Originally posted by Vannor

Originally posted by Scarfe

Originally posted by Vannor

Originally posted by Scarfe

2 Map

I could not jump in GW1, I could not fall off cliffs, yet somehow I had a greater sense of freedom.  GW2 is a horrible pile of shoe boxes, you explore each corner then move on to the next.  I really dislike the horrible tetris design. 

I really REALLY disagree with what you are trying to say here. GW1 is structured in the same shoebox style as GW2.. the only difference is that in GW2 you can explore all the inside of the shoebox, in GW1 you can't.

well GW1 wasn't perfect, but what I would give for rolling hills and plains to explore, rather than that fake rectangle. 

I dunno.. all I see is linear paths inside a rectangle in GW1.. in GW2 I see no linear paths inside a rectangle. Obviously a full open world, if possible, would have been better for both games.

I still think GW1 is a much better game though.

vanilla wow did this well, I know it has a low polygon count and all that shizzle, and I know that it is now entirely on rails, but back in the day I came outta SW and could cross over to the next areas without some fake mountain/ wall in my way.  tbh, I really just want a map like Skyrim to play in. 

Originally posted by SirFubar

Originally posted by Butregenyo

i was a huge "fan-boy" before it was released as GW1 offered unlimited content in terms of pvp, and we expected at least as much in gw2 with better dynamics. We really trusted in Anet, but after release we saw the reality. PvP in this game is a like minigame. No build diversity, no ladder/matchmaking, no halls, no gvg, lame balance choices, only one type of pvp (seriously, even freshmen developing a no-budget indie pve centric shitty game considers applying more than one game modes for pvp. duh!), only 3 maps for tourneys(lol...). I cannot believe how they degraded after such a brilliant game like gw1. I dont give a damn about the pve. I want to be able to have 123573568935673456 different viable builds just like in gw1.

(by pvp here i am only interested in the balanced spvp. wvwvw is just like a different form of pve for me)

Just to find out that 95% (more or less) of those builds are not viable for PvP. Sure having a build diversity is nice, but the more choices you gives, the more you will found out that most of those choices are not viable, just completely imbalanced or just not strong enough compared to some other builds. I'm pretty sure that most of the top PvPer in GW1 nearly always used the same builds with some small variation here and there. Just take the PvE for exemple, when I was playing on my monk or even my assasin, I've found out early that nearly 3/4 of my skills were just plain useless. Most didn't work out well with each other and some were just a bit crappier that the ones I used. So yeah, having diversity is nice, but you need to make sure every thing is viable, something that was not in GW1. So, I'm glad they didn't do the same thing in GW2, its a lot better for balance purpose.

That's absolutely correct.  However, while I appreciate that the stance is the party line for a reason (of course GW2 is easier to balance than GW1), I don't really accept that excuse after having been burned out by GW2 well in advance of them earning my deep-seated ire with the Ascended Armor fiasco.  Did builds in GW1 tend to reduce to a handful of optimals?  Sure.  By my estimation, GW2 has done the same, the primary difference being that they started with fewer alternatives.  If the intention was to reduce the number of gimp/ineffective builds, that was certainly successful, but I feel like it ultimately came at the expense of expression for players who have a strong understanding of the game systems' potentials but nonetheless are willing to sacrifice min-max efficiency for variety in playstyle.

In GW1, my Ritualist could be built a million different ways.  Most of them were bad.  However, because of my access to a changing sub-class and heroes, I had at least a dozen viable builds for completing content/farming in PVE.  If I'd wanted to PVP, I would have had not millions--but at least a handful--of viable options there as well. In GW2, I had a build for my Mesmer.  It was optimal for my playstyle.  If I wanted to change things up, I could grab another weapon, and change a couple utilities, but I had no real opportunity to make subtle, nuanced changes to the build.  I could create additional effects or make myself better or worse at certain things by tampering with traits, but that had only a very small, albeit non-zero, effect on how the character actually played.

Now I can't speak to broad-level viability metrics when it comes to comparing builds in GW1 and GW2, because I simply don't have access to the data.  And I'll cheerfully concede that during the game's development, I was one of the ones championing the change in direction, because it really does make sense theoretically, and it looks pretty good on paper.  Anecdotally, though, I could spend months on my ritualist and never ever burn out, whereas after only a month and a half on GW2 I felt like my playstyle had gotten stagnant and there was nothing left for me to do to innovate that I hadn't already tried, except roll another alt.  That's telling to me, and I think it's symptomatic of the fact that the weapon-ability tie and rigid categorization of other skills is a step backwards.

Like a lot of areas in GW2, I feel like they sacrificed gameplay for accessibility, and in this arena the cost was a lot higher than they thought it would be.  To me, improvement could have been achieved by, yes, doing away with redundant abilities, but more importantly, by improving synergy and balance among a large palette of abilities, with the expectation--and this is important--that players will figure out which ability combinations are good, create interesting builds, and discover combinations and levels of synergy that the developers didn't anticipate.  Yes, that means future balancing work down the line, but it also allows the players to create their own content, and that increases replayability and longevity, something that GW2 is struggling for right now.  Forgive me for speculating, but I suspect that the content-cycle steamroll is already pressing hard on development, and if the game had a systems-level means for players to tinker with it, we would be seeing the balance changes people have been raging about instead of desperate releases of new content every month.

There's nothing that says that abilities if implemented are set in stone.  You can code a system to handle refunds if you decide an ability is trash after implementing it, and you can salvage your assets if you plan ahead for that.  The art can be reused, the animation can be reused, or, hell, if you've got a competent team, you can actually--!--balance the ability after the fact.  That's what they did with GW1, and while it indeed resulted in a patchwork skill list, it also made for a richer meta-game, and to this day I'd take Build Wars over Clones vs. Phantasms.

thank you OP for putting my doubts together, as I was not sure what goes wrong with my GW2 gaming.
I'm sure agree with you, but need to add my own disappointment about

1. armor: IMO only few at GW2 looks cool and it nothing to have with tons of skins at GW.

2. cinematic. lol I must admit I loved it at GW! sometime made my party frustrated as looked same stuff for X time. Here in said "personal" story I have max 2 guys dialogue at static window.

3. I'm not much about PvP but even I found Random Arenas fun, at GW2 it seems dull and pointless.

4. I liked Mad King event but Wintersady is like nothing much, never felt anything like that at GW.

5. I keep thinking, it's not cuz we have stacks of 250 at GW we need to keep t at GW2, here with crafting (badly made, tbh)we sure need more mats and space.

and most important: anyone can tell me why I find GW2 mega boring?

I am a GW1 vet - played since beta and GW2 is a different game and I accepted that. i mean I was there for the monk protest at THK, I was the person who instigated the all-mesmer runs, after Sorroew's Furnace came out.  I am probably also older than y'all (meaning you are more set in your ways) and I don't understand how you can not understand they made a new game. A.net said it was going to be different than GW1.

IT IS NOT GW1 - there will never be another one.

I too find GW2 seriously boring, and I don't even have an 80.......or even a 50.

The problems I see are that the downgrading of level is too severe to allow easy farming of mats(Which drop far too infrequently)

And the crafted gear is too late in levels making farming a very tedious endeavor no matter your level.

Runing speed is atrocious.

Disconnects are too frequent/Lag is too great

I miss the Rock Paper Scissors approach to class balancing. it made PVP much more enjoyable.

I miss the difficulty of GW1

I miss having to hunt down my Elite skills.

I miss being able to travel around waypoints without spending a crapload of money doing so.

Originally posted by grndzro

I too find GW2 seriously boring, and I don't even have an 80.......or even a 50.

The problems I see are that the downgrading of level is too severe to allow easy farming of mats(Which drop far too infrequently)

And the crafted gear is too late in levels making farming a very tedious endeavor no matter your level.

Runing speed is atrocious.

Disconnects are too frequent/Lag is too great

I miss the Rock Paper Scissors approach to class balancing. it made PVP much more enjoyable.

I miss the difficulty of GW1

I miss having to hunt down my Elite skills.

I miss being able to travel around waypoints without spending a crapload of money doing so.

Got to agree with all of the above.  Crafting is a bit of a mess; and hunting elite skills, I would take that over a vista or jump puzzle any day of the week, dam I stopped playing platform games back when Doom was released and don't want them in my MMO's. 

Originally posted by cloud8521
Everyone always pulls the "Hype" card.. but honestly that is the most BS excuse to hate something. "Oh  the fanbase  said a game is good,  byond normal expextations  this is all the games fault! How dare the game have a fanbase." what is worse is said Hype was all true.

I am not blaming the game for the hype, although I am partially blaming the devs.  What I am saying is that if your expectations for something have been raised to unrealistic levels, then you are going to be disappointed.  A simple point and completely valid. 

Originally posted by Scarfe

This is my first post and no doubt I will be accused of trolling or some such nonsense, but I intend to explain my general dissapointment with GW2, briefly: -

1 Hype

I stumbled upon GW1 and loved it.  The hype for GW2, (in no small way exacerbated by press releases that were bordering upon pure BS) was insane.  Nothing can live up to that level of hype.  GW2 certainly did not. 

 

2 Map

I could not jump in GW1, I could not fall off cliffs, yet somehow I had a greater sense of freedom.  GW2 is a horrible pile of shoe boxes, you explore each corner then move on to the next.  I really dislike the horrible tetris design. 

3 Story

What is there to say here?  Voice acting is terrible.  The story is dreadful, I mean really bad.  There are several storylines, but I would rather play through GW1 50 times than experience them all. 

4 Freedom

The beauty of GW1 was the ability to set up a build from scratch, pick from a huge variety of useful abilities on a limited toolbar.  In pvp you never quite knew what you would be fighting.  Why oh why did they do away with this. I simply cannot understand it. Need I say more?

5 Fake twitch

If moves are announced three weeks in advance it is not twitch. 

6 That's it

It feels like an experiment in doing away with quest hubs and the trinity, that went badly wrong, yet they had to justify it.

 

 I have a hard time believing you kept a straight face while typing this.

1. Hype. Irrelevant. Has nothing to do with old GW1 dogs like myself liking the game.

2. Map. Yep, it's about exploring, and HEY! Just like GW1 was! Only now there's more to see, more to find, more to explore. Plus it's a dynamic, changing world. Comparing it to the instances in GW1 where you clear the mobs on the map then have the map to yourself, mob-free, is ridiculous. Different system, different game.

3. You don't like the story, others do. Irrelevant to GW1, although there's plenty of issues with GW1 story as well. Danika's voice acting, for example, still makes small children wake in the middle of the night in fear without knowing why.

4. Freedom. It's still there, it's just more than just the skills on the toolbar now. Traits, sigils, runes... they're all part of the build now instead of deciding whether or not to give Otyaugh's Cry a try or not.

5. Fake twitch? It's better than it was in GW1, where you saw the enemy cast bars and reacted on that instead of a visual clue which you may or may not miss. Seriously, you find that an issue, when it was so much easier in GW1?

6. The experiment, doing away with the trinity and hubs, is certainly a successful formula. They've done it brilliantly, regardless of what the vocal few on the forums think.

Originally posted by Volkon

Originally posted by Scarfe

This is my first post and no doubt I will be accused of trolling or some such nonsense, but I intend to explain my general dissapointment with GW2, briefly: -

1 Hype

I stumbled upon GW1 and loved it.  The hype for GW2, (in no small way exacerbated by press releases that were bordering upon pure BS) was insane.  Nothing can live up to that level of hype.  GW2 certainly did not. 

 

2 Map

I could not jump in GW1, I could not fall off cliffs, yet somehow I had a greater sense of freedom.  GW2 is a horrible pile of shoe boxes, you explore each corner then move on to the next.  I really dislike the horrible tetris design. 

3 Story

What is there to say here?  Voice acting is terrible.  The story is dreadful, I mean really bad.  There are several storylines, but I would rather play through GW1 50 times than experience them all. 

4 Freedom

The beauty of GW1 was the ability to set up a build from scratch, pick from a huge variety of useful abilities on a limited toolbar.  In pvp you never quite knew what you would be fighting.  Why oh why did they do away with this. I simply cannot understand it. Need I say more?

5 Fake twitch

If moves are announced three weeks in advance it is not twitch. 

6 That's it

It feels like an experiment in doing away with quest hubs and the trinity, that went badly wrong, yet they had to justify it.

 

 I have a hard time believing you kept a straight face while typing this.

1. Hype. Irrelevant. Has nothing to do with old GW1 dogs like myself liking the game.

2. Map. Yep, it's about exploring, and HEY! Just like GW1 was! Only now there's more to see, more to find, more to explore. Plus it's a dynamic, changing world. Comparing it to the instances in GW1 where you clear the mobs on the map then have the map to yourself, mob-free, is ridiculous. Different system, different game.

3. You don't like the story, others do. Irrelevant to GW1, although there's plenty of issues with GW1 story as well. Danika's voice acting, for example, still makes small children wake in the middle of the night in fear without knowing why.

4. Freedom. It's still there, it's just more than just the skills on the toolbar now. Traits, sigils, runes... they're all part of the build now instead of deciding whether or not to give Otyaugh's Cry a try or not.

5. Fake twitch? It's better than it was in GW1, where you saw the enemy cast bars and reacted on that instead of a visual clue which you may or may not miss. Seriously, you find that an issue, when it was so much easier in GW1?

6. The experiment, doing away with the trinity and hubs, is certainly a successful formula. They've done it brilliantly, regardless of what the vocal few on the forums think.

1.  I believe its relevent; if you have been given unrealistic expectations you will only be disappointed. 

2.  I am not much of a fan of the map in either tbh.  Would prefer an open world to explore without walls.  However, the GW1 map just felt more organic to me, it wasn't this horrible tetris world that just ruins all immersion. 

3. Simply put, the GW1 story was vastly superior.  The GW2 stories I have experienced just feel amateurish in the extreme.

4. GW2 is clearly far more prescriptive.

5.  I don't really find it an issue tbh, it is one of the more minor grumbles I have.  the general tedium of combat would be a bigger issue for me.

6.  Pure opinion, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.  I think the instances are mess because no real alternative has been offered for the trinity, it has simply been removed from the game.  The hearts are simply quest hubs without any of the interraction you used to have.  The dynamic events are not dynamic, the are just two or three constantly repeating quests, take area, defend area, repeat ad nauseum. 

Originally posted by Scarfe

Originally posted by Volkon

Originally posted by Scarfe

This is my first post and no doubt I will be accused of trolling or some such nonsense, but I intend to explain my general dissapointment with GW2, briefly: -

1 Hype

I stumbled upon GW1 and loved it.  The hype for GW2, (in no small way exacerbated by press releases that were bordering upon pure BS) was insane.  Nothing can live up to that level of hype.  GW2 certainly did not. 

 

2 Map

I could not jump in GW1, I could not fall off cliffs, yet somehow I had a greater sense of freedom.  GW2 is a horrible pile of shoe boxes, you explore each corner then move on to the next.  I really dislike the horrible tetris design. 

3 Story

What is there to say here?  Voice acting is terrible.  The story is dreadful, I mean really bad.  There are several storylines, but I would rather play through GW1 50 times than experience them all. 

4 Freedom

The beauty of GW1 was the ability to set up a build from scratch, pick from a huge variety of useful abilities on a limited toolbar.  In pvp you never quite knew what you would be fighting.  Why oh why did they do away with this. I simply cannot understand it. Need I say more?

5 Fake twitch

If moves are announced three weeks in advance it is not twitch. 

6 That's it

It feels like an experiment in doing away with quest hubs and the trinity, that went badly wrong, yet they had to justify it.

 

 I have a hard time believing you kept a straight face while typing this.

1. Hype. Irrelevant. Has nothing to do with old GW1 dogs like myself liking the game.

2. Map. Yep, it's about exploring, and HEY! Just like GW1 was! Only now there's more to see, more to find, more to explore. Plus it's a dynamic, changing world. Comparing it to the instances in GW1 where you clear the mobs on the map then have the map to yourself, mob-free, is ridiculous. Different system, different game.

3. You don't like the story, others do. Irrelevant to GW1, although there's plenty of issues with GW1 story as well. Danika's voice acting, for example, still makes small children wake in the middle of the night in fear without knowing why.

4. Freedom. It's still there, it's just more than just the skills on the toolbar now. Traits, sigils, runes... they're all part of the build now instead of deciding whether or not to give Otyaugh's Cry a try or not.

5. Fake twitch? It's better than it was in GW1, where you saw the enemy cast bars and reacted on that instead of a visual clue which you may or may not miss. Seriously, you find that an issue, when it was so much easier in GW1?

6. The experiment, doing away with the trinity and hubs, is certainly a successful formula. They've done it brilliantly, regardless of what the vocal few on the forums think.

1.  I believe its relevent; if you have been given unrealistic expectations you will only be disappointed. 

2.  I am not much of a fan of the map in either tbh.  Would prefer an open world to explore without walls.  However, the GW1 map just felt more organic to me, it wasn't this horrible tetris world that just ruins all immersion. 

3. Simply put, the GW1 story was vastly superior.  The GW2 stories I have experienced just feel amateurish in the extreme.

4. GW2 is clearly far more prescriptive.

5.  I don't really find it an issue tbh, it is one of the more minor grumbles I have.  the general tedium of combat would be a bigger issue for me.

6.  Pure opinion, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.  I think the instances are mess because no real alternative has been offered for the trinity, it has simply been removed from the game.  The hearts are simply quest hubs without any of the interraction you used to have.  The dynamic events are not dynamic, the are just two or three constantly repeating quests, take area, defend area, repeat ad nauseum. 

 

 So our opinions differ and we agree to disagree.