GW2 is evolutionary and a fantastic game but imho it currently falls somewhat short of revolutionary, i say currently falls short because the game is less than 2 months old and can still over time have features, content and fixes added that eventually make it truly revolutionary if anet should decide to take it that way..

I still play gw2 and very much enjoy it but just like any other newly released games it has some serious flaws and bugs that need to be hammered out..

It really depends on how you define "revolutionary".

It is the first game that doesnt do just like Wow and still do what it does really well. It also do that with B2P.

But GW2 is not a revolution in itself, just like Paynes writing wasnt. It is however the start of a revolution because it acually show mainstream devs that you dont have to do things exactly like Wow to make a fun and working game.

I still voted Yes, but only because I already known this for a long while. The game still have a lot of the standard MMO features put in a slightly different way, and exploration is not something new, it was a common features in the late 90s early 00s.

GW2 is not a Wow copy and what is at least revolutionary starting is that it actually proves that non Wow copies still can do fine.

The game is still in vanilla and where the game will be 5 years from now is hard to say but it still prove the point and hopefully it might get people like EA and Activision to realize that it is not just changing P2P into F2P that needs to be done if you want a new successful MMO but you also need to change the basics of the game.

There are other games who got the same basic idea, Tera have tried to change MMO combat, TSW try to get rid of levels and so on (not counting small indie games here) but none of them really sold well enough to really prove the point to the larger publishers, and GW2 is experimenting with many things who each by themselves might not be so big.

GW2 is not a revolution in itself but the revolution have started. We just dont see the large picture yet and wont for a few more years but hopefully we will once again get MMOs that try to do things in their own way instead of just copy and paste.

Originally posted by SlickShoes

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Originally posted by Rimmersman

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

It does change some things.

First,it actually brings the "MMO" to the open world instead of the "MMO" in an instance.

Additionally it made every player an ally in PVE, removing factions and removing competition for resources.

It also changed "questing", from the method of delivering them to the way it rewards them.

It is also possible to craft the best items in the game instead of them being hidden in some instance.

 

There are also a number of things that aren't exactly exclusive to it but that aren't (or were at GW2 release date) very common in MMORPGs, like 3-side PvP, non gear based PvP, etc.

What do you mean by the marked line?

Are you saying that GW2 is a non instanced game, i'm missing your point?

GW2 Open world isn't  instanced, is there any doubs about that?

What I mean is that you actually have masses of people playing together towards the same shared objective in the open world of GW2, something that in most other games doesn't happen except in Raids and maybe the illusion of a populated open world in new starter areas for a race until the game shifts to a lobby like playstyle.

Once you have explored the zones and done the quests in GW2 though you enter the lobby game too, idling in cities, crafting, dungeons, pvp, WvW, do it all without really going anywhere. Add in the fact that you can just fast travel anywhere and it feels even smaller.

None of the zones in GW2 connected at all, so its not really OPEN fi you want to get down to it, everything is connected by a loading screen and once a certain amoutn of people are in that zone you are placed in an overflow, so it is instanced.

Actually you can't do dungeons from towns.

In fact the open world is still relevant because part of the "quests" never end and you won't spend that much time in towns.

It is open world it just isn't seamless. 

An overflow server is that a server. Much better than a queue screen.

It is crazy the things we have to debate with Guild Wars games. "Guild Wars 1 ins't an MMORPG cause it is instanced" bur "DDO is an MMORPG" no problem or "Vindictus is a MMORPG ". I wonder if people debat if TERA is a MMORPG or not because it has CHANNELS AND THOSE ARE DIFFERENT INSTANCES but "GW2 is instanced because if your server is full and they send you to an overflow server isntead of queue it is proof it is an instance".

Lets just ignore the point that you keep playing (if only briefly) with tons of people while by the time a panda in the biggest MMORPG reaches northrend he is playing alone in the world (that is if he isn't levelling by doing dungeons instead of doing quests).

Originally posted by Icewhite

"Revolutionary Game That Would Change The Genre"

Cite this quotation please.

Googling turns up an interesting lack of results.  What's funny is that all known instances of this phrase, or close variants, spawed here, in this thread. 

If you're questioning who's 'guilty of generating the hype'?  It's the OP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well

Classic, easy political trick.

This, of course. As usual, obvious is obvious.

And before the OP or anyone else thinks about using this poll to bash the game more... a game not being "revolutionary" (but IMHO just "evolutionary", aka enhancing existing elements) doesn't make it a bad game, or all MMORPG since the UO/AC1/EQ trio are bad since they all copied on those three and enhanced the features.

It's, by far, not the first game to not clone WoW design. Tabula Rasa, TSW, Darkfall, and others have gone a very different direction.

It might be the first pure fantasy MMO that's a success AND haven't cloned WoW mechanics - that's true, but I don't find that to be particularly amazing.

Trying new things is fine, but if they don't amount to something better - it's worth exactly nothing, except as an experiment to learn from.

To me, GW2 represents a lesson that - apparently - some people/developers needed to appreciate why some things are the way they are in RPGS - and why they work. Some things don't need to change and they're not exclusively bad - with a good example being the trinity.

I have never really thought of GW2 as revolutionary, but over time it has delivered a kind of "personal revolution" in that it has taken the shine out of older games that I used to really enjoy.

LOTRO is one such game. I always loved it, always went back to it when out of things to play. But now, after GW2, I just can't play it. The combat seems dull and dated - I have to stand there and take the hits, I can't dodge, my attacks are slow and I can't move and attack at the same time. I can't swap weapons in combat.

Same with questing - having a quest log just puts me off now, lots of things to do all over the place and I feel this need to try to clear it out before quests become grey. Then there is the fact that quests become grey and I have outlevelled them, or certain areas or content and parts of the game slowly become obsolete. Plus I miss events just popping up and dragging me in directions I didn't plan going in when I set out. The game world seems more static and lifeless.

So, maybe GW2 isn't the earth-shattering change to the genre that people thought it would be, but at the same time my own experience is that it has evolved MMO gameplay to an extent where older games just seem old now by comparison.

Originally posted by The_Korrigan

This, of course. As usual, obvious is obvious.

Fact-checking on a game forum?  No wai!

Sorry, we have a presidential election coming up.  If this is what passes for skeptical scrutiny on this site, how poorly informed is our electorate?

Hold me, I'm more frightened every four years.

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Originally posted by Rimmersman

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

It does change some things.

First,it actually brings the "MMO" to the open world instead of the "MMO" in an instance.

Additionally it made every player an ally in PVE, removing factions and removing competition for resources.

It also changed "questing", from the method of delivering them to the way it rewards them.

It is also possible to craft the best items in the game instead of them being hidden in some instance.

 

There are also a number of things that aren't exactly exclusive to it but that aren't (or were at GW2 release date) very common in MMORPGs, like 3-side PvP, non gear based PvP, etc.

What do you mean by the marked line?

Are you saying that GW2 is a non instanced game, i'm missing your point?

GW2 Open world isn't  instanced, is there any doubs about that?

What I mean is that you actually have masses of people playing together towards the same shared objective in the open world of GW2, something that in most other games doesn't happen except in Raids and maybe the illusion of a populated open world in new starter areas for a race until the game shifts to a lobby like playstyle.

GW2 is not an open world mmo, just because people can play together does not mean it's an open world. You actually made the claim that it brings open world to MMOs lol, that's total rubbish.

Have you actually played an open world MMO where there are no instances whatsoever because GW2 is not one of those worlds. I will give ArenaNet it's due because the world is okay and graphics are very nice indeed but saying one of the things GW2 chages is bringing open world to MMO is lauaghable to say the least.

Nope. Not even close.

But I never thought that to begin with...

YES. And you all will see.

Most of future mmorpgs will handle quests according to GW2,getting rid off quest hubs, they will also get rid off the stealing mobs and ninja looting & they will allow to share kill experience, crafting nodes and a long etcetera....

GW2 may be not the "Genre breaking" some of you were expecting.... Maybe you had unreasonable expectations...

But it is definetly going to change how mmos will be played from now on.

In my opinion...GW2 is not "Genre Breaking"...but a very awaited evolution of the genre´s gameplay.

and BTW: I disagree with most OP´s points...

Exploration dull? Dungeons unorganized? Combat sad?

just NO,NO and NO srry.

Originally posted by gordiflu

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

It does change some things.

First,it actually brings the "MMO" to the open world instead of the "MMO" in an instance.

Additionally it made every player an ally in PVE, removing factions and removing competition for resources.

It also changed "questing", from the method of delivering them to the way it rewards them.

It is also possible to craft the best items in the game instead of them being hidden in some instance.

 

There are also a number of things that aren't exactly exclusive to it but that aren't (or were at GW2 release date) very common in MMORPGs, like 3-side PvP, non gear based PvP, etc.

But none of those things is actually new.

 

No instances: All the old games were like that. Instances came later.

"Every player an ally on PVE": I've seen that in text mode muds when graphic web browsers did not exist yet.

It's also not the first game that changes the "questiong approach". It has got its personal approach but still uses quests anyway.

Best items are crafted is as old as SWG.

 

So, yes, GW2 will change some things, the same way other games have done. Now, will it be the revolution that some players were talking about? Not really.

Revolution means new? Changing means new?

The fact it goes fetch things from older games even MUDS, some that don't exist any longer is proof it is changing things.

Evolution, Revolution, Change, Innovation, none of these words mean "something new, never seen before".

It just means a departure from what is done now. Which games released in the last couple years brought the things I mentioned to the mass market?

Revolutionizing the MMO market will mean future games will incorporate some/most of the things GW2 has in a regular base.

So if in the future we start seeing overflow servers, low downtime patching, Dynamic Events, weapon tied skills, no trinity, faction-less PvE, 3 side PvP, global auction house, b2p+cash shop, more action oriented combat (I know several titles have started to do that, but the biggest ones only rarely do so), less "!" NPCs, etc, then GW2 was indeed probably a revolution.

And sometimes it isn't those that create/invent something that make it popular or bring it to the masses - WoW could be described as a streamlined and polished EQ, but the fact is that WoW became the standard and not EQ,dispite EQ introducing many of the concepts WoW use first.

Originally posted by Zzad

YES. And you all will see.

Most of future mmorpgs will handle quests according to GW2,getting rid off quest hubs, they will also get rid off the stealing mobs & they will allow to share kill experience, crafting nodes and a long etcetera....

GW2 may be not the "Genre breaking" some of you were expecting.... Maybe you had unreasonable expectations...

But it is definetly going to change how mmos will be played from now on.

In my opinion...GW2 is not "Genre Breaking"...but a very awaited evolution of the genre´s gameplay.

Sharing nodes already happens, as for the lack of quest hubs, i can't see it. Their are MMOs that are in development that still have quest hubs and many people still prefer them. 

Revolutionary? Change the genre?

Imo not even close...

Originally posted by The_Korrigan

Originally posted by Icewhite

"Revolutionary Game That Would Change The Genre"

Cite this quotation please.

Googling turns up an interesting lack of results.  What's funny is that all known instances of this phrase, or close variants, spawed here, in this thread. 

If you're questioning who's 'guilty of generating the hype'?  It's the OP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well

Classic, easy political trick.

This, of course. As usual, obvious is obvious.

And before the OP or anyone else thinks about using this poll to bash the game more... a game not being "revolutionary" (but IMHO just "evolutionary", aka enhancing existing elements) doesn't make it a bad game, or all MMORPG since the UO/AC1/EQ trio are bad since they all copied on those three and enhanced the features.

[mod edit]

What is Google the oracle of truth? Can it take one sentence and see all forms of variants and sentences which has similar meaning? NO, so this whole response is just nonsense because it is based on a completely false presumption. For instance, search for 'Guild Wars 2' and 'revolutionary' and you will find these articles:

Guild Wars 2 Is The Real MMO Revolution - Game Informer

5 Reasons Why Guild Wars 2 Will Be A Revolutionary MMORPG ...

Guild Wars 2's Cultural Revolution

Guild Wars 2 revolution - Guild Wars 2 Gameplay

[mod edit]

Originally posted by Rimmersman

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Originally posted by Rimmersman

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

It does change some things.

First,it actually brings the "MMO" to the open world instead of the "MMO" in an instance.

Additionally it made every player an ally in PVE, removing factions and removing competition for resources.

It also changed "questing", from the method of delivering them to the way it rewards them.

It is also possible to craft the best items in the game instead of them being hidden in some instance.

 

There are also a number of things that aren't exactly exclusive to it but that aren't (or were at GW2 release date) very common in MMORPGs, like 3-side PvP, non gear based PvP, etc.

What do you mean by the marked line?

Are you saying that GW2 is a non instanced game, i'm missing your point?

GW2 Open world isn't  instanced, is there any doubs about that?

What I mean is that you actually have masses of people playing together towards the same shared objective in the open world of GW2, something that in most other games doesn't happen except in Raids and maybe the illusion of a populated open world in new starter areas for a race until the game shifts to a lobby like playstyle.

GW2 is not an open world mmo, just because people can play together does not mean it's an open world. You actually made the claim that it brings open world to MMOs lol, that's total rubbish.

Have you actually played an open world MMO where there are no instances whatsoever because GW2 is not one of those worlds. I will give ArenaNet it's due because the world is okay and graphics are very nice indeed but saying one of the things GW2 chages is bringing open world to MMO is lauaghable to say the least.

Your reading skills are a bit off.

I said it brings MMO to the open world.

Now I'm using Open World as "the space in the game that is permanent and shared between all the players in the same server" not in the gaming level design theory definition that very few 3D worlds actually comply to.

Nope, nor did i ever...

 just like i didn't think Rift with it Rifts would, or TOR with its stories would, or War with it Paul Barnett would. (as a few recent examples)

I stopped believing in the MMO hype machine a long time ago, the only thing its realy used for it seems is return fire, back at the "fanboys" a month after launch, or "forum PvP" as it were..

I do like the game quite a bit though, so thats all that counts in my book