| 74 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
3/25/09 11:49:38 AM#41
Originally posted by Zorndorf
Can I have this in GW ? (apart from the legendary raiding and open world travelling?). http://revver.com/video/1366341/within-our-grasp/ The above is a mandatory link for those STILL thinking WotLK has no massively played world PvP every night. Guys who play GW or War or AoC or anything launched these last few years: please stop the drooling ....the floor is getting wet.... That's fine and dandy, WoW finally has decent world PvP occasionally. Most of WoW's PvP is still instanced just like Guild Wars' is. If you weren't such a raging fanbois, you would realize that there is more to a game than simply having an Open world PvP battleground. I'll admit, I love Open world PvP, and I hate that GW doesn't have it. But beyond that, GW is better in almost every single way, from it being based on player's skill instead of the time they spend mindlessly grinding for gear, GW has an infinitely more creative, original, and completely better class/skill system then WoW has, to the fact that it actually has a continuing story that is interesting and meaningful in what you do. Take off the blinders, or just stop trolling. Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic |
|
|
3/25/09 11:52:09 AM#42
Originally posted by scot835
How is it not an MMORPG? Sure, it doesn't have a massive, persistant world. But, it is more massive in other senses than almost every other game(except Eve), including WoW. Everyone is on the same "realm". Sure, things get broken up into districts, and zones, but EVERYONE is on the same server. If someone owns the game, you can play with them. That is truely massive. Beyond that, it is obviously online, multiplayer, and an RPG. Be it the fact that the game is broken up into instanced, but EVERYONE is on the same server, does that not make it more massive than AoC, which is broken up into instanced and different servers? Does that make AoC not an MMO? Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic |
|
|
3/25/09 12:07:38 PM#43
Originally posted by Abrahmm
How is it not an MMORPG? Sure, it doesn't have a massive, persistant world. But, it is more massive in other senses than almost every other game(except Eve), including WoW. Everyone is on the same "realm". Sure, things get broken up into districts, and zones, but EVERYONE is on the same server. If someone owns the game, you can play with them. That is truely massive. Beyond that, it is obviously online, multiplayer, and an RPG. Be it the fact that the game is broken up into instanced, but EVERYONE is on the same server, does that not make it more massive than AoC, which is broken up into instanced and different servers? Does that make AoC not an MMO?
Massive doesn't mean people playing the game. Its people playing in the exact same place at the same time. Then number of people in one area is actually quite low in GW. Is Diablo a MMO? Is COD4 a MMO? Is UT or CS a MMO? GW is no different than those. Honestly, with the Way AOC is designed, its no better. For some people having a persistant world gives the the game believability. For me and loads of others, if theres nothing persistant it ain't a MMO. Besides, GW's own developers don't consider it a MMO, so case closed right? You might as well ask which is better, FF7 or WOW. They're both RPGs and all, har har har. |
|
|
3/25/09 12:14:08 PM#44
Again we go back to what the definition of what a mmorpg is. Seems some people must have a persistant world in the mode of WoW/EQ for it to be considered to be an mmo. I favor a broader definition which includes GW. Co-op games to me are more encompassing that includes mmorpg under their umbrella. |
|
|
3/25/09 12:48:39 PM#45
Again, There was no statement about wow or EQ taking the leadership role. As a matter of a fact I have four, that are awesome; all of them. LOTRO, WOW, WAR, CITY OF HEROS... i spend about three months time each and then rotate. have a good day and game on. |
|
Originally posted by Abrahmm
How is it not an MMORPG? Sure, it doesn't have a massive, persistant world. But, it is more massive in other senses than almost every other game(except Eve), including WoW. Everyone is on the same "realm". Sure, things get broken up into districts, and zones, but EVERYONE is on the same server. If someone owns the game, you can play with them. That is truely massive. Beyond that, it is obviously online, multiplayer, and an RPG. Be it the fact that the game is broken up into instanced, but EVERYONE is on the same server, does that not make it more massive than AoC, which is broken up into instanced and different servers? Does that make AoC not an MMO? Massive-Mutiplayer is what it lacks to be a MMORPG |
|
|
3/25/09 1:25:55 PM#47
Originally posted by jdm12983
WoW gear is only easier to get if in the sense that if all you want is frequent gear drops, without regard to whether actually using the drop would be reasonable, then WoW will give you a lot more of them. If it's the frequency of gear drops that you could actually use without being an idiot for it, Guild Wars has more. If it's frequency of getting gear drops that you might use, but wouldn't be immediately looking to replace it as soon as possible, Guild Wars has far, far more than WoW. And if it's the difficulty of getting the top gear that you actually want well ahead of time, Guild Wars makes that dramatically easier in many, many ways. In Guild Wars, between my characters, I have about 30 complete sets of perfect gear. I have enough stuff sitting around that if I wanted another 30 complete sets, I could go get them right now, without needing to farm anything. In WoW, has there ever been anyone who had, for every single gear slot, 30 items that could arguably be the very best item in the game for that slot under certain circumstances? That's not just 30 raid epics for every slot, but all top tier stuff such that there is no other item in the game that is clearly better in the same slot. (That could be spread across multiple characters, of course; it would be stupid to have all that on one character.) Because what I have right now in Guild Wars is pretty comparable to that, and wasn't really that hard to get. If being easier to get gear is a plus, Guild Wars wins that category by an enormous margin. |
|
|
3/25/09 2:54:27 PM#48
Originally posted by Josher
Massive doesn't mean people playing the game. Its people playing in the exact same place at the same time. Then number of people in one area is actually quite low in GW. Is Diablo a MMO? Is COD4 a MMO? Is UT or CS a MMO? GW is no different than those. Honestly, with the Way AOC is designed, its no better. For some people having a persistant world gives the the game believability. For me and loads of others, if theres nothing persistant it ain't a MMO. Besides, GW's own developers don't consider it a MMO, so case closed right? You might as well ask which is better, FF7 or WOW. They're both RPGs and all, har har har. By who's definition does it mean people playing in the exact same place? Is there some side note that says Massive(in one spot) Multiplayer Online RPG? Thats your own, personal definition. I don't see anywhere that specifies that Massive has a definitive scope. You are also claiming that Guild Wars has NOTHING that is persistent, which is false. First of all, the first district of every city is persistent as there has to be at least one district of every place. You can always say(barring the district being full) to a friend "meet me in district 1 of X" and if you both go their, you will always find them there. I could go to district 1 of any city and dance for days straight, and you will always find me there. Second, the economy is persistent across all districts and zones. If it wasn't for towns and outposts, I would agree with you, and GW would be very similar to COD4 - small personal instances to fight in and nothing more. The towns change that. You also forget that games like COD4 have little RPG elements, thus also negating the MMORPG title. Also, the moderators of MMORPG.com consider GW's an MMO, so case closed right? But this thread isn't about whether GW is an MMO or not, it's about whether people think it's a better GAME than WoW. I think it is. Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic |
|
|
3/25/09 3:34:20 PM#49
Originally posted by Zorndorf
Can I have this in GW ? (apart from the legendary raiding and open world travelling?). http://revver.com/video/1366341/within-our-grasp/ The above is a mandatory link for those STILL thinking WotLK has no massively played world PvP every night. Guys who play GW or War or AoC or anything launched these last few years: please stop the drooling ....the floor is getting wet.... The rabid fanboy warning us about drooling. Gotta love the irony.
As for the OP, I think that WoW does offer a little more depth but I think that's just what you get when you pay a monthly fee. There are plenty of MMOs that I feel offer more depth than WoW. Guild Wars still offers a fun overall experience, and with no monthly fee, which is rad. As to whether or not it's an MMO, I think the fact that it's listed on this site is a convincing enough argument for me. |
|
|
3/25/09 7:29:54 PM#50
Originally posted by Quizzical
I will say this again... those wre just my opinions... I in no way got exact with certain tpyes of gear or whatever. I just merely stated that overall to just got and buy gear it's easier in WoW; I didn't get exact by saying "easier to get gear that exactly suits your current toon's needs". |
|
|
3/25/09 7:38:24 PM#51
wow is a hit and stop hit and stop game so im going for guild wars.
guild wars attack pace is realistic. |
|
|
Flex1
Advanced Member
Joined: 11/29/06
“Give thanks for a little and you will find a lot.” |
3/25/09 9:00:47 PM#52
Originally posted by tro44_1
M-assive M-utiplayer O-nline R-ole P-laying G-ame
GW is missing the first M :^) GW is a massive game. It has a massive amount of people in it. Massive amount of skills, Massive amount of weapons, Massive amounts of monsters, Massive amounts of quests, Massive amount of lore. Masive enough for you?! |
Originally posted by Flex1
M-assive M-utiplayer O-nline R-ole P-laying G-ame
GW is missing the first M :^) GW is a massive game. It has a massive amount of people in it. Massive amount of skills, Massive amount of weapons, Massive amounts of monsters, Massive amounts of quests, Massive amount of lore. Masive enough for you?!
No Massive Mutiplayer gameplay.
Warcraft 3 is a MMO |
|
|
3/25/09 9:27:10 PM#54
well WoW is a real MMO.. but Guildwars is actually fun.. i prefer games that are fun so I wil go with guildwars
|
|
Originally posted by EndDream
World PvP is not fun? Large Scale PvE not fun? Guess your not going to get GW2 |
|
|
3/25/09 9:44:22 PM#56
Originally posted by jdm12983
As I stated; those were the thing that I liked about each game. So yes; some of that is just opinion. But with gear - I just meant in general sense. Because; yes, with Guild was you can actualy just buy the max-lvl armor but it will take a decent amount for farming for money to either buy the mats from the vendor or other players. However in WoW you can juts but high lvl items straight from the Auction House or sometimes other players directly. Granted; it still takes a decent amount of money gathering from time to time but I feal (again - just my opinion) that it's a little easier to get decent lvl gear in WoW. Either way it goes though - both games are great in their own ways. :)
Huh? they practically give you best armor/weapons. You merely grind for 'best looking equipment' Besides PVP characters get best equipment ingame period so it buries the crap out of WoW in this regard period. GW is not a lootfest- like WoW |
|
Originally posted by PatchDay
Huh? they practically give you best armor/weapons. You merely grind for 'best looking equipment' Besides PVP characters get best equipment ingame period so it buries the crap out of WoW in this regard period. GW is not a lootfest- like WoW ?? In TBC could your group Dps / Tank/Heal Sunwell using only Arena Gear? |
|
|
3/25/09 10:43:14 PM#58
Originally posted by tro44_1
Huh? Why won't this thread just die, there is no point in this ferris wheel of a thread. |
|
|
3/25/09 10:56:55 PM#59
I'm not reading what other people said but I found this interesting since I have played and enjoyed both games. Obviously this is my opinion but I think most level headed people will agree with me. (Those who aren't fanbois of one and/or hater of the other.) PvP - Guild Wars (obvious one) PvE - Guild Wars (the story is engaging and you actually want to play to find out how the story unfolds. WoW story is longer and still good but nowhere near as engaging.) Crafting - WoW (GW doesn't really have one.) Weapons/Armor/ect - WoW (Guild Wars has some nice skins as far as armor and weapons... but with the stats and variety that WoW has, Guild Wars doesn't really compare. Plus it's exciting to get armor via quests and drops ect which also does not happen really in Guild Wars) I could go on but basically it boils down to this. WoW has more to do no question about it. Guild Wars has better PvP and PvE but it's only going to last the majority of players short term fun(especially the PvE) Honestly I recommend both... and they are so different it's really hard to compare... though I'm excited about Guild Wars 2 because THAT might generate a lot more debate. Guild Wars 2 vs World of Warcraft .... we'll see. |
|
|
3/26/09 12:11:08 AM#60
Originally posted by tro44_1
World PvP is not fun? Large Scale PvE not fun? Guess your not going to get GW2
Something that might be fun in theory if done well probably won't be fun if done really badly--and WoW's open world PvP is done really badly. |
|