Fanboism is strong in this one.

It will not change the fact that GW2 is same old same old for many of us. Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving. 12 months, after that it becomes booooring. Maybe not even that long.

---

Originally posted by Tarka

The mechanics are very different

---

Mechanics are the same, what you talk about is implementation. It is still the same thing, just done a bit differently.

No big deal tho, I do not say it as something demeaning or negative.

---

Originally posted by Spiider

Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving.

---

Revolutionary does not necessarily implies industry breaking, saving or changing. It is revolutionary in terms that never has done anything even similar - they took what already used mechanics and turned them around into something vastly different.

Originally posted by Spiider

Fanboism is strong in this one.

It will not change the fact that GW2 is same old same old for many of us. Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving. 12 months, after that it becomes booooring. Maybe not even that long.

Sorry you won't be playing.  Your opinion is appreciated.  I don't think the OP is looking to see if the game is revolutionary or a WoW Killer; I believe he's looking to see if there are similarities between GW2 and Rift.  Move along, ye old grumpy soul.

Originally posted by Spiider

Fanboism is strong in this one.

It will not change the fact that GW2 is same old same old for many of us. Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving. 12 months, after that it becomes booooring. Maybe not even that long.

It makes me wonder, when people post things like this, what they ARE waiting for.

Originally posted by Reflection2

Originally posted by Tarka

2)  The player doesn't get a progress bar that applies solely to their own progress in the task, instead they see a "communal" progress for everyone taking part in the "Heart" quest.  I don't know if WAR had something similar for its PQ system, but I'd guess that it did.

 

This is not true - the heart progress bar is individual for each person. They are different to the dynamic event progress bar which counts the contribution of everyone in the area. You can often complete heart quests by doing a nearby dynamic event which may lead to some of this confusion.

From my extensive time playing Rift and taking part in the dynamic events they had, my main hated was mob tagging. As a fully raid geared cleric it was not efficient to do anything but solo if you wanted to earn PAs, and I would rarely join public groups as it simply slowed things down. I tended to avoid other players when grinding or doing dailies. My whole guild was the same, no one ever grouped outside of raids and the 15 mins for a daily dungeon, and arguments often broke out over the best soloing spots such as Talos Landing. When I did join a public group during an event there was always some asshat who was ungrouped tagging the mobs so the group did not get any experience or loot. 

Compared to this Guild Wars 2 is a complete breath of fresh air. Actually being happy to see other players in the world! Helping people and being helped! I mean, even apart from the thousands of other improvements GW2 has over Rift, this was just mind blowing for me.

Incorrect.  I was doing "Heart" quests in Queensdale (it was the one with the wurms and the feeding of the cows) and everyones contribution was making that bar go up, not just my own.  See the wiki article for Renown Hearts:

"Hearts fill as players assist in the area; no NPC interaction is required to begin progress on a heart....

......

Once a heart is completed, players are rewarded with experience and receive mail from an NPC expressing gratitude and containing money. Additionally, the renown heart NPCs will begin selling karma goods."

Note the plural:  "players" and the bits in red.

I believe that you are getting mixed up between:

1)  Multiple players contributing to completing the "heart" (which is what I experienced).

with:

2)  The rewards that are given out on an individual basis based on each individual players contribution. 

The "heart" progress bar is a communal one as far as I could tell.

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

I like Rift alot, but after playing GW2 I couldn't go back to Rift. GW2 is in a whole different league really. I still like Trion and what they're doing over there, but it's like night and day for me.

Come on 8/25. This has been a hellish wait already and I wasn't even a big fan until the 3rd beta weekend recently. I can't imagine how you guys & gals feel who have been waiting years...

We feel exasperated and excited and some of us, *cough cough* are practically foaming at the mouth.  Trolls really hate that kind of thing and have to tell the world about it.  LOL  Undercover Troll on a mission from the CIA to stop all happiness about a title.  I think that might be the deal.  I'm not callin' anyone in particular a troll, mind you.  Just commenting on troll business practices. heh

And I played both RIFT and all the BWEs for GW2 and no, I absolutely do not think GW2 is anything like RIFT other than having events, WHICH, by the way, are very dissimilar.  For one, they scale to the number of players. 

Originally posted by Tutu2
Is this a fair assessment? I keep hearing the story and voice acting is somewhat lucklustre, which is concerning me also. 

Is a Mix of warhammer PQs, Rift DE and Invasions (sometimes people forget that rift also, have invasions). I played both games, and so far Rift DE and invasion are more complex and hard than the ¨DE¨ that you find in gw2, and is not really dynamic, i mean is dynamic talking about time but not space, once you learn where it will happen all you need to do is wait, but  once we have the change to play gw2 till 80, people will make better comparisions.

About the story and voice action, from my point of view is more like a ¨B¨ movie.  

Originally posted by Aerowyn
game is nothing like Rift.. not sure where you heard that

word is born :)

Originally posted by Spiider

Fanboism is strong in this one.

It will not change the fact that GW2 is same old same old for many of us. Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving. 12 months, after that it becomes booooring. Maybe not even that long.

On the bright side in 12 months I'll have saved $180 in subscription fee's and be able to buy 4 new games to replace the hole in my game playing space

Originally posted by Tarka

The "heart" progress bar is a communal one as far as I could tell.

Hmm, I'm not sure.  If some of them are, they're very rare.  I know for a fact because I watched to see if the progress bar went up and as far as I remember, it never did unless I contributed.  It was something I paid close attention to in the BWE's, but it's not impossible that some heart quests fill up as a result of multiple people doing them.  I just don't remember that happening.

As for players being plural, they're talking about individual players but addressing them as a group, they're not saying they were in a group in the game.

Originally posted by Spiider

Fanboism is strong in this one.

It will not change the fact that GW2 is same old same old for many of us. Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving. 12 months, after that it becomes booooring. Maybe not even that long.

Since when is "Fanboyism" synonymous with actually answering a query?  Furthermore, where did anyone in this thread call it "revolutionary" or "industry breaking"?  

The simple fact is, GW2's progression activities (i.e. the "Hearts" and DE systems) ARE different to Rift.  Just like Rift has progression systems that differ to those in WoW.  One may not like the fact that GW2 isn't so radically different as to be considered a completely different animal, but nevertheless each game is different in some noticable respects. 

Of course, that doesn't prevent certain individuals from refusing to acknowledge such differences, and trying to automatically assume that everything is the same.

So my question to you is:    

In YOUR own opinion, at what point is a "ground based" MMO so different as to be worthy of being actually labelled as "different" to the competition, and yet STILL actually be considered a ground based MMO?  

[mod edit]

Is GW2 "revolutionary"?  In my opinion, no.  But that's not the point of this discussion.  GW2 IS different to Rift in the ways mentioned earlier. So whilst it may not be "revolutionary", it could be instead considered to be"evolutionary".

Originally posted by Baddogbill

Originally posted by Spiider

Fanboism is strong in this one.

It will not change the fact that GW2 is same old same old for many of us. Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving. 12 months, after that it becomes booooring. Maybe not even that long.

On the bright side in 12 months I'll have saved $180 in subscription fee's and be able to buy 4 new games to replace the hole in my game playing space

If the game can entertain me for 12 month then I am very very happy. Only one MMO managed to entertain me for me then a year. 

Originally posted by hikaru77

Originally posted by Tutu2
Is this a fair assessment? I keep hearing the story and voice acting is somewhat lucklustre, which is concerning me also. 

Is a Mix of warhammer PQs, Rift DE and Invasions (sometimes people forget that rift also, have invasions). I played both games, and so far Rift DE and invasion are more complex and hard than the ¨DE¨ that you find in gw2, and is not really dynamic, i mean is dynamic talking about time but not space, once you learn where it will happen all you need to do is wait, but  once we have the change to play gw2 till 80, people will make better comparisions.

About the story and voice action, from my point of view is more like a ¨B¨ movie.  

The only thing hard about a Rift DE was getting people to actually do anything but pop out and kill the final boss ...I do find it sort of funny that anyone found an invasion in Rift hard and complex. [mod edit]

Well, my opinion of GW2 is not very favorable, and I think the game is very dull and shallow on so many levels, but particularly weak in the story and voice acting areas.

I enjoy good story driven games, but unfortunately, I think GW2 does a really poor job with very generic storylines, very poor writing, cutscenes that make the game look like a cheap asian f2p title ( remains to be seen if they change them by launch), and voice acting that is atrocious, and laughable at best. It's almost like coders at Anet said : "hey, lets save some money and do the voice acting ourselves".

In regards to the game playing like Rift, I believe you may get that feeling because of the "dynamic events", which in my opinion, feel more like public quests in WAR.  Unfortunately, the way these dynamic events were implemented is not that different from WAR and they get old really fast, especially in the starting zones, where maybe in an attempt to avoid overwhelming new players with complicated mechanics, they are basically very generic "kill X rats" quests disguised by popups that read "new event nearby" and present players with bars of completion that fill up or get depleted as the objectives are met.

The game won't be enjoyed by everyone, and well, I think it's clear I won't be buying it, but I hope those that do have a good time.

Different people, different opinions, and different tastes in gaming..

Originally posted by Baddogbill

The only thing hard about a Rift DE was getting people to actually do anything but pop out and kill the final boss ...I do find it sort of funny that anyone found an invasion in Rift hard and complex. Perhaps a game like Barbie on Line would be better suited for folks that had too much trouble with invasions in Rift

Another big difference between Rift's rifts/invasions and GW2's dynamic events is that Rift's event mobs were all some sort of "deux ex machina" monsters, which has little to do with the local setting of the game. From the first area to the last area, you pretty much had the same kind of esoteric, totally out of context monsters attacking you. They come out of nowhere, and go back to nowhere.

In GW2, the event mobs are all in context. Bandits stealing from commoners, wild animals making trouble, Ettins scavenging goods or annoying a peaceful giant in his cave, centaurs pillaging farms, everything is part of the general story of the area your in. It's not some kind of out of context esoteric monster dropped from some giant tornado which is nothing more than a different version of a mob spawner.

Originally posted by Dreskest

In regards to the game playing like Rift, I believe you may get that feeling because of the "dynamic events", which in my opinion, feel more like public quests in WAR.  Unfortunately, the way these dynamic events were implemented is not that different from WAR and they get old really fast...

You are most likely confusing the hearts with dynamic events. Hearts are not dynamic events. The dynamic events are nothing like the static WAR public quests.

Originally posted by Tarka

Originally posted by Spiider

Fanboism is strong in this one.

It will not change the fact that GW2 is same old same old for many of us. Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving. 12 months, after that it becomes booooring. Maybe not even that long.

Since when is "Fanboyism" synonymous with actually answering a query?  Furthermore, where did anyone in this thread call it "revolutionary" or "industry breaking"?  

The simple fact is, GW2's progression activities (i.e. the "Hearts" and DE systems) ARE different to Rift.  Just like Rift has progression systems that differ to those in WoW.  One may not like the fact that GW2 isn't so radically different as to be considered a completely different animal, but nevertheless each game is different in some noticable respects. 

Of course, that doesn't prevent certain individuals from refusing to acknowledge such differences, and trying to automatically assume that everything is the same.

 

So my question to you is:    

In YOUR own opinion, at what point is a "ground based" MMO so different as to be worthy of being actually labelled as "different" to the competition, and yet STILL actually be considered a ground based MMO?  

Do you have any examples?  Or are you just trolling for the sake of it?

 

Is GW2 "revolutionary"?  In my opinion, no.  But that's not the point of this discussion.  GW2 IS different to Rift in the ways mentioned earlier. So whilst it may not be "revolutionary", it could be instead considered to be"evolutionary".

So you are trying to say that I'm 100% wrong and that GW2 is something this world has never seen?

EVE was revolutionary when it came out. So was AO (that's 2001 we are talking about, a year you probably didn't even know how to spell "mmorpg"). Yet some individuals will keep defending what they like despite obvious facts showing the contrary (of that something being boring, bad or just plain dumb). Just like some Germans supported nazi party or some americans support invading countries they cant even find on the map. Are you one of those?

Rift and GW2 are the same. Grindy, boring, and clones of WOW that is clone of EQ that is clone of something before it.

Right now there is NO game that breaks the industry in a positive way simply because people making games are too afraid to saiil uncharted waters. It's all about profits and GW2 is money making game, not fun providing one.

[mod edit]

Originally posted by Spiider

Originally posted by Tarka

Originally posted by Spiider

Fanboism is strong in this one.

It will not change the fact that GW2 is same old same old for many of us. Call it WOW clone, call it not-same-as-rift or call it Matilda but it will not be revolutionary and industry breaking or saving. 12 months, after that it becomes booooring. Maybe not even that long.

Since when is "Fanboyism" synonymous with actually answering a query?  Furthermore, where did anyone in this thread call it "revolutionary" or "industry breaking"?  

The simple fact is, GW2's progression activities (i.e. the "Hearts" and DE systems) ARE different to Rift.  Just like Rift has progression systems that differ to those in WoW.  One may not like the fact that GW2 isn't so radically different as to be considered a completely different animal, but nevertheless each game is different in some noticable respects. 

Of course, that doesn't prevent certain individuals from refusing to acknowledge such differences, and trying to automatically assume that everything is the same.

 

So my question to you is:    

In YOUR own opinion, at what point is a "ground based" MMO so different as to be worthy of being actually labelled as "different" to the competition, and yet STILL actually be considered a ground based MMO?  

Do you have any examples?  Or are you just trolling for the sake of it?

 

Is GW2 "revolutionary"?  In my opinion, no.  But that's not the point of this discussion.  GW2 IS different to Rift in the ways mentioned earlier. So whilst it may not be "revolutionary", it could be instead considered to be"evolutionary".

So you are trying to say that I'm 100% wrong and that GW2 is something this world has never seen?

EVE was revolutionary when it came out. So was AO (that's 2001 we are talking about, a year you probably didn't even know how to spell "mmorpg"). Yet some individuals will keep defending what they like despite obvious facts showing the contrary (of that something being boring, bad or just plain dumb). Just like some Germans supported nazi party or some americans support invading countries they cant even find on the map. Are you one of those?

Rift and GW2 are the same. Grindy, boring, and clones of WOW that is clone of EQ that is clone of something before it.

Right now there is NO game that breaks the industry in a positive way simply because people making games are too afraid to saiil uncharted waters. It's all about profits and GW2 is money making game, not fun providing one.

Shall I continue? Or will you simply avoid any intelligent and honest argument by claming me to be a troll? I can always claim that those who find GW2 interessting are trolls if I was to follow your chain of deduction. Yet I do know better and will simply find my amuzement somewhere else, not interrupting anyone who wants to play GW2. We are all free to do and think what we want. If you like it play it. But don't expect me to be silent in expressing myself.

Did you actually read my post?  

1)  Do you know the difference between something being "revolutionary" as opposed to being "evolutionary"?   If I said "GW2 is something this world has never seen" (your words) then I would be implying that it is revolutionary.  Not evolutionary (which is what I actually said).  So your question (and the majority of your latest post) is irrelevant. 

2)  It is really not advisable to make assumptions about people you dont actually know.  Yes, I played AO and Eve.  I have played many MMORPG's in my time.   Including SWG (Pre-NGE), AOC, WoW, Tabula Rasa, SWTOR, STO, and others.  I really don't care if you believe me or not.  That's irrelevant.

3)  Calling something "boring" or "not fun" is completely subjective.  You are entitled to your own opinion, but that doesn't necessarily apply to others.  More importantly, such an opinion is completely off topic in a discussion comparing systems in two games.  The fact is that the OP asked a question and people have replied.  If you are calling them "fanboys" for replying then you have really gotten things mixed up.

4)  You claim that "...there is no game that breaks the industry in a positive way...", which is again a subjective statement.  I could point out that GW2 brings elements which can affect the industry in a positive way, just as many other MMO's have.  For instance, TOR's situation could be considered to be something that the industry could learn from and therefore be considered a positive thing.  Just because YOU don't agree doesn't make your opinion as being the only justifiable one.

In short: 

• Is GW2 revolutionary?  No. 
• Does it HAVE to be revolutionary to be capable of providing "fun"?   No.  

The point here is that your statements are completely off-topic and subjective.  You are throwing around labels which are well known to evoke emotions in other users of such discussions and generalising because you refuse to acknowledge differences between the games.  Therefore your comments are both inaccurate and unhelpful to the actual topic being discussed, and therefore could well be considered as a troll attempt.