Quest hubs suck

No mounts idea is great

Though not needing to group up to hit the level cap sucks

and the speed at which you can hit the level cap sucks

so they tried some new things, but also stuck to close to the faster is better mentality, which doesnt work out, except for mainstream gamers

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Aerowyn

 

i figured it all out on my own.. wasn't hard

I figure that it is reasonable to assume that some basic explaination of game mechanics (esp if this is some new thing) is in the game or on ANet's site.

Not on some youtube channel that isn't even ANet's official one.

GW2 does some new things but it doesn't explain it at all to the players. How can anyone expect that to be accepted positively?

 

I like a lot of GW2's new mechanics but that's something subjective. 

I hate GW2's inability to explain itself, that's objectively bad.

well people have been bitching up and down MMOs since wow have way to much hand holding.. and you are asking for them to lay everything out in front of you and not let people discover things on their own... again no way to please everyone..

While i do sometimes miss the trinity, quest hubs are something i never want to see again in an MMO.

I would have preferred if Anet stuck to their guns and didn't include heart quests either.

Originally posted by StoneRoses

Originally posted by Agrias34

They should have kept it true to Guild Wars, meaning, very similar to Guild Wars the original.  GW2 is so farfethced different than the Guild Wars I knew, I quit GW2 to go back to play GW1 !!

I remember when they said, they're just making GW2 cuz they wanted to do things they couldn't do in GW1, except it's a totally different game, has no similarities at all with what GW1 was, and shouldn't even be called GW2, it should have had a totally different name because it is not similar whatsoever.  Biggest letdown I've ever experienced, and just overall surprised how they changed the game too much to fit into what 'people' want to play.

Anet never said it was suppose to anything like GW1, I don't even know why you even bothered trying to play it. They didn't hide anything from you.

i'm soooo glad gw2 isn't like gw1 i really didn't care for the game much at all actually.. for me only thing gw2 is weak on compared to gw1 is sPVP

Hell no.

There are plenty cookiecutte carebear MMORPGs out there for you to choose from, leave our GW2.

OP you have hit the nail on the head in at least one comment.

There is too much of a gap between "solo immersion" and "partied dungeon runs" in this game.

What I would love to see is a player dungeon run ranking.

Everyone starts at 1000 ranking.

You run a dungeon with other rank 1000's and if you do it with minimal deaths and finish it within x time, on top of normal loot etc your ranking goes up (to say 930). You then get to run dungeons with others within your range (anyone 900- 960) and again attempt to lift your ranking.

This would allow people who like to be solo in a crowd to continue playing the game like they did when solo.

Well it sounds like fun to me *shrugs*

Also the game desperately needs ingame party talk like Lotro's.

I will try logging back in and playing again, though I havn't for a few months.

Originally posted by Aerowyn

 

well people have been bitching up and down MMOs since wow have way to much hand holding.. and you are asking for them to lay everything out in front of you and not let people discover things on their own... again no way to please everyone..

Wow... so asking for 'hey, I want to roll this profession, what does it do?' is 'lay everything out in front of you'?

I think there is some kind of bias here.

Look even ANet accepts that their tutorial is lacking so not sure why this type of 'defending' is necessary. Just makes ANet look like a company that doesn't know their game.

Back on topic: I think the backlash at the new things that GW2 does is somewhat fuelled by the complete lack of tutorial it has.

Originally posted by jtcgs

Hell no.

There are plenty cookiecutte carebear MMORPGs out there for you to choose from, leave our GW2.

This.  GW2 is GW2, you can't change it to have something you're comfortable with, being different is the reason I'm still playing it.  People need to just let it go.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Aerowyn

 

well people have been bitching up and down MMOs since wow have way to much hand holding.. and you are asking for them to lay everything out in front of you and not let people discover things on their own... again no way to please everyone..

Wow... so asking for 'hey, I want to roll this profession, what does it do?' is 'lay everything out in front of you'?

I think there is some kind of bias here.

Look even ANet accepts that their tutorial is lacking so not sure why this type of 'defending' is necessary. Just makes ANet look like a company that doesn't know their game.

 

Back on topic: I think the backlash at the new things that GW2 does is somewhat fuelled by the complete lack of tutorial it has.

WoW! 

LAZY!

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by jtcgs

Hell no.

There are plenty cookiecutte carebear MMORPGs out there for you to choose from, leave our GW2.

This.  GW2 is GW2, you can't change it to have something you're comfortable with, being different is the reason I'm still playing it.  People need to just let it go.

The same shit rolls out with any new game! 

Originally posted by StoneRoses

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by jtcgs

Hell no.

There are plenty cookiecutte carebear MMORPGs out there for you to choose from, leave our GW2.

This.  GW2 is GW2, you can't change it to have something you're comfortable with, being different is the reason I'm still playing it.  People need to just let it go.

The same shit rolls out with any new game! 

I guess.  I just don't see why it needs to be so polarizing a subject (then again, people who don't visit forums seem much more likely to accept change than anyone I've seen on MMORPG.com lol).  Variety is a good thing... people cried out for it for years, and since there was some mild changes with GW2 (and the upcoming Wildstar for another example), people are getting upset.  *shrug*

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Aerowyn

 

well people have been bitching up and down MMOs since wow have way to much hand holding.. and you are asking for them to lay everything out in front of you and not let people discover things on their own... again no way to please everyone..

Wow... so asking for 'hey, I want to roll this profession, what does it do?' is 'lay everything out in front of you'?

I think there is some kind of bias here.

Look even ANet accepts that their tutorial is lacking so not sure why this type of 'defending' is necessary. Just makes ANet look like a company that doesn't know their game.

 

Back on topic: I think the backlash at the new things that GW2 does is somewhat fuelled by the complete lack of tutorial it has.

you have a basic description of the class when making a character the thing is classes in this game aren't set in stone like wow or other games.. they have many roles and many differn't things they are good at and they let the players figure that out..  what would the tutorial say? you play the class how it suits you best you don't need ANET telling you how you should be playing the class because there isn't just one single way to play it

Originally posted by MMOExposed

No. I didn't like Quest hubs and I don't like Heart quest. Those should have never been made int the game. And with a game like this, Aet should have never had level mechanics. It takes away from the fun.

also the game should have included raid dungeons, which it did not. Events can't replace Instanced PvE. Rift proves that.

the trinity should have never been removed, but simply allow all classes to play each role. No healers basically kills large scale PvE and PvP for Melee fighters.

also the game should have had more in world effects that the player changes and controls.

I agree.

I too think a hubess quest system is best but thats because I am an explorer at heart.  Speaking of hearts, worst design element in the game IMO.  I can live without the trinity but I do sort of miss it, even though I always play DPS.  The issue I have with the trinity is the same ones the Anet staff had with them from their manefesto.  Standing around looking for players is not fun nor is it fun when the other 4 friends you play with all want to be the same role.

I dont know of a good way to fix the trinity but removing it might not be the answer either.

Originally posted by Aerowyn

 

you have a basic description of the class when making a character the thing is classes in this game aren't set in stone like wow or other games.. they have many roles and many differn't things they are good at and they let the players figure that out..  what would the tutorial say? you play the class how it suits you best you don't need ANET telling you how you should be playing the class because there isn't just one single way to play it

You don't need tutorials! - Aerowyn

We understand / acknowledge the game is not friendly to new players. We are working to fix this. - ANet

Which one is right? :(

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by MMOExposed

No. I didn't like Quest hubs and I don't like Heart quest. Those should have never been made int the game. And with a game like this, Aet should have never had level mechanics. It takes away from the fun.

also the game should have included raid dungeons, which it did not. Events can't replace Instanced PvE. Rift proves that.

the trinity should have never been removed, but simply allow all classes to play each role. No healers basically kills large scale PvE and PvP for Melee fighters.

also the game should have had more in world effects that the player changes and controls.

I agree.

 

I too think a hubess quest system is best but thats because I am an explorer at heart.  Speaking of hearts, worst design element in the game IMO.  I can live without the trinity but I do sort of miss it, even though I always play DPS.  The issue I have with the trinity is the same ones the Anet staff had with them from their manefesto.  Standing around looking for players is not fun nor is it fun when the other 4 friends you play with all want to be the same role.

 

I dont know of a good way to fix the trinity but removing it might not be the answer either.

although i do sort of wish they didnt include hearts i dont see the huge issue in having them other than it leads to some people just running from heart to heart but the hearts themselves aren't bad.. they are basic quests but don't require you to talk to a npc at all, all have numerous ways to complete each one, all have special venders attached to the quest that gives you a chance to get some nice equipment as you level

Originally posted by Shrilly

Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

Originally posted by Kaneth

Threads like these shows me how much the community as a whole doesn't truly want anything that's different. People are comfortable with their defined roles and defined quest hubs, and defined end game, defined everything. The community has spent so much time allowing game developers telling them what to like, that they've actually come to believe it.

Too bad there isn't a rep system or at least an applaud emoticon, because I'd use both for that part of your post alone, not to mention the rest of the post which is excellent too.

too true

  Well said, JLP.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Aerowyn

 

you have a basic description of the class when making a character the thing is classes in this game aren't set in stone like wow or other games.. they have many roles and many differn't things they are good at and they let the players figure that out..  what would the tutorial say? you play the class how it suits you best you don't need ANET telling you how you should be playing the class because there isn't just one single way to play it

You don't need tutorials! - Aerowyn

We understand / acknowledge the game is not friendly to new players. We are working to fix this. - ANet

Which one is right? :(

obviously everyone on this website knows better than anything any game devs would ever know... so guess that answers that... and I think the tutorials they are talking about are on actual combat mechanics like combo fields, dodging,  and the trait system

I didn't mind the lack of quest hubs.  That was one thing I didn't really like about shift of mob grinding to quest leveling.  In the mob grinding world, I typically went all over the place.  "Dynamic," kill, find, talk to, etc. quests... I've done so many they just don't do it for me anymore especially when I have to follow a very specific path.

The trinity exists for a reason.  In any given fight, the goal is to kill the mob and not die.  That's why there is a "trinity."  Now, the trinity has varied overtime.  I was first told the trinity was Warrior, Rogue, and Cleric in EQ.  It was the best tanking, the best sustained damage, the best healing.  It was never the best group.  It was just a foundation for a good group.  No slower got you no where fast.  The problem I had with GW2 is not that they were trying to get out of the trinity mold, but they got out of the trinity mold by going a garbage route.  Basically going with all DPS is not breaking the trinity.  It's just being dumb.  Should have gone a hybridization route with classes simultaneously filling multiple roles and expanding roles beyond what games currently offer (or returning to old style games with various support roles) or by creating hybrid viability.

Originally posted by remyburke
They could have kept traditional roles and did everything else the way they did and it would have been an amazing game. They went overboard with the reinvention IMO. There's a reason that roles have played a part in RPGs since the 1970's.

Actually, the classes in GW2 are closer to the original Dungeon and Dragons classes than any EQ/WoW clone classes are. There's no trinity in pen and paper RPGs. There's no agro table either.