Does a game have to be revolutionary to be worth anything?

But to answer the topic, "I never believed it would be a revolution, but that doesn't mean I don't think it's a good game in its own right".

I think GW2 set a precident at the least.  It has let game companies know that MMO gamers are willing to invest into a game that is ambitious and different.

In that sense, I believe it has changed the genre a bit already.

On the other hand, I personally just don't find GW2 to be all that exciting to play.  I respect what it attempted to be, but it holds no charm for me.  I played it for the first week after launch, and that was about it.  Despite the fact that I can see and know that GW2 has done a good number of things better than any other MMO I've ever seen (including the "boring" combat), I simply don't feel compelled to return to it.  It lacks something, though I'm honestly not sure what that something is.

Oh, and as an aside, what's wrong with reading?  I really don't understand the seeming fixation that MMOs these days have with voice acting.  Especially when they give my character a voice.

Originally posted by SirFubar                                                                                                                                                                        I don't know where you get the idea that GW2 was coming as a "Revolutionnay game that would change the genre" aside from the hype on the internet, but that was obviously wrong and it ain't our fault if you fall for it. The only "revolution" (if we can even call it that way...) that the game was bringing IMO was the sPvP without the gear grind. This was for me a major selling factor. Maybe the holy trinity gone was another one but I'm not entirely sure.

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus
Its never been called revolutionary, but its sure one of the games that helps the whole genre evolve to a different level.

Oh, I don't know, maybe...this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GExA5IsWZpQ

"Dynamic Event's is a revolution of thought..."

"Make it the best MMO that's ever been released..."

I knew it would be a good game with some fresh ideas,but I never expected it to change the MMO world or direct it into a completely new direction

Biased poll. i wonder what the results would be if the question had been "do you think Gw2 has significantly altered the genre ", without all the hyperbole. Of all the points the op mentions im only going to focus on combat

Combat: moving around and being able to detect aoe effects, dynamic dodging, movement based attack skills that take you into and out of range while pushing a button....thats all "oh really" to you?. I tried Mop after and i felt as if i was fighting on a wheelchair.

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus
Its never been called revolutionary

Now that is a paradigm shift in history rewrite levels.

Originally posted by Blackstar347
I think you are nitpicking a bit. Some might find it revolutionary others will not. Why should we care if some people out there don't find it a revolutionary game?

It doesn't work that way, you don't get to *find* it revolutionary. It either is or isn't, measured by the effect it has on it's field (genre, in this case).

If it is, we can't tell yet, but in any event, you don't just get to decide on a personal level.

In my opinion, it may spawn a B2P mini revolution, but as far as gameplay conventions go - nothing. Just nothing.

Originally posted by freston

Biased poll. i wonder what the results would be if the question had been "do you think Gw2 has significantly altered the genre ", without all the hyperbole.

That's almost what "revolution" means. Not exaclty, but most people aren't naive enough to expect a sudden, extreme change just because a game succeeded. And yes, I do think GW2 changed the genre significatly, simply because it's the first "big" MMO since WoW that didn't fall flat on its face in one way or another and isn't a WoW clone. Like SWTOR proved that a big budget can't compensate for a lack of polish and innovation, GW2 proved that non-WoW MMOs can succeed.

AoC is the only other game since WoW's release that could've done this, but it got funcommed.

Exploration:  Exploration is nice in GW2.  Is it genre changing?  In some aspects yes, in others no.  I agree that the rewards are underwhelming though.  They should scale better and give more incentive to do them.

Structured PvP: is too bland for me.  Only 1 gameplay style and it's Capture & Hold.  The lobby browser is a backwards step in the genre, and it should have been an automatic grouping for random players, and organized teams could have used the lobby style system instead.

WvW is fun for random pvp action, but it's sorely lacking for coordinated guild and group play.  The features such as Commander needs a lot of work.  This the main reason for the lack of teamplay.

Rewards. I agree with this.  They are very lackluster, especially the Daily rewards.

Crafting is pretty good.  I was able to craft gear and weapons every tier as i leveled up.  Gathering materials was a hassle though, and i bought everything i needed from Trading Post when i had to.

Dungeons disappointed me the most with this game.  It was too much of a learning curve for new players.

Story disappointed me too, especially after playing swtor.  I just couldn't get into the awful voice-acting, but it was still good considering A-Net didn't have a big budget like Bioware.  The actual characters and story in GW2 didn't interest me either, especially Traeherne.

Combat is a welcome change for me.  It's more action-focused, instead of standing still.  I love the dodging mechanic too.

Money Costs are ok.  It's kind of pain for new players though, but once you hit 80, you shouldn't have problems with alts.

You didn't have to call us fanbois/fangirls.  I'm a fan, but also a critic.  It's good to be balanced and see the pros and cons.

I dont think anyone, except maybe complete fools, thought it was going to just suddenly turn the entire genre on its head overnight like some people tend to imply about anyone who enjoys the game. But it is clear that it has had at least some effect on the genre, and several other currently in development games are using some similar features & mechanics (like active dodging, smaller sets of skills, combo fields , dynamic events, not relying on trinity & taunt mechanics). It got the wheels turning, it didnt revolutionize it. It was a step in the right direction for some players, but it isnt perfect. Other games will improve on and perfect the ideas of things that GW2 brought.

No, it wasn't. Honestly I feel like I was *almost* lied to.

Dynamic Events: Hearing everything I did about dynamic events made them seem like world changing and impactful. In reality they change the world for minutes, then it repeats over and over.

Trinity: Losing the trinity was a miss for me. I like the responsibility of  keeping yourself alive, but it makes for horrid gameplay in groups. Nothing but zerging and since there is no real tank and healer the bosses are really lackluster and boring. This is where the trinity shines imo. You can have truly dynamic boss fights and make them unique in their own way. GW2? Stand there and spam abiltiies if you want. Sure you'll die, but just run back and repeat it.

Hearts: I still don't get these. The game would've done a lot better without them. It almost hurts more than it helps.

Economy: This is where the game makes me most angry. They set it up so you cannot buy low and sell high, and everything has a minimum price. Having every server connected was a mistake also. It would've done better if it was per server or split with like 3-4 servers making up each trading post. The price on everything is so low making money is a painful experience, but this is why ArenaNet wanted. They want to make their cash shop valuable, but doing it this way just annoys me.

Controls: Anyone who says they're good is lying to themself. They are truly horrid. I still don't understand even to this day why there is not a zoom in for the camera. Going into any tight spaced area is nothing but pure frustration. This is one thing WoW will always win on it seems. Their controls are 100% fluid and perfect.     

Dungeons: I find dungeons to be pretty decent. They are at the right difficulty. My only issue is what I stated above. A lot of dungeons are tiny, so the camera comes into play and makes it annoying to fight them.

Orr: This is a hit or miss for a lot of people. I do like the zone, I do think it is deserving of a level 80 zone, but the respawns are out of control. You have around 40 seconds to move on after you fight something or you will begin to start getting swarmed.

Cash Shop: This is by far the best feature of GW2. I hope future F2P/B2P games follow suit. This is how you do a cash shop well. Any game that comes out if it isn't anywhere near like this one I won't touch it.

Overall the game is still a great. It easily beats out 99% of other MMOs that are on the market. The game still needs to evolve and grow, but I fear ArenaNet won't change certain things and that will end up hurting the game. The only thing GW2 changed imo is the cash shop. They have evolved it and other companies will need to step up if they want their games to be able to survive. I think the "revolutionary game" will have to be as much sandbox as it is themepark. You need to give the userbase the tools to do anything they want.

I think they did most what they aimed to do. And as it goes with any new thing - not all turns out to be actually better than old.

Only hyped fanboys thought the game will change the MMO genre in any other way it allready did : killing P2P MMO games