Originally posted by jdnyc

Originally posted by Zorgo

 

you also know as well as I do that when you pick up a quest from a quest hub - you don't accomplish the task at the hub - they are usually a chain which will take you all over the map. 

you mean like Rift's Zone events?  and no many don't do that.  many stay in the local area.  hell most do.

GW2 is certainly doing it differently - there is more flow, it is more organic, you can join into it in any part of the chain rather than having to catch follks up to the part you are on, etc. 

Like Rift's Instant Adventures?

But imo, it is still the same concept, applied in a different way.

As I have said before, whether you like GW2 or don't like GW2 depends solely on whether you place emphasis on 'the same ol' concept - or the 'applied in a different way'.

 

 

You're talking about stuff introduced during Storm Legion, or atleast through a patch, right? That's just part of an MMO growing up. You seriously can't expect that GW2 DEs will stay as it is. Fact is, Rift started out with randomized mob spawns AKA Rifts. Over time it got better and better. I personally believe GW2 (as well as many other games) influenced these improvements to Rift.

Originally posted by Zorgo

Originally posted by evilastro

WTH is a DE hub?  A map?  Then every game is a hub based game because things only happen on the map. Well, maybe if we try harder we can be even a little more simplistic about things. Don't give up yet, keep trying!

I have noticed specifi areas on the maps where npc's start DE events; often with more than one DE beginning from a similar location. Example, you have the kids conjuring the bears, the hunt for the stag head, and I believe one other which all originate from the same 'village' or 'settlement'; having DE's start a specific location on a map, that location could arguably be labelled a 'hub'. 

This is not a value statement about whether hubs are good or bad - I am sorry, you find GW2's way of doing things simplistic. I would have qualified it as 'efficient'. 

 A few dynamic events happen at camps,because that is obviously where people hang out. People don't just sit around in the wild waiting for you. That doesn't make them hubs by a long shot, dynamic events are chains, they might start in a town, but they will take you all over the map, with new ones happening all over the place.

Very different to 'go collect as many quests as possible from this hub, go kill everything nearby, return to hub to hand in quests'.

To be honest, I have never seen more than different 2 events happen from the same spot though. Unless they are part of a chain. Definitely not enough to be classified as a hub.

Most would except that the word 'hub' aptly discribes 'a place where people hang out'. And you know as well as I do that it is more than a 'few'.

you also know as well as I do that when you pick up a quest from a quest hub - you don't accomplish the task at the hub - they are usually a chain which will take you all over the map. 

GW2 is certainly doing it differently - there is more flow, it is more organic, you can join into it in any part of the chain rather than having to catch follks up to the part you are on, etc. 

But imo, it is still the same concept, applied in a different way.

As I have said before, whether you like GW2 or don't like GW2 depends solely on whether you place emphasis on 'the same ol' concept - or the 'applied in a different way'.

 

The thing is, I doubt that most people would consider a place where you get a few quests from as a "hub".  DE's start, continue and complete all over the place and if you wanted to say that standard quests do too, well that's fine. BUT, there are a lot of occurances of multiple (more than 10) quests starting from a single outpost or town. That is a hub, and that is something many people are glad that GW2 moved away from. 

There was a time when there were no hubs... so moving away from hubs is not revolutionary... WoW really went hardcore on quest hubs, and then slowly refined the design of it so people had a smoother more fluid leveling experience through zones.... but before that many mmos had little to no questing... it was about going out into the world and killing stuff to level. 

GW2 doesn't even goad you to explore to the extent of the old mmos, instead of a hub telling you where to go you just run around like a gopher to marks on the map. 

Originally posted by caetftl

There was a time when there were no hubs... so moving away from hubs is not revolutionary... WoW really went hardcore on quest hubs, and then slowly refined the design of it so people had a smoother more fluid leveling experience through zones.... but before that many mmos had little to no questing... it was about going out into the world and killing stuff to level. 

GW2 doesn't even goad you to explore to the extent of the old mmos, instead of a hub telling you where to go you just run around like a gopher to marks on the map. 

Thing is, that is exactly how I don't play it. Maybe that's why I enjoy it so much, while others don't.  If I had my way, there wouldn't be a map,  at least not a minimap.  I play the game for what is in front of me. I just take part in the world, and I enjoy the flow and feel of the gameplay. The map is for figuring out what you've missed.

Originally posted by caetftl

There was a time when there were no hubs... so moving away from hubs is not revolutionary... WoW really went hardcore on quest hubs, and then slowly refined the design of it so people had a smoother more fluid leveling experience through zones.... but before that many mmos had little to no questing... it was about going out into the world and killing stuff to level. 

GW2 doesn't even goad you to explore to the extent of the old mmos, instead of a hub telling you where to go you just run around like a gopher to marks on the map. 

Here we go with not knowing what the words mean again.

Revolution means "turn around", it doesn't mean something never seen before.

It seems every "marketing buzz word" has to mean "new", "unique".

Going from a hub base back to a non hub base is a "revolution".

Originally posted by KhinRunite

Originally posted by jdnyc

Originally posted by Zorgo

 

you also know as well as I do that when you pick up a quest from a quest hub - you don't accomplish the task at the hub - they are usually a chain which will take you all over the map. 

you mean like Rift's Zone events?  and no many don't do that.  many stay in the local area.  hell most do.

GW2 is certainly doing it differently - there is more flow, it is more organic, you can join into it in any part of the chain rather than having to catch follks up to the part you are on, etc. 

Like Rift's Instant Adventures?

But imo, it is still the same concept, applied in a different way.

As I have said before, whether you like GW2 or don't like GW2 depends solely on whether you place emphasis on 'the same ol' concept - or the 'applied in a different way'.

 

 

You're talking about stuff introduced during Storm Legion, or atleast through a patch, right? That's just part of an MMO growing up. You seriously can't expect that GW2 DEs will stay as it is. Fact is, Rift started out with randomized mob spawns AKA Rifts. Over time it got better and better. I personally believe GW2 (as well as many other games) influenced these improvements to Rift.

Some through a patch.  Storm Legion built on that.  Zone events have been around since Beta 2 of Rift.

Todays kids thinks that the word revolution means something new that has never been seen before.

Todays kids thinks that the word innovation means something new that has never been see before.

Originally posted by darkblight
>Warhammer online dynamic events. 

yeah. Didn't you say this in another thread? Anyhow, I agree. GW2 dynamic events are superior to Warhammer's PQs.

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by Rayshe

Originally posted by kzaske

When Guild Wars 2 was first announced several years ago a set of features and goals was specified. Among those features were dynamic events. At the time, no game had attempted anything even close to what was described in the interview. Since that time, several games have used the term Dynamic Events to describe random events (RIFT comes to mind) but random events are not dynamic events. I am not even sure you can call Rift's events random as they always occur at the same location and after a specific amount of time had passed since the end of the previous event.

Dynamic Events as envisioned by Mike during the interview were indeed revolutionary. They like many other features included in the first announcement, did not quite come out the way they were envisioned at that time. All that said; dynamic events as they are found in Guild Wars 2 today are head and shoulders better than any other implementation I have seen (I have not played SW:TOR so I am not addressing those).

I am going to paraphrase the OP, I can't wait until real dynamic events become common place.

OK so its totally theirs because they changed the name.

 

Sorry but i gotta agree that no one has done them right yet. There is nothing Dynamic about the Dynamic events. They all have some kind of queue to start them off. Thus they are simply a ingame event. From timers to Talking to specific NPC's something triggers them. If something triggers them they aren't dynamic.

 

the win/fail states do change them though no matter how they are triggered they will not always be played out the same.. during the first months so many people swamred all the zones of tyria almost no one got to see any fail at all.. even now many areas still have to many people during some events making them unable to fail.. when this happens you never get to see the alternate part of many of these events.. also im really trying to figure out how dynamic event in any way equates to permanent long lasting effect or infinitely changing variable with no loops.. GW2 quest system is in a constantly moving state of change which to me makes it a dynamic system.

Also in a game you ALWAYS need some sort of trigger it could be anything like you said a timer, a npc gets talked to, a certain event happens that starts another event,  something but you need a trigger... how would any program know when to start doing anything without any instruction.. think many people have a very off sense of what computer programming AI can actually acomplish.

The guild Blood of the Spider on The Rathe server was the first guild system-wide to kill Ventani (the fourth warder) on July 28, 2001, and therefore wake the sleeper. The event caused a stir on the server when Kerafyrm went into multiple zones, including Skyshrine, killing everyone and everything in his path.

http://news.mmosite.com/content/2008-12-23/20081223084659416,3.shtml

SOE put out their dynamic event, which actually was dynamic and had lasting reprocussions on the game world about a decade before GW2.

Can we all shut up about how great ANet is?  They didn't do what they described. The hated SOE had done what they described 10 years earlier.  The GW2 public quests are the same as the same thing as Warcraft public quests with a little more AI scripting and maybe more often result conditions.

Originally posted by grimfall

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by Rayshe

Originally posted by kzaske

When Guild Wars 2 was first announced several years ago a set of features and goals was specified. Among those features were dynamic events. At the time, no game had attempted anything even close to what was described in the interview. Since that time, several games have used the term Dynamic Events to describe random events (RIFT comes to mind) but random events are not dynamic events. I am not even sure you can call Rift's events random as they always occur at the same location and after a specific amount of time had passed since the end of the previous event.

Dynamic Events as envisioned by Mike during the interview were indeed revolutionary. They like many other features included in the first announcement, did not quite come out the way they were envisioned at that time. All that said; dynamic events as they are found in Guild Wars 2 today are head and shoulders better than any other implementation I have seen (I have not played SW:TOR so I am not addressing those).

I am going to paraphrase the OP, I can't wait until real dynamic events become common place.

OK so its totally theirs because they changed the name.

 

Sorry but i gotta agree that no one has done them right yet. There is nothing Dynamic about the Dynamic events. They all have some kind of queue to start them off. Thus they are simply a ingame event. From timers to Talking to specific NPC's something triggers them. If something triggers them they aren't dynamic.

 

the win/fail states do change them though no matter how they are triggered they will not always be played out the same.. during the first months so many people swamred all the zones of tyria almost no one got to see any fail at all.. even now many areas still have to many people during some events making them unable to fail.. when this happens you never get to see the alternate part of many of these events.. also im really trying to figure out how dynamic event in any way equates to permanent long lasting effect or infinitely changing variable with no loops.. GW2 quest system is in a constantly moving state of change which to me makes it a dynamic system.

Also in a game you ALWAYS need some sort of trigger it could be anything like you said a timer, a npc gets talked to, a certain event happens that starts another event,  something but you need a trigger... how would any program know when to start doing anything without any instruction.. think many people have a very off sense of what computer programming AI can actually acomplish.

The guild Blood of the Spider on The Rathe server was the first guild system-wide to kill Ventani (the fourth warder) on July 28, 2001, and therefore wake the sleeper. The event caused a stir on the server when Kerafyrm went into multiple zones, including Skyshrine, killing everyone and everything in his path.

http://news.mmosite.com/content/2008-12-23/20081223084659416,3.shtml

SOE put out their dynamic event, which actually was dynamic and had lasting reprocussions on the game world about a decade before GW2.

Can we all shut up about how great ANet is?  They didn't do what they described. The hated SOE had done what they described 10 years earlier.  The GW2 public quests are the same as the same thing as Warcraft public quests with a little more AI scripting and maybe more often result conditions.

You mean what Anet described on the video I posted several times and it sound exactly like what is in the game?

http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1013691/Designing-Guild-Wars-2-Dynamic

Look, even a thread from 2010.

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/473/view/forums/thread/290515/GDC-Talk-Learn-More-About-GW2-Dynamic-Events.html

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Originally posted by grimfall

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by Rayshe

Originally posted by kzaske

When Guild Wars 2 was first announced several years ago a set of features and goals was specified. Among those features were dynamic events. At the time, no game had attempted anything even close to what was described in the interview. Since that time, several games have used the term Dynamic Events to describe random events (RIFT comes to mind) but random events are not dynamic events. I am not even sure you can call Rift's events random as they always occur at the same location and after a specific amount of time had passed since the end of the previous event.

Dynamic Events as envisioned by Mike during the interview were indeed revolutionary. They like many other features included in the first announcement, did not quite come out the way they were envisioned at that time. All that said; dynamic events as they are found in Guild Wars 2 today are head and shoulders better than any other implementation I have seen (I have not played SW:TOR so I am not addressing those).

I am going to paraphrase the OP, I can't wait until real dynamic events become common place.

OK so its totally theirs because they changed the name.

 

Sorry but i gotta agree that no one has done them right yet. There is nothing Dynamic about the Dynamic events. They all have some kind of queue to start them off. Thus they are simply a ingame event. From timers to Talking to specific NPC's something triggers them. If something triggers them they aren't dynamic.

 

the win/fail states do change them though no matter how they are triggered they will not always be played out the same.. during the first months so many people swamred all the zones of tyria almost no one got to see any fail at all.. even now many areas still have to many people during some events making them unable to fail.. when this happens you never get to see the alternate part of many of these events.. also im really trying to figure out how dynamic event in any way equates to permanent long lasting effect or infinitely changing variable with no loops.. GW2 quest system is in a constantly moving state of change which to me makes it a dynamic system.

Also in a game you ALWAYS need some sort of trigger it could be anything like you said a timer, a npc gets talked to, a certain event happens that starts another event,  something but you need a trigger... how would any program know when to start doing anything without any instruction.. think many people have a very off sense of what computer programming AI can actually acomplish.

The guild Blood of the Spider on The Rathe server was the first guild system-wide to kill Ventani (the fourth warder) on July 28, 2001, and therefore wake the sleeper. The event caused a stir on the server when Kerafyrm went into multiple zones, including Skyshrine, killing everyone and everything in his path.

http://news.mmosite.com/content/2008-12-23/20081223084659416,3.shtml

SOE put out their dynamic event, which actually was dynamic and had lasting reprocussions on the game world about a decade before GW2.

Can we all shut up about how great ANet is?  They didn't do what they described. The hated SOE had done what they described 10 years earlier.  The GW2 public quests are the same as the same thing as Warcraft public quests with a little more AI scripting and maybe more often result conditions.

You mean what Anet described on the video I posted several times and it sound exactly like what is in the game?

http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1013691/Designing-Guild-Wars-2-Dynamic

Look, even a thread from 2010.

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/473/view/forums/thread/290515/GDC-Talk-Learn-More-About-GW2-Dynamic-Events.html

Did you watch the video?  "Another important part about events is that players feel like events change the world, and events change the world in very dramatic different ways."  Turns out, every time I start a new character and go through the area, the centaurs were at the exact same state or reverting to the same starting state that they were in when the server went live.  This is the same thing that happens in Warhammer.

So 10 years ago, we had the #1 western MMORPG release quest based content that allowed the players to change the world.  Now we have intricate multi-player quests that start with triggers (or timers) and have many steps, but essentially return to the world to the same starting point.

The quests are better than the Warhammer ones, but they're still public quests, they don't change anything long term, and they sure as hell didn't keep me playing the game.

It was possible that when running through the areas in Kunark in 2002, the dragons would be up.  Sometimes they would be dead.  (That was dynamic, having to anticipate a raid dragon chasing after you when trying to meet your group for some exping)  How is that any different from what ArenaNet did here, in regard to persistant change to the world?  At least with the game from 11 years ago, it was news when a dragon was slain - tell me the state of each of the dynamic events on your GW2 server.  You don't know.  Why?  Because you don't care.  And neither do I.

Originally posted by MightyChasm
Oh God.  More of this 'GW2 is revolutionary' idiocy.  If you enjoy the game then great, but it is derivative and generic.  There is nothing revolutionary about it.  

If you took the time to learn the word revoluionary means then you understand.

Originally posted by Torgrim

Originally posted by MightyChasm
Oh God.  More of this 'GW2 is revolutionary' idiocy.  If you enjoy the game then great, but it is derivative and generic.  There is nothing revolutionary about it.  

 

If you took the time to learn the word revoluionary means then you understand.

 GW2 is not revolutionary.  Theres a lot of patronising 'go learn something' posts here, but for clarity, taken from :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution

The term revolution has also been used to denote great changes outside the political sphere. Such revolutions are usually recognized as having transformed in society, culture, philosophy and technology much more than political systems...

So the question is does GW2 represent 'great change' ? Well it does not from a game mechanic perspective, it offers lots of improvements to pre-existing mmorg mechanics they have improved apon, thats evolution not revolution.

Where you could argue that GW2 is being revolutionary is the AAA no subsciption model - that could indeed be revolutionary, but thats not what people are banging on about here. 

Originally posted by Bladestrom

Originally posted by Torgrim

Originally posted by MightyChasm
Oh God.  More of this 'GW2 is revolutionary' idiocy.  If you enjoy the game then great, but it is derivative and generic.  There is nothing revolutionary about it.  

 

If you took the time to learn the word revoluionary means then you understand.

 GW2 is not revolutionary.  Theres a lot of patronising 'go learn something' posts here, but for clarity, taken from :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution

The term revolution has also been used to denote great changes outside the political sphere. Such revolutions are usually recognized as having transformed in society, culture, philosophy and technology much more than political systems...

So the question is does GW2 represent 'great change' ? Well it does not from a game mechanic perspective, it offers lots of improvements to pre-existing mmorg mechanics they have improved apon, thats evolution not revolution.

Where you could argue that GW2 is being revolutionary is the AAA no subsciption model - that could indeed be revolutionary, but thats not what people are banging on about here. 

So changing the way people level and how they interact with players while leveling in a MMORPG isn't revolutionary in MMORPG realm?

What about GW2 having one of the best physic engines of any MMORPG?

Originally posted by grimfall

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Originally posted by grimfall

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by Rayshe

Originally posted by kzaske

When Guild Wars 2 was first announced several years ago a set of features and goals was specified. Among those features were dynamic events. At the time, no game had attempted anything even close to what was described in the interview. Since that time, several games have used the term Dynamic Events to describe random events (RIFT comes to mind) but random events are not dynamic events. I am not even sure you can call Rift's events random as they always occur at the same location and after a specific amount of time had passed since the end of the previous event.

Dynamic Events as envisioned by Mike during the interview were indeed revolutionary. They like many other features included in the first announcement, did not quite come out the way they were envisioned at that time. All that said; dynamic events as they are found in Guild Wars 2 today are head and shoulders better than any other implementation I have seen (I have not played SW:TOR so I am not addressing those).

I am going to paraphrase the OP, I can't wait until real dynamic events become common place.

OK so its totally theirs because they changed the name.

 

Sorry but i gotta agree that no one has done them right yet. There is nothing Dynamic about the Dynamic events. They all have some kind of queue to start them off. Thus they are simply a ingame event. From timers to Talking to specific NPC's something triggers them. If something triggers them they aren't dynamic.

 

the win/fail states do change them though no matter how they are triggered they will not always be played out the same.. during the first months so many people swamred all the zones of tyria almost no one got to see any fail at all.. even now many areas still have to many people during some events making them unable to fail.. when this happens you never get to see the alternate part of many of these events.. also im really trying to figure out how dynamic event in any way equates to permanent long lasting effect or infinitely changing variable with no loops.. GW2 quest system is in a constantly moving state of change which to me makes it a dynamic system.

Also in a game you ALWAYS need some sort of trigger it could be anything like you said a timer, a npc gets talked to, a certain event happens that starts another event,  something but you need a trigger... how would any program know when to start doing anything without any instruction.. think many people have a very off sense of what computer programming AI can actually acomplish.

The guild Blood of the Spider on The Rathe server was the first guild system-wide to kill Ventani (the fourth warder) on July 28, 2001, and therefore wake the sleeper. The event caused a stir on the server when Kerafyrm went into multiple zones, including Skyshrine, killing everyone and everything in his path.

http://news.mmosite.com/content/2008-12-23/20081223084659416,3.shtml

SOE put out their dynamic event, which actually was dynamic and had lasting reprocussions on the game world about a decade before GW2.

Can we all shut up about how great ANet is?  They didn't do what they described. The hated SOE had done what they described 10 years earlier.  The GW2 public quests are the same as the same thing as Warcraft public quests with a little more AI scripting and maybe more often result conditions.

You mean what Anet described on the video I posted several times and it sound exactly like what is in the game?

http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1013691/Designing-Guild-Wars-2-Dynamic

Look, even a thread from 2010.

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/473/view/forums/thread/290515/GDC-Talk-Learn-More-About-GW2-Dynamic-Events.html

Did you watch the video?  "Another important part about events is that players feel like events change the world, and events change the world in very dramatic different ways."  Turns out, every time I start a new character and go through the area, the centaurs were at the exact same state or reverting to the same starting state that they were in when the server went live.  This is the same thing that happens in Warhammer.

So 10 years ago, we had the #1 western MMORPG release quest based content that allowed the players to change the world.  Now we have intricate multi-player quests that start with triggers (or timers) and have many steps, but essentially return to the world to the same starting point.

The quests are better than the Warhammer ones, but they're still public quests, they don't change anything long term, and they sure as hell didn't keep me playing the game.

It was possible that when running through the areas in Kunark in 2002, the dragons would be up.  Sometimes they would be dead.  (That was dynamic, having to anticipate a raid dragon chasing after you when trying to meet your group for some exping)  How is that any different from what ArenaNet did here, in regard to persistant change to the world?  At least with the game from 11 years ago, it was news when a dragon was slain - tell me the state of each of the dynamic events on your GW2 server.  You don't know.  Why?  Because you don't care.  And neither do I.

 

Why would your new character know anything about your previous character?

At least in GW2 you don't know what state it is in.

In other games it is exactly the same all the time.

Actually there are sites that track major meta events.

More if you saw the video, they explain that the changes are not permanent and can be reverted,

They also explain than when you beat the bandits the bandits disapear for a while in a traditonal quest game the bandits where there before, they are there while you doing it and they will be there after you finished the quest.

MMORPGs don't track passage of time very well and it is insane to think that is possible currently or that will be possible any time soon.

Originally posted by Bladestrom

Originally posted by Torgrim

Originally posted by MightyChasm
Oh God.  More of this 'GW2 is revolutionary' idiocy.  If you enjoy the game then great, but it is derivative and generic.  There is nothing revolutionary about it.  

 

If you took the time to learn the word revoluionary means then you understand.

 GW2 is not revolutionary.  Theres a lot of patronising 'go learn something' posts here, but for clarity, taken from :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution

The term revolution has also been used to denote great changes outside the political sphere. Such revolutions are usually recognized as having transformed in society, culture, philosophy and technology much more than political systems...

So the question is does GW2 represent 'great change' ? Well it does not from a game mechanic perspective, it offers lots of improvements to pre-existing mmorg mechanics they have improved apon, thats evolution not revolution.

Where you could argue that GW2 is being revolutionary is the AAA no subsciption model - that could indeed be revolutionary, but thats not what people are banging on about here. 

Yes it is a great change from the traditional quest based games to level to a purely Dynamic Event gameworld.

If another another MMO has done this before then yes you have a point.

Originally posted by Bladestrom
Torgrim, thats not great as in people thinks its great - great as a momentous evolutionary moment when there is a fundemental shift in the mmorg gaming world that rocks the foundations of mmorging to the core and becomes the template that all mainstream mmorgs aspire to. Gw2 is great (I'm a huge fan of gw1 & 2) but that's it. ( asside from the non sob model whic I personally believe is revilutionary)

Then we will never see a revolutionary game.....ever.