Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

http://www.arena.net/blog/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto

 

In addition to great storyline and important player choices, another hallmark of great RPGs is that they create a world that feels real and alive. Let’s say a village is being terrorized by bandits. You don’t want to find out about that because there’s a villager standing there motionless with an exclamation mark over his head who says when you click on him, “Help, we’re being terrorized by bandits.” You want to find out like you would in GW2: because the bandits are attacking, chasing villagers through the streets, slaying them and setting their houses on fire. You can stand up for the villagers, or you can watch their village burn to the ground and then deal with the consequences. We’ve worked hard to create a living, dynamic world for you, where there’s always something new to do.

MMOs are social games. So why do they sometimes seem to work so hard to punish you for playing with other players? If I’m out hunting and another player walks by, shouldn’t I welcome his help, rather than worrying that he’s going to steal my kills or consume all the mobs I wanted to kill? Or if I want to play with someone, shouldn’t we naturally have the same goals and objectives, rather than discovering that we’re in the same area but working on a different set of quests?

We think of GW2 as the first MMO that actually has a cooperative PvE experience. When I’m out hunting and suddenly there’s a huge explosion over the next hill – the ground is shaking and smoke is pouring into the sky – I’m going to want to investigate, and most other players in the area will too. Or if the sky darkens on a sunny day, and I look up and see a dragon circling overhead preparing to attack, I know I’d better fight or flee, and everyone around me knows that too.

With traditional MMOs you can choose to solo or you can find a good guild or party to play with. <span pullquote="" location-grouping="" "="">With GW2 there’s a third option too: you can just naturally play with all the people around you. I personally spend a big chunk of my time in traditional MMOs soloing, but when I play GW2 I always find myself naturally working with everyone around me to accomplish world objectives, and before long we find ourselves saying, “Hey, there’s a bunch of us here; let’s see if we can take down the swamp boss together,” without ever having bothered to form a party.

Of course GW2 has great support for parties, but they just don’t feel as necessary as they do in other MMOs, because your interests are always aligned with all other nearby players anyway. When someone kills a monster, not just that player’s party but everyone who was seriously involved in the fight gets 100% of the XP and loot for the kill. When an event is happening in the world – when the bandits are terrorizing a village – everyone in the area has the same motivation, and when the event ends, everyone gets rewarded.

 

DEs were designed for this, They accomplish it. Most MMORPGs aren't like this. Most MMORPGs pride themselves to be a competition between players.

Great storyline... thats subject to opinion, I thought the storylines were very weak at best. I have admitted in the past that GW2 does a great job of bringing the world alive artificially, but thats not dynamic. They certainly are full of themselves aren't they.. The first true cooperative PVE Experiance... ROFL. MMO's are social yes. Yet why is one of the main complains about GW2 about it being very anti-social.. People dont talk because there is no reason to. 

That post is just toying with words to make their system sound better than everyone elses on the market. Hell SWTOR did that with there questing/cinematic system and made it look fantastic... 

storyline i agree, its a weaker side of gw2, especially in comparison to GW1.  RE being anti social, you are confusing solo play with guild play.  guild play tends to be very relaxed and fun, no competition for  gear or raid slots, shared rewards = fun and very very social. 

RE the solo play, are you comparing apples with oranges?  solo play in other mmorgs is  questing solo, with some acting selfishly towards other people and stealing resources.  (its rewarded).  You almost never join with people.  I n GW2 the issue is that you join casually with others while you are SOLO PLAYING.  That is not anti social and it is better than the former solo play model.

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

http://www.arena.net/blog/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto

 

/Snip

DEs were designed for this, They accomplish it. Most MMORPGs aren't like this. Most MMORPGs pride themselves to be a competition between players.

Is ANet's design manifesto still relevant?

With the whole 'Ascendency gear' and the 'level 80 gear grind' AMA, its irrelevant now.

Pretty sure we've answered the OP's thread though.

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

http://www.arena.net/blog/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto

***edited for length***

DEs were designed for this, They accomplish it. Most MMORPGs aren't like this. Most MMORPGs pride themselves to be a competition between players.

Pretty much what Gaia said ^

People need to stop looking at GW2 under a microscope, and they might be able to see why it's being called 'revolutionary', or at the very least, why it is indeed different. It's not like this hasn't been explained enough.

EVERY game, when you scrutinize it too closely, is 'nothing new'. That doesn't make it accepted as truth. Games are mostly definited by their mechanics / systems, and how they interact with one another to create a new experience. Yes, you are still killing things in GW2, crafting, and collecting. That stuff is so fundamental it's not going away. It'd be like trying to get rid of movement in a game, because you wanted to be different. It's just not going to happen. What's important to realize, though, is that the systems GW2 has implemented, do come together to form something that doesn't exist in other games yet.

You don't have shopping list quests, the amount of things needed is hidden, and often scales depending on the players in the area. Proper lvl scaling, is also something that hasn't really been handled properly before. WAR tried it, but it didn't quite work all that well.

There's a long list of things that contribute to the reason why GW2 is a different type of MMO. However, it's still an online fantasy rpg. What anet set out to tackle was a change in philosophy, and to a large degree, they've succeeded. Heck, look at TESO; the game has a lot in common w/ GW2 so far.

Originally posted by Bladestrom

storyline i agree, its a weaker side of gw2, especially in comparison to GW1.  RE being anti social, you are confusing solo play with guild play.  guild play tends to be very relaxed and fun, no competition for  gear or raid slots, shared rewards = fun and very very social. 

This is not an aspect of design but an aspect of how a guild is ran individually. Every MMO has good guilds (social and fun) and bad guilds that do nothing at all. Hell most games have way better guild management and reason to be in a guild than GW2. Plus being a social MMO, you shouldnt have to be in a guild to actually socialize with others around you. 

FFXI for example is a game where you pair up with random people everyday (not in your guild) and hold some pretty lengthy and fun conversation. This does not happen in GW2 with any sort of abundance to even be considered a social MMO. 

 RE the solo play, are you comparing apples with oranges?  solo play in other mmorgs is  questing solo, with some acting selfishly towards other people and stealing resources.  (its rewarded).  You almost never join with people.  I n GW2 the issue is that you join casually with others while you are SOLO PLAYING.  That is not anti social and it is better than the former solo play model.

Your making it seem like solo play in GW2 is this amazing experience but its not. You run around with a zerg of people you will never see again, or care that you will never see them again. Your forced to keep pace with the rest of the zerg or lose out on the event. You also have the Heart quests that are your typical solo style MMO.  

Not to mention if socialization is a main aspect of GW2, why is soloing a key point. Grouping should be. And there is no reason to group outside of dungeons in GW2. Unlike other games, once again FFXI you group up for social interaction and a faster leveling experience.

You would think that ANET would go on and on about how amazing the grouping aspect of their game was and not the soloing aspect.

Once again... ANET is pretty full of themselves aren't they.  

I had to reread this a few times to decipher but I think I was able to. 

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

http://www.arena.net/blog/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto

 

/Snip

DEs were designed for this, They accomplish it. Most MMORPGs aren't like this. Most MMORPGs pride themselves to be a competition between players.

Is ANet's design manifesto still relevant?

With the whole 'Ascendency gear' and the 'level 80 gear grind' AMA, its irrelevant now.

Pretty sure we've answered the OP's thread though.

It's still relevant. While I'm not overly thrilled by the ascendency idea, it's not nearly as big of a deal as most people make it out to be. It has absolutely no bearing in sPvP, it makes no real difference in WvW, and I've never seen it listed as a requirement for any dungeons other than fractals.

It's kind of a progression system that exists in a bubble, in a lot of ways.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

http://www.arena.net/blog/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto

 

/Snip

DEs were designed for this, They accomplish it. Most MMORPGs aren't like this. Most MMORPGs pride themselves to be a competition between players.

Is ANet's design manifesto still relevant?

With the whole 'Ascendency gear' and the 'level 80 gear grind' AMA, its irrelevant now.

Pretty sure we've answered the OP's thread though.

This manifesto is much more relevant than the newer video manifesto and goes in line with a old blogpost Arenanet had during GW1 that I can't find (isn't easy to find in the GW1 website anymore).

Ascendency gear is still at rings and backslot.

It was clearly a overreaction to what they have been reading in forums at the time with players demanding more stat based progression - and as I noted people wanting that kind of progression also want things that are better given by games like WoW.

I hope they ditch their idea of adding more Ascended gear, but if not, at least with the new ways that will come on Monday patch, it won't be so bad.

From my point of view, GW2 questing/leveling in the persistent world is nothing like questinh/leveling in WoW persistent world.

As I've said many times, when people need to go fetch 10 games to say that GW2 features were done better or first in that 1 of 10 games, it becomes a silly discussion, because GW2 isn't discrete features but the sum of all features working at the same time.

There is a syndrome known of MMORPGs - "game X is WoW with twist a" or "game y is WoW with feature b". So when you subtract that feature or twist in essence it still was WoW (or EQ if the reader is annoying).

Originally posted by aesperus

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

http://www.arena.net/blog/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto

***edited for length***

DEs were designed for this, They accomplish it. Most MMORPGs aren't like this. Most MMORPGs pride themselves to be a competition between players.

Pretty much what Gaia said ^

People need to stop looking at GW2 under a microscope, and they might be able to see why it's being called 'revolutionary', or at the very least, why it is indeed different. It's not like this hasn't been explained enough.

EVERY game, when you scrutinize it too closely, is 'nothing new'. That doesn't make it accepted as truth. Games are mostly definited by their mechanics / systems, and how they interact with one another to create a new experience. Yes, you are still killing things in GW2, crafting, and collecting. That stuff is so fundamental it's not going away. It'd be like trying to get rid of movement in a game, because you wanted to be different. It's just not going to happen. What's important to realize, though, is that the systems GW2 has implemented, do come together to form something that doesn't exist in other games yet.

You don't have shopping list quests, the amount of things needed is hidden, and often scales depending on the players in the area. Proper lvl scaling, is also something that hasn't really been handled properly before. WAR tried it, but it didn't quite work all that well.

There's a long list of things that contribute to the reason why GW2 is a different type of MMO. However, it's still an online fantasy rpg. What anet set out to tackle was a change in philosophy, and to a large degree, they've succeeded. Heck, look at TESO; the game has a lot in common w/ GW2 so far.

Sorry don't agree.  All ANet did was to make tweaks to existing mechanics.  That does not make it revolutionary or change a philosophy.   It is an ok game.  It looks good and had a fairly good launch which I setter than most games in the last 8 years or so, but that is not revolutionary.  No matter how much makeup you put on a pig it's still a pig and the same is true with GW2, it's just another MMO.  Some like it some don't.

Originally posted by Sinjin213

Originally posted by aesperus

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

http://www.arena.net/blog/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto

***edited for length***

DEs were designed for this, They accomplish it. Most MMORPGs aren't like this. Most MMORPGs pride themselves to be a competition between players.

Pretty much what Gaia said ^

People need to stop looking at GW2 under a microscope, and they might be able to see why it's being called 'revolutionary', or at the very least, why it is indeed different. It's not like this hasn't been explained enough.

EVERY game, when you scrutinize it too closely, is 'nothing new'. That doesn't make it accepted as truth. Games are mostly definited by their mechanics / systems, and how they interact with one another to create a new experience. Yes, you are still killing things in GW2, crafting, and collecting. That stuff is so fundamental it's not going away. It'd be like trying to get rid of movement in a game, because you wanted to be different. It's just not going to happen. What's important to realize, though, is that the systems GW2 has implemented, do come together to form something that doesn't exist in other games yet.

You don't have shopping list quests, the amount of things needed is hidden, and often scales depending on the players in the area. Proper lvl scaling, is also something that hasn't really been handled properly before. WAR tried it, but it didn't quite work all that well.

There's a long list of things that contribute to the reason why GW2 is a different type of MMO. However, it's still an online fantasy rpg. What anet set out to tackle was a change in philosophy, and to a large degree, they've succeeded. Heck, look at TESO; the game has a lot in common w/ GW2 so far.

Sorry don't agree.  All ANet did was to make tweaks to existing mechanics.  That does not make it revolutionary or change a philosophy.   It is an ok game.  It looks good and had a fairly good launch which I setter than most games in the last 8 years or so, but that is not revolutionary.  No matter how much makeup you put on a pig it's still a pig and the same is true with GW2, it's just another MMO.  Some like it some don't.

And Grafite and Diamond are just Carbon and Megan Fox shares all the atomic components with that pig of yours - sometimes what matters is the end product and not the base blocks.

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

 

This manifesto is much more relevant than the newer video manifesto and goes in line with a old blogpost Arenanet had during GW1 that I can't find (isn't easy to find in the GW1 website anymore).

Ascendency gear is still at rings and backslot.

/snip

I see things in black and white in things like this.

If someone says 'I'll do X' and doesn't do 'X', who will trust that person to do X again?

It is even more bizarre if you think about the fact ANet used to be totally up-front with their playerbase. Not anymore which is sad.

Didn't their 2013 blog state more ascendency gear is coming?

Moving the goal post from 'DE is revolutionary!' to 'GW2 does things really well!' kinda looks silly.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

 

This manifesto is much more relevant than the newer video manifesto and goes in line with a old blogpost Arenanet had during GW1 that I can't find (isn't easy to find in the GW1 website anymore).

Ascendency gear is still at rings and backslot.

/snip

I see things in black and white in things like this.

If someone says 'I'll do X' and doesn't do 'X', who will trust that person to do X again?

It is even more bizarre if you think about the fact ANet used to be totally up-front with their playerbase. Not anymore which is sad.

Didn't their 2013 blog state more ascendency gear is coming?

Moving the goal post from 'DE is revolutionary!' to 'GW2 does things really well!' kinda looks silly.

The fact Ascendency items is a silly, unnecessary idea, doesn't alter how DE make the leveling process work.

The way DEs (amongs other changes) make players play with each other is indeed revolutionary (it may not be unique, but the recent pattern is clear).

And I guess you only play games from new studios that only have newbie game designers then.

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

 

The fact Ascendency items is a silly, unnecessary idea, doesn't alters how DE make the leveling process work.

The way DEs (amongs other changes) make players play with each other is indeed revolutionary (it may not be unique, but the recent pattern is clear).

And I guess you only play games from new studios that only have newbie game designers then.

Changing how a game is designed and the overrall vision is something that all game companies do.

However, they normally don't straight up lie and say 'We'll do X' and actually do 'Y'.

GW2 was touted as 'no gear grind / cosmetic upgrades only' during development.

It is just now that they've changed their tune to 'well, there are gear progression but its minor so it doesn't count'. Which is kinda shady.

You want to change the vision? Fine. But don't lie about it. Not that difficult and the ANet that made GW1 would have done so.

I would say the DE's are the evolution of all public quests seen before. Many of the features in GW2 are evolutionary but their philosophy is somewhat revolutionary.

Despite peoples thoughts on GW2 it has certainly left a mark.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

 

The fact Ascendency items is a silly, unnecessary idea, doesn't alters how DE make the leveling process work.

The way DEs (amongs other changes) make players play with each other is indeed revolutionary (it may not be unique, but the recent pattern is clear).

And I guess you only play games from new studios that only have newbie game designers then.

Changing how a game is designed and the overrall vision is something that all game companies do.

However, they normally don't straight up lie and say 'We'll do X' and actually do 'Y'.

GW2 was touted as 'no gear grind / cosmetic upgrades only' during development.

It is just now that they've changed their tune to 'well, there are gear progression but its minor so it doesn't count'. Which is kinda shady.

You want to change the vision? Fine. But don't lie about it. Not that difficult and the ANet that made GW1 would have done so.

First, what does any of that has to do with DEs?

Second, the Arenanet that made GW1 also said that they would never allow 7 heroes parties.

Third, wasn't part of the community screaming around september that did want more gear grind?

And then in November, the ones opposed to it, myself included, screamed back.

And in December that evil greedy Arenanet with their microtransactions put another pane in my bank for materials like ectos, mystic coins and dust and an additional pane for event materials.

Arenanet listen to their players, but many times you need to be careful when listening to players and exactly what players you choose to listen to.

Gear progression isn't exactly a grind, because white->blue->green->yellow->orange is a gear progression but not exactly a grind, so Ascended items by itself don't have to be a gear grind.

Mistakes happen, it is the way you respond to the them that matter.

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

 

First, what does any of that has to do with DEs?

 

Still waiting for anyone to say why DE is 'revolutionary' when the game design was done before.

X-series does it better, Space Rangers does it better and those games were released 10+ years ago.

Saying 'GW2 as a collective is good' is not the same as 'DE is revolutionary' btw.

I think it is funny that people are claiming "soandso did it first!" when the reality is that ArenaNet was the first developer to actually get it to successfully work. WoW wasn't the first game with a questing system...does it matter? No. They were the first to be successful at it; that is what matters. 

To the op: I absolutely cannot wait to see how the DE system evolves ;)

Originally posted by Bad.dog

Originally posted by Sinjin213

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Originally posted by Sinjin213

Originally posted by aesperus

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

 

Way to totally miss the point, but then that's all you fanbois do.  ANet didn't do anything revolutionary with GW2, but since all you fanbois are too blinded to see it, so be it.  It's the same old "base blocks" that have been around for years.  They didn't even bother to rearrange them, they just renamed them.  But then that must be the revolutionary part.  Or is it the jumping puzzles that are right out of a browser game that are revolutionary?

Keep thinking what you want, it's still pretty much a free world.

 

I'm impressed in 5 post you have all the lingo down pat .... and managed to throw out a couple of insults to boot ,welcome to the club .

On a more positive note I believe GW2's DE'S are more evolutionary then revolutionary as they seems to be an advancement of the PQ...Rift ...DE family tree  

That's because this isn't my first account.  I do think your statement about evolutionary is actually more correct than revolutionary.

as far as insults go, I have yet to purposely throw an insult yet on this my new account, so if you or anyone else feels insulted by my posts, then you are the one with a problem because you obviously read something I didn't mean.  If you are looking for more PC in my posts, not gonna happen because PC doesn't mean political correctness, it means Political Cowardice.  

Originally posted by Torgrim

Originally posted by Zorgo

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Regardless of who introduced PQs/Rifts or Dynamic Events first:

- people in WAR levelled by doing quests/instances,

- people in Rift levelled by doing quests/instances,

- people in GW2 level by wandering around the world and having Dynamic Events pop up on them.

I can see a difference and I prefer it.

Others don't and they can be happy playing Warhammer online and Rift without doing PQs and Rifts,

....I levelled in WAR and Rift by using a combination of features, including and sometimes primarily PQs and Rifts.....

 - the same as I did in GW2...using a combination of all its features.

Who exactly are these people who didn't use rifts or pq's? That's delusional.

 

WAR and RIFT are quest hub based, GW2 are not.

You are right, it has DE hubs and heart hubs....yet that statement has no relevance to the posts you quoted.

Do people use a variety of multiple features for  progression in all three games? Yes.

Regardless of how you feel about DE's, they're not new. They're still basically questing - same as every other MMO. GW2 is the Apple of dynamic events. They took a bunch of ideas from other people and put them in a nice package.

I personally think GW2 is a well made game, but the lore and repetiveness of the quest bores me to tears. The quests themselves are the same as any other game - escort, kill or fetch. Sure there's a couple of nicely done quests in the game but it's really just more of the same.