Originally posted by NameWasTaken
As good as TERA looks, after playing my first GW2 beta event, I can't justify paying $15 per month to play anything now. Seeing such a highly polished game, without a subscription fee, has spoiled me for good, so I'll revisit this game once it goes free2play.

once it goes F2P? dont be so damn negative, jeez.

this game is like the antithesis of a korean MMO.

RNG doesnt domineer everything, it's not a grind, and the combat system is a breath of fresh air compared to dumb tab and auto attack MMOs (much like GW2) that pollute the genre.

there are 8 unique classes, and 7 different races, each to cater to different players likes and needs. the environments are breathtaking, and the surroundings are incredibly detailed. the boss fights are unique and challenging. the dungeons are just as breathtaking as the scenery, and the fights inside are epic battles.

the game REALLY comes alive after you get to level 20, which only takes a few hours of play. you unlock customization for your skills through glyphs, you start instances, and start recieving BAM (big ass monsters, or bosses) quests to group up and take down with friends. the best part is, due to having 2 types of tanks, and 2 different healers, it isnt as big of an ass to find a group to spank them down.

GW2 is a piece of crap wrapped in the gold of hype/fancy design in comparison.

@OP You need to get at least level 30+ to experience a harder challenge. ;)

On the side note I am very happy that the game finally came into release at the US. Good job En Masse and excellent customer service. Definitely a game breaking MMO.

been playing Tera,  too busy having fun.   got to level 38 wich is the level cap for headstart.  can't wait to play tomorrow.

Originally posted by wrightstuf

Originally posted by helthros

Why does every TERA thread turn into GW2 vs TERA? Why are GW2 fanboys so threatened by this game?

 

The best is "The only thing TERA does well is combat" - You mean that thing you spend 90% of your game time doing? lol, I can see how doing that well is insignificant.

 

I didn't play GW2, but watching the feeds waiting for my TERA queue to pop I couldn't help but notice that it was simply button spamming. I haven't received a certain answer to my question - Can you be just as effective and get by just fine never using the tab key to target someone?

Sorry, but if 90% of the time you spend in an MMO is combat, then that MMO sucks bad. I play Tera, and have a character level 35. Have already cancelled and am playing till D3, as it just isnt compelling. combat does NOT make a game. I play on a PvE server and so far its just mindless questing to max level, then....

And from what i've seen, the Tera fanboys seem to feel more threatened. Seems like they jump on the defense alot more.

You blah blah about how combat isn't everything then you say you're waiting for a game, D3, which is 99% based on its action combat? lol.. just lol.

Originally posted by sadeyx

Originally posted by galdos

Originally posted by NameWasTaken



As good as TERA looks, after playing my first GW2 beta event, I can't justify paying $15 per month to play anything now. Seeing such a highly polished game, without a subscription fee, has spoiled me for good, so I'll revisit this game once it goes free2play.

 

^ This and GW2 is a refreshing change from the standard MMO formula, Tera's only innovation is   it's combat.

Not True,  the political system is also innovative.

And since 90% of your time in all MMO's is 'in-combat'  then your statement is very flippant

Its like saying "yea, we've only re-invented the wheel"

But I suppose if your the kind of person to not care about combat you probably wont notice how clunky GW's combat is in comparison.

Not to diminish Guildwars though,   being able to pay for gold with cash is quite innovative too.   Oh and a cash-shop centric game that has (a very steep) box price... well, thats very innovative

 

People want things to be innovative that are simply not.

The political system of TERA was modeled after another game whose name escapes me.  It was a much older game and was isometric.  TERA has adapted that idea, not innovated.

As well there is a similar political system in Wakfu.

The combat system used by TERA was also used by DC Universe Online.  Not the exact thing but you could dodge, block and what not.

Much like SWTOR which is largely un-innovative people wanted something they felt to be a good game to not only be a good game but a "game changer."  TERA is not a game changer.  It is not innovative.

It might be a good game.. it may be a great game... but it is not innovative.

Originally posted by troublmaker

Originally posted by sadeyx

Originally posted by galdos

Originally posted by NameWasTaken



As good as TERA looks, after playing my first GW2 beta event, I can't justify paying $15 per month to play anything now. Seeing such a highly polished game, without a subscription fee, has spoiled me for good, so I'll revisit this game once it goes free2play.

 

^ This and GW2 is a refreshing change from the standard MMO formula, Tera's only innovation is   it's combat.

Not True,  the political system is also innovative.

And since 90% of your time in all MMO's is 'in-combat'  then your statement is very flippant

Its like saying "yea, we've only re-invented the wheel"

But I suppose if your the kind of person to not care about combat you probably wont notice how clunky GW's combat is in comparison.

Not to diminish Guildwars though,   being able to pay for gold with cash is quite innovative too.   Oh and a cash-shop centric game that has (a very steep) box price... well, thats very innovative

 

People want things to be innovative that are simply not.

The political system of TERA was modeled after another game whose name escapes me.  It was a much older game and was isometric.  TERA has adapted that idea, not innovated.

As well there is a similar political system in Wakfu.

The combat system used by TERA was also used by DC Universe Online.  Not the exact thing but you could dodge, block and what not.

Much like SWTOR which is largely un-innovative people wanted something they felt to be a good game to not only be a good game but a "game changer."  TERA is not a game changer.  It is not innovative.

It might be a good game.. it may be a great game... but it is not innovative.

DCUO has a buggy, wonky block and dodge system, frustrating soft tab target system and is more of a hybrid than anything.  

Not to mention the whole active collision detection system present in TERA. 

Combat system used by TERA also used DCUO...wait wait, I know. AoC also has wonky dodging and blocking. It must be like TERA.

Originally posted by wrightstuf

Originally posted by helthros

Why does every TERA thread turn into GW2 vs TERA? Why are GW2 fanboys so threatened by this game?

 

The best is "The only thing TERA does well is combat" - You mean that thing you spend 90% of your game time doing? lol, I can see how doing that well is insignificant.

 

I didn't play GW2, but watching the feeds waiting for my TERA queue to pop I couldn't help but notice that it was simply button spamming. I haven't received a certain answer to my question - Can you be just as effective and get by just fine never using the tab key to target someone?

Sorry, but if 90% of the time you spend in an MMO is combat, then that MMO sucks bad. I play Tera, and have a character level 35. Have already cancelled and am playing till D3, as it just isnt compelling. combat does NOT make a game. I play on a PvE server and so far its just mindless questing to max level, then....

And from what i've seen, the Tera fanboys seem to feel more threatened. Seems like they jump on the defense alot more.

 

This man speaks the truth. Mmos should not be all about combat. 

And then he goes on to say hes waiting for D3.

(:

Originally posted by troublmaker

Originally posted by sadeyx

Originally posted by galdos

Originally posted by NameWasTaken















As good as TERA looks, after playing my first GW2 beta event, I can't justify paying $15 per month to play anything now. Seeing such a highly polished game, without a subscription fee, has spoiled me for good, so I'll revisit this game once it goes free2play.

 

^ This and GW2 is a refreshing change from the standard MMO formula, Tera's only innovation is   it's combat.

Not True,  the political system is also innovative.

And since 90% of your time in all MMO's is 'in-combat'  then your statement is very flippant

Its like saying "yea, we've only re-invented the wheel"

But I suppose if your the kind of person to not care about combat you probably wont notice how clunky GW's combat is in comparison.

Not to diminish Guildwars though,   being able to pay for gold with cash is quite innovative too.   Oh and a cash-shop centric game that has (a very steep) box price... well, thats very innovative

 

People want things to be innovative that are simply not.

The political system of TERA was modeled after another game whose name escapes me.  It was a much older game and was isometric.  TERA has adapted that idea, not innovated.

As well there is a similar political system in Wakfu.

The combat system used by TERA was also used by DC Universe Online.  Not the exact thing but you could dodge, block and what not.

Much like SWTOR which is largely un-innovative people wanted something they felt to be a good game to not only be a good game but a "game changer."  TERA is not a game changer.  It is not innovative.

It might be a good game.. it may be a great game... but it is not innovative.

 

If we're going to use that criteria for innovation, then are you willing to acknowledge that a game like GW2 isn't innovative at all?  In fact, if that is your basis for calling something innovative, then we can basically say that GW2 doesn't have a single feature that they didn't rip off from someone else.

Sounds silly, doesn't it?  To me, innovation is doing something different, not necessarily unique, and doing it better than is currently being done in any capacity.  A few posts above yours NBlitz laid out a very nice list of innovations from TERA, including the combat, collision detections, and political system.  These things aren't unique, but they are the evolved forms of what has come before.  And the genre is better for having them in a  game, just like it is better for having the Dynamic Event system from GW2 in a game.  

Originally posted by NameWasTaken

As good as TERA looks, after playing my first GW2 beta event, I can't justify paying $15 per month to play anything now. Seeing such a highly polished game, without a subscription fee, has spoiled me for good, so I'll revisit this game once it goes free2play.

 

Funny cause friday Tera opened up for me with early acces. At the same time i was invited for GW2 beta. Seeing that GW2 had server issues friday i spend my firday night in Tera. Saterday i launched GW2, and i just noticed when i was playing how much i wanted to be in Tera again cause the combat made the game feel so great.

Okay true, i didn't play GW2 much, only the introduction but seeing the introduction is like any other MMORPG (quests given to you instead of quests just happening to you as it happens later in the game) i just couldn't put myself to play it and whent back to Tera. Both games have their + and - sides. But for me personally i find it hard to play other MMORPG's cause the combat system they use is just boring compared to the action from Tera. Beside playing a Lancer has been the greatest fun i ever had with any class in a MMORPG. I normally don't like playing a tank but in Tera it just feels great that i can actively block, jump between a fire ball and my group member to protect him from it, etc all in real time.

Sounds silly, doesn't it?  To me, innovation is doing something different, not necessarily unique, and doing it better than is currently being done in any capacity.  A few posts above yours NBlitz laid out a very nice list of innovations from TERA, including the combat, collision detections, and political system.  These things aren't unique, but they are the evolved forms of what has come before.  And the genre is better for having them in a  game, just like it is better for having the Dynamic Event system from GW2 in a game.  

Tera combat is nothing innovative at all. I have play the games which also have a combat as is Tera like Dynasty Warrior, Monster Hunter also there are Asian MMOs have the combat as in Tera like Kingdom Under Fire, C9, yes it's kind of unique in Tera , but for me it's kind of much the same as in the MMOs that I said.

Collision Detections is also appear in most offline game but I dont find why we should have Collision Detections in massive online game, it is ridicurious 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCEMrTWL8gk

But those features havnt appeared in an MMO before,   its only now that internet speeds, latency and computer architecture has advanced to the stage where its viable in an MMO.

Originally posted by amadeuz

...

 Tera combat is nothing innovative at all. I have play the games which also have a combat as is Tera like Dynasty Warrior, Monster Hunter also there are Asian MMOs have the combat as in Tera like Kingdom Under Fire, C9, yes it's kind of unique in Tera , but for me it's kind of much the same as in the MMOs that I said.

Collision Detections is also appear in most offline game but I dont find why we should have Collision Detections in massive online game, it is ridicurious 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCEMrTWL8gk

Collision detection is one of the things that few mmorpgs can pull through properly, thus very few implement it. For one, it raises the network requirements and poorly optimised mmorpgs can't handle them most of the time.

I don't know if Tera's combat is innovative, it is certainly different in the mmorpg space. Listing a couple single player games and some unfinished mmorpgs doesn't invalidate how fresh and different than the regular tab targetting (or the more recent soft lock targetting) combat feels.

Originally posted by Illyssia
Terra is just another Korean MMO, Bill, get over this one fast and don't warm to it. It is designed to go down a blast with the Soeul PC Bang culture, where you buy game cards and rent a computer for the day. Usually they have some kind of grind/ time sink to keep you pumping in game hours and earning the games company revenue. Bluehole put ina cash shop soon after launch in Korea to maximize their profits too from players. Art graphics and sound are par for the Korean mmo genre, it is sort of bang crash wallop, with big swords and wacky armour models.

Good lord, why post when your only contribution is false generalisations?

If you want to see stagnation in mmorpgs, all you have to do is check the western developers, who seem content with repackaging the same wow style gameplay. Only Eastern developers and some Europeans are trying to produce something different nowadays, but are not given much of a chance from biased people.

Westerners hate big swords right? Guess why WoW is such a failure, with the absurdly big weapons and shoulder pads. Please.

Oh, and guess what, GW2 is a Korean mmorpg. Funny how that works.

Originally posted by Bushi13

Originally posted by NameWasTaken



As good as TERA looks, after playing my first GW2 beta event, I can't justify paying $15 per month to play anything now. Seeing such a highly polished game, without a subscription fee, has spoiled me for good, so I'll revisit this game once it goes free2play.

All games should inspire to play not inspire to pay.

That's very poetic sounding, but isn't really as profound as you might want to believe.

At the end of the day, games are products, made by companies who are in business to make money and remain in business. Companies have different ways of going about making that money, but it's their goal nonetheless.

I know there's this common mentality of "it's not worth the subscription to me, so there shouldn't be one". Many people tend to never consider things in relation to anything beyond their own nose. They seldom ever see, or even acknowledge, the bigger picture.

Here's the thing though, whether or not something is worth paying for is 100% subjective. I'm sure there are tons of things you will spend money on - far more than $15 a month - that others see no value in and wouldn't find worth the cost. But you do, and don't even think twice about it. Why? Because you enjoy it. It's worth the cost to you.

If you're inspired enough to play GW2, you'll buy the game. If it continues to inspire you to play, you'll buy the expansions. Maybe you'll even spend money on cash shop items.

In that context, you are no different than the person who buys another MMO, like TERA, and finds themselves inspired enough to continue paying $15 a month for a subscription. Or anyone playing any other subscription MMO for that matter.

In that context, you are no different than the person who plays a fully F2P MMO and happily spends money in the Cash Shop - potentially far more than a $15 sub-fee's worth - because they're inspired to play the game and know that the cash shop items will make it more enjoyable/manageablee/feasible for them in some way, be it xp gain rate, mounts, or whatever.

Speaking of Cash Shops, your statement can be used against GW2 as well. They have a cash shop in the game because they intend, and probably even require, the additional revenue it brings in. People are quick to say "ah, but it's not necessary!". And indeed it's not. But to say that is to ignore the crux of the situation.

Cash Shops (in general, not just GW2's) are designed largely around exploiting various elements of human psychology. The need to belong, or to stand out, to be competitive, to be "even", the want of convenience or advantage or , at least, less disadvantage.  Too often, when you see the debate about Cash Shops, it always comes back to whether the items are "pay to win" or not, and it's almost always in the context of "will buying item x give me an advantage over other players, or them over me". That's certainly a valid argument, where it's applicable. But it's only one aspect of how Cash Shops earn developers money.

Companies will stock their virtual inventories with items that they know - through research, gathered data, etc - many people will want to buy. They'll buy it either because it fits into one of those psychological areas listed above. Or, they'll buy it to overcome some obstacle or speed bump that's been deliberately coded into the game in order to encourage that purchase (e.g. xp potions which help circumvent a deliberately stunted rate of xp gain).

These things are well researched, well planned out and very carefully priced and positioned to sell based on all kinds of data. It's not like they're saying "Dur hur, let's just fill it up with neat stuff and hope it sells!". They're filling it up with stuff that they know will sell, even if it's not to "you". Again, people tend to not look past their own nose and think "well if I don't think it's necessary, why would anyone else".

And of course, there's the knowledge that cash shops can, and do, yield returns far beyond a mere $15 subscription fee. That's the reason so many companies are changing to this model. They see more $$$ in it. And it comes with a number of built-in benefits that are like gold to their marketing and PR; the ability to say it's "free!", the ability to technicallly count every single account registered in their "player population" reports, because they don't distinguish between the one that's played actively and the one who hasn't logged in in over a year. And so on.

Developers, and this includes ANet, do not embrace cash shops because they're "better for the player". That they happen to be better for some players (not cost of entry, etc) is one of those freebie bonuses that come with it. They embrace cash shops because they are proven, time and again, to bring in far more revenue than a subscription model ever could. It is not some altruistic gift, or act of goodwill by a company for its fans and players.

It's one of the greatest ironies of gaming that I can think of; something that's touted as "free" makes the developers more money than something that isn't.

In a nutshell, it comes back to your statement. Though they aren't asking you to pay a monthly sub up-front, A-Net are still trying to inspire you to pay them more money. And they're doing it in ways you probably won't even be aware of while playing.

For my time and money, I personally prefer to play a game that earns my monthly sub fee by inspiring me to log in and play, by providing me an enjoyable and engaging experience that keeps me ever wanting to progress and move forward; much more so than one that lets me play for "free" (or for a box purchase), but then is chock-full of design quirks and cash shop items that are trying to entice me to spend more money every minute I'm logged in.

Originally posted by Xasapi

Originally posted by Illyssia
Terra is just another Korean MMO, Bill, get over this one fast and don't warm to it. It is designed to go down a blast with the Soeul PC Bang culture, where you buy game cards and rent a computer for the day. Usually they have some kind of grind/ time sink to keep you pumping in game hours and earning the games company revenue. Bluehole put ina cash shop soon after launch in Korea to maximize their profits too from players. Art graphics and sound are par for the Korean mmo genre, it is sort of bang crash wallop, with big swords and wacky armour models.

Good lord, why post when your only contribution is false generalisations?

If you want to see stagnation in mmorpgs, all you have to do is check the western developers, who seem content with repackaging the same wow style gameplay. Only Eastern developers and some Europeans are trying to produce something different nowadays, but are not given much of a chance from biased people.

Westerners hate big swords right? Guess why WoW is such a failure, with the absurdly big weapons and shoulder pads. Please.

Oh, and guess what, GW2 is a Korean mmorpg. Funny how that works.

I thought Guild Wars is American work, isn't it? or I misunderstanding something.

I knew Guild Wars part 1 made by ArenaNet that located in Seattle, and Guild Wars 2 is also developed by ArenaNet too. I saw NCSoft company logo label on the game, but they said NCSoft is just publish it, thus ANet do the most works.

Originally posted by amadeuz

I thought Guild Wars is American work, isn't it? or I misunderstanding something.

I knew Guild Wars part 1 made by ArenaNet that located in Seattle, and Guild Wars 2 is also developed by ArenaNet too. I saw NCSoft company logo label on the game, but they said NCSoft is just publish it, thus ANet do the most works.

You are correct, AreneaNet is located in Bellevue, WA. The company was founded by a bunch of former Blizzard employees. AN is an NC West subsidary with NC West located in Seattle. But it is part of the NC Soft umbrella, but claiming they were Korean would be like claiming Blizzard is French because they are part of Vivendi.