the 50 pound cherry on my banana split. :)

What "everything" about GW2 says to me is, these guys really want to offer something different, and not in the vein of WOW, if anything as I put it in another thread just a few secs ago; they are impressively expanding on their own design and concepts (GW1).

My only real concern which still remains from far earlier discussions on this topic, is the idea of bloat, simply overshooting the moon when they were aiming for a cloud. It's great that they want to pack so much into GW2, I just hope they give it what it needs so that each feature compliments another, otherwise it may feel convoluted* ( {*} hope I'm using that word right there).

You don't think introducing the whole method of using just dynamic events and no trinity as innovative?

Can you show me another mmo that had done this?

The thing is, you're missing the meaning to the 'when you want' part.

GW2 makes it ridiculously convenient to do most things, AND you can go backwards and do older things, without outleveling it.

That's the 'when you want' part.

Sandboxes are generally only 'when you want' if you assume what is, at times, an inhuman level of patience. :)

In games like that, often reaching the ability to do certain things is pretty much a monumental struggle, and hardly a 'Hey, I think I'll just go....' sort of moment.

The whole 'do whatever you want when you want' means something different if you're talking about a sandbox.  Different design goals. :)

It may be convinient, but at the end of the day, once it's been done a couple of times it will get boring. Dynamic quests will eventually become linear. That's the sad part of creating a game based entirely on dynamic events. Yes, you might be able to go back and do those things again and find them challenging, but will you want to? 

Originally posted by Valua

Innovation - the act of starting something for the first time; introducing something new.

(Psst.  Going to let you in on a little secret.  Words can have multiple definitions.  Just saying.  Also, under your INCREDIBLY harsh rules for innovation, there is pretty much almost no innovation anywhere, ever, in the whole of human experience.  Isaac Newton?  Only ever got where he was in science because he stood on the shoulders of giants.  All of human knowledge is incremental, and built upon previous discoveries.)

This is the entire point I'm trying to make...

But I completely disagree with the lack of innovation in human existance. Mankind may only have had small innovation with their inventions, but it's still innovation. Something Guild Wars 2 doesn't have, by my definition.

I don't like to use the word innovative lightly, as Guild Wars 2 players do. 

Originally posted by Valua

Originally posted by Valua

Innovation - the act of starting something for the first time; introducing something new.

(Psst.  Going to let you in on a little secret.  Words can have multiple definitions.  Just saying.  Also, under your INCREDIBLY harsh rules for innovation, there is pretty much almost no innovation anywhere, ever, in the whole of human experience.  Isaac Newton?  Only ever got where he was in science because he stood on the shoulders of giants.  All of human knowledge is incremental, and built upon previous discoveries.)

 

This is the entire point I'm trying to make...

 

But I completely disagree with the lack of innovation in human existance. Mankind may only have had small innovation with their inventions, but it's still innovation. Something Guild Wars 2 doesn't have, by my definition.

 

I don't like to use the word innovative lightly, as Guild Wars 2 players do. 

What is your example of innovative then? And please use proper context (in other words, mmo video games)

Originally posted by Valua

1.) This game will recieve more bashing than any other MMO in the history of the genre. It will have more people raging than Vanguard. It will have more haters than World of Warcraft. Why? Because it will not live up to the hype, it simply cannot, no game can. 

Vintage pessimistic attitude. I've said this quite a few times but fact of the matter is, the MMO community are full of contradicting hypocrites who are only skeptical with a game like GW2 but absolutely get hyped up for other products. "No game can live up to the hype" is an invalid statement. Plenty of games have lived up to the hype. Bastion, Mass Effect, Borderlands(word of mouth hype will always prevail), etc. The only reason an MMO hasn't lived up to the hype is because no game has differed itself from WoW too much. Except for GW2 of course. I don't care if you say other people have got hyped up for other MMOs the same but GW2 is the only one where it's warranted. I was probably the most skeptical one on this forum when they first started releasing information(maybe except for the people who still thought that GW2 wasn't going to be persistant when they specfically said it would be). However, I've played it. I've read about it. I've watched videos on it. Just like I've done every other MMO. GW2 is the ONLY one that got me excited. Period.

2.) People will regret calling it "innovative," again simply because it is not. All the things that this game is said to have have been done before, maybe on a smaller scale, but still done before. Therefore it is not innovative.

You obviously do NOT know the defintion of innovation. What you describe is INVENTION which is the creation of an idea while innovation is about the USE of an idea. ArenaNet is taking ideas that have been thought of before but the use of those ideas are different. Therefore, it's innovative.

3.) The game will be good, not gods gift to the world, but good. It will have a strong player base, just not as large as what some people are predicting (more than World of Warcraft, really? No. It will do as well as Guild Wars 1, maybe a little better.)

 Nobody has said it would be god's gift to the world. If anyone is overexagerrating, it's people like you. You think people are over hyping when in reality GW2 has earned the hype therefore it's not over hyped. You don't see it because you ARE biased.

I'm not bashing the game at all, I think it will be very good. But I'm pissed off with every single MMO being compared with it right now, the game isn't even released yet, you cannot compare a game to something you've never played. Yes, you've seen the videos, but I also saw videos of Age of Conan/Vanguard which made those games look like the second coming. 

I've played it and no other MMO compares.

To conclude, you can't compare, or rate, a game you've never played (or only played an hour of.) I realise that this website is mostly full with Guild Wars 2 fantatics, but seriously, wait until the game is about before bashing another game or because it is not as good as Guild Wars 2 (which is an invalid opinion as you do not know.) 

 I've played more than an hour of it.

These are my predictions, my opinions. Free of biased reviewing. Rant over.

 You are biased. In fact, you're one of those people who want to be "logical" and "independant". However, you try too hard. Most people would call you a hipster but I personally hate that word myself. Maybe it's because it just sounds weird. It's cool you want to be different but don't force yourself to be different. You see what everyone else sees in GW2. An innovative fresh title. You just don't want to admit it because you feel as if you'd "conform" to the majority.

 

 

Originally posted by DJJazzy

You don't think introducing the whole method of using just dynamic events and no trinity as innovative?

Can you show me another mmo that had done this?

Again, you're not grasping my definition of the word innovation. 

It would be like me saying Game2001 has partly cel shaded graphics, Game2007 has fully cel shaded graphics, therefore Game2007 is innovative. No, it's revelutionary.

Originally posted by Valua

Innovation is not invention.

Creating the radio is an invention.  Creating a car is an invention.  Putting a radio in a car for the first time is an innovation.

So tired of people quibbling about what constitutes innovation or thinking that something has to be 100% new in order to count.  Take the downed state from Borderlands, tweak it and put it in an MMO for the first time, that's an innovation.

Dynamic events have never been done before.  They're an evolution on PQs from WAR, but they innovate by making them the focus of the open world content instead of a sideshow, making them chain in different directions on success/failure, making them chain in space to new areas, making them trigger off a variety of different things, and being fully cooperative.  They're a truly amazing concept for MMOs.

Honestly, I don't even think this game is overhyped at all.  To me, if GW2 was just dynamic events, B2P, a "massive" amount of content (said to be bigger than all of GW1 combined, including expansions) and waiting until its totally finished before releasing it, that right there is a 10.  Everything else (and there's a lot) is just icing on the cake.

Dictionary definition - something new or different introduced

 

Nothing new has been introduced with Guild Wars 2.

 

 

What is your point, and your goal? To win a semantic argument over the definition of a word?

GW2 Dynamic events are innovative. The scale is what is important here. For example, if a 20 year old game had a single dynamic event that chained to a second dynamic event, yes, you are correct that someone else did it first.

Shaking up/changing the holy trinity is innovative, at least for an mmorpg.

So what?

What matters to me, is that GW2 is innovatively implementing dynamic events on a grand scale. 1500+

The immerssive effect of this may be staggering.

It may allow different experiences to be had in the same zones, unlike mmorpg standard of 'wait 5 minutes and it resets'.

Cascading dynamic events ARE innovative.

Its the chaining and cascading that is the innovation.

The flat leveling curve is innovative as  far as I am concerned. I have not seen any games do that; usually your xp to get to the next level increases.

But really, if you have researched GW2 and don't like what you see, that is fine. Play something else that suits you better.

I like what I see from my research, and I will try GW2 out and hopefully it will be a game that I enjoy.

Originally posted by Valua

Originally posted by DJJazzy

You don't think introducing the whole method of using just dynamic events and no trinity as innovative?

Can you show me another mmo that had done this?

 

Again, you're not grasping my definition of the word innovation. 

 

It would be like me saying Game2001 has partly cel shaded graphics, Game2007 has fully cel shaded graphics, therefore Game2007 is innovative. No, it's revelutionary.

I think YOU are the one not understanding what the word innovate means.

Originally posted by Valua

Originally posted by DJJazzy

You don't think introducing the whole method of using just dynamic events and no trinity as innovative?

Can you show me another mmo that had done this?

 

Again, you're not grasping my definition of the word innovation. 

 

It would be like me saying Game2001 has partly cel shaded graphics, Game2007 has fully cel shaded graphics, therefore Game2007 is innovative. No, it's revelutionary.

That's because you don't dictate what the definition of a word is. A definition isn't up for debate or subject to point of view.

Originally posted by Valua

 

It may be convinient, but at the end of the day, once it's been done a couple of times it will get boring. Dynamic quests will eventually become linear. That's the sad part of creating a game based entirely on dynamic events. Yes, you might be able to go back and do those things again and find them challenging, but will you want to? 

Well, there's supposed to be 1500 of them.  That should keep me busy for a COUPLE minutes.  They're also saying they're going to add in new ones, on the sly.  If they follow through with that, that'd go a long way towards keeping the game fresh.

ALSO, I don't play games as much as many MMORPG players do.  Between the DE and the PvP, I can't possibly imagine doing the dynamic events more than a couple times, and at least it's a more organic experience than running back and forth between a quest giver and the same damn wolves 5 times. :)

so.... yeah.  Improvement over current questing paradigm, at least for me.  ... and hey, that's where the 'when you want' kicks in.  Tired of doing this DE?  Pop on over to some other area.  Nothing is forcing you to do a specific DE, or do them in a specific order. :)  Tired of events altogether?  Oh hey, straight to PvP.  Built a second character and tired of PvE?  Don't have to get past level 2 to participate in either instanced PvP or World vs. World.  Don't even have to grind up a set of good equipment to make yourself competitive.

For some people this is a BAD thing (Yes.  SOme people want the feeling of accomplishment they get from feeling they earned something), but for other people (raises hand) it's a good thing.

No, I'm not going to be disappointed in that design decision, and realize that's not what I want.  I've had games that give me convenience, and I like it, dammit.

I have tastes, I know what they are, and that's convenient for me as well. :)

What is your example of innovative then? And please use proper context (in other words, mmo video games)

Some people would think of my use of the word innovation as invention, but they are wrong, it is simply just another defintion of the word that I use differently to them.

Lets stick within the MMO genre for now, innovation to me means -

The first MMO to have three faction PvP.

Dynamic events.

Personal story.

PvP.

Dodging.

etc, etc.

Sorry I can't name which MMO's did the above first, but I know for sure it wasn't Guild Wars 2.

Originally posted by Meowhead

Originally posted by Valua

 

It may be convinient, but at the end of the day, once it's been done a couple of times it will get boring. Dynamic quests will eventually become linear. That's the sad part of creating a game based entirely on dynamic events. Yes, you might be able to go back and do those things again and find them challenging, but will you want to? 

Well, there's supposed to be 1500 of them.  That should keep me busy for a COUPLE minutes. 

PSHHH doable in 50 seconds.

Guys its a troll thread, hes clearly getting a chuckle out of it at work being bored. =/

Originally posted by Valua

 

Oh you silly little fanatic.

This is exactly the reason I posted here, because of deluded people like yourself. 

Exactly what am I deluded about?  Am I misdescribing the game at all?  Can you point to anything which suggests the game isn't anything I've described?

LoL has 15 million players because it is free to make an account, but only a fraction play. Runescape actually has 90 million accounts, but again only a fraction of that number play on a regular basis. Why so many players? Because they are free. Don't compare them to World of Warcraft or Guild Wars 2.

I brought up LoL to point out that WoW's number of players wasn't magical.   LoL has 15 million registered players, 4 million play every month.  WoW's Asian subscribers pay as they play, yet we still lump those 5 million in with the 5 million NA and Europe players who subscribe.  Who is to say that WoW's players play every single month.

WoW's numbers are obviously not based on their being free, so who is to say that another game won't beat it.  Unless you believe that WoW will stay the #1 MMO forever, then some game MUST come along and top it.  Who is to say that GW2 isn't that game?  I already pointed out half a dozen reasons why it might.  Do you even have a reason why it wouldn't other than that you don't believe the game will live up to "the hype."

Mists of Pandaria will bring many of those that left World of Warcraft back, mark my words, it's a PvP expansion, something the WoW community has been wanting for years. Then Pokemon style battle's with monsters, something millions of people have wanted for years. So, don't look at Pandaria as a hinderence to WoW. Trust me.

 Is WoW capable of innovation but GW2 isn't?  Millions of people might want what Pandaria is offering.  They might also want what GW2 is offering, seeing as how WoW has enjoyed 7 years with basically no competition that hasn't fallen on its face.

B2P isn't innovation, it's been done countless times before. Most single player games with only aspects do this, you might say that they are no MMO's, but neither is Guild Wars1. It's a lobby game, just like the only aspect of Call of Duty. 

 Has a AAA MMO done B2P?  No it hasn't.  And I didn't describe it as an innovation, I described it as a reason that might change how people play. 

What does GW1 have to do with anything?  GW2 will be a AAA B2P MMO, that's the point of bringing it up when talking about GW2.

Yes, Arenanet won't care how many people are actively playing the game as long as they sell millions of boxes, but we, as players, care don't we? We want to see the gave thrive? We want to be on servers full of players? I do anyway. 

 Just like P2P games make money by giving people reasons to resubscribe, B2P makes money off delivering quality product with expansions.  It's actually harder for a B2P game to make money because they need to provide a product that people voluntarily manually purchase. 

B2P keeps servers full of players longer because people don't have a financial incentive to stop playing the game.  They bought it, they can play it forever if they want.

Being able to do what you want, when you want, also isn't innovation. Sandbox games have done it for years. Vanguard is my prime expample of sandpark, which also has no instances. 

Again, who said it was an innovation?  I said it was a way that might change how people play the game.  Also, way to ignore all the other parts of my post.  It's easy to look right when you cherry pick which aspects you want to respond to.

Everything everyone has mentioned to me here as "innovation" has been corrected by me, well, in my term of the word innovation anyway, the English dictionary definition. 

 No, it hasn't.  For the love of God, innovation does not mean what you think it does.  I can't even imagine what could possibly even qualify as innovation given your absurd overly strict "100% new" interpretation.  Seriously, to you it's like Rift put in content which they described as dynamic and because of that, GW2's dynamic events, which are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT no longer count as anything that is worthwhile.

The definitions of innovation talk about "introducing something new or different."  The key here is what is the new thing being introduced to?  I like I said earlier, if you put a radio into a car for the first time, that's innovation.  If you put the downed state in an MMO for the first time, that's innovation.  If you put Dynamic Events into any game for the first time, that's innovation.  You can probably even call Dynamic Events "invention" if you go by the definition "to originate or create as a product of one's own ingenuity, experimentation, or contrivance."  This is where you reply something like, "no it's not because my interpretation of the dictionary says so."

I don't even give care if you call them "innovations" or not.  Could I list 100+ "features" that GW2 is doing which no other AAA MMO has ever done to date?  Yes I can.  Can you provide evidence they won't be in the game?  No, you can't.  End of story.

Those who fall to the hype of this game will be sorely dissapointed. As would any gamer, for any game, that had the ammount of hype this game does.

YOU will be dissapointed when this game doesn't meet up to your every expectation. 

It's only hype if it's promises left unfulfilled. If I'm wrong about the game, I'll be the first to say I was wrong. Will you make the same claim? Bookmark this post.  Though don't be upset if I don't reply to your admission, I'll probably be too busy playing the game.

 

I think YOU are the one not understanding what the word innovate means.

No.

That's because you don't dictate what the definition of a word is. A definition isn't up for debate or subject to point of view.

I have stated, a number of times, in this thread what I believe the definition of the word Innovation is.

Innovation - the act of starting something for the first time; introducing something new.

Originally posted by cali59

Originally posted by Valua

 

snip

Valua may or may not give his views a little bit too much value.

^I personally do not care about your definition of innovation. I care about the comonly accepted definition of innovation:

"Innovation is the creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or ideas that are accepted by markets,governments, and society. Innovation differs from invention in that innovation refers to the use of a new idea or method, whereas invention refers more directly to the creation of the idea or method itself."

Just because you don't consider something to be innovative doesn't mean that it isn't innovative.

Well, there's supposed to be 1500 of them.  That should keep me busy for a COUPLE minutes.  They're also saying they're going to add in new ones, on the sly.  If they follow through with that, that'd go a long way towards keeping the game fresh.

ALSO, I don't play games as much as many MMORPG players do.  Between the DE and the PvP, I can't possibly imagine doing the dynamic events more than a couple times, and at least it's a more organic experience than running back and forth between a quest giver and the same damn wolves 5 times. :)

so.... yeah.  Improvement over current questing paradigm, at least for me.  ... and hey, that's where the 'when you want' kicks in.  Tired of doing this DE?  Pop on over to some other area.  Nothing is forcing you to do a specific DE, or do them in a specific order. :)  Tired of events altogether?  Oh hey, straight to PvP.  Built a second character and tired of PvE?  Don't have to get past level 2 to participate in either instanced PvP or World vs. World.  Don't even have to grind up a set of good equipment to make yourself competitive.

For some people this is a BAD thing (Yes.  SOme people want the feeling of accomplishment they get from feeling they earned something), but for other people (raises hand) it's a good thing.

No, I'm not going to be disappointed in that design decision, and realize that's not what I want.  I've had games that give me convenience, and I like it, dammit.

I have tastes, I know what they are, and that's convenient for me as well. :)

I'm not bashing dynamic events, all I'm saying is that they're not innovative. 

They will be very interesting and fun, and I will no doubt love them, a breath of fresh air, one of the things I'm excited about with Guild Wars 2.

But I play a lot, so I imagine after 2/3 characters they will become pretty much linear, unless, like you said, they constantly implement them.