Guild wars II changed nothing for a lot of folks like me, who would never touch another product made by  NCSOFT, yes ANET is NCSOFT, same folks who make aion and what not.

So a lot of folks like me just steared away, and from what all I been reading about their horible customer service, I would think a lot of folks are very unhappy.

Nothing has changed other than some folks wen t to play it, and then came back and camped the forums out and started griping.

Everything else has remained status quo.

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

Originally posted by RefMinor
It didn't change everything, so the premise of your question is incorrect.

Definetly this.

 

1) GW2 got rid of quest hubs: Yes, it also pretty much got rid of quests too. So.... I'll take quest hubs over that. The game is at least 98% kill/gather/destroy tasks. You know, those exact things people complain about in other games but for some reason when ANet does it, it is revolutionary.

 

2) GW2 is B2P: Yes, they successfully tricked players into paying $60 for a F2P game. Yet again, because it was ANet, it is revolutionary and will be the future of gaming. So the future is we'll all pay $60 for a F2P when currently you get F2P games for free to start with... good improvement.

 

3) GW2 auto grouped everyone: Yup, and they killed all socialization by doing so. Good to know the future of gaming is an MMO where no one ever talks to each other. Sounds fun.

 

4) GW2 did combos!!: Oh wait, other games already did those.

5) GW2 did Dynamic Events!!: Oh wait, other games already did those.

6) GW2 did WvW PvP!!: Not any different from RvR that has been done before only this time there is absolutely no point to it at all so it is boring as hell. Not a good improvement.

 

 

If we base the future of gaming off of GW2... we're f&%ked.

I have to agree with most of this.  Instead I'd like to focus on what Anet really did that may or may not have been innovative and revolutionary, but at least was big steps in the right direction.

1)  No more fighting over mobs and gathering items.- Having started playing WoW again with MoP, just highlighted for me how much nicer the GW2 system is.  It sucks to feel like you need to "beat" this person to that ore node, or 'tag' that monster first so you get credit.  I guess that type of competition is okay if you're playing a PvP game and the consequences for beating, or sometimes cheating, your way to a node first can be resolved by fighting, in a PvE game the GW2 way should be copied for all future games.

2)  Auto-leveling - The freedom to play with your friends at any time regardless of your respective levels needs to be implemented in all games.  Nothing is worse then being level 60 when your friend first starts a game and having to wait on them to catch up, or to go help them but realize you get nothing of value for your character while you're helping your friend.

Just as important to me is being able to go back to earlier zones and still reap rewards and benefits for seeing the content.  I've always thought it was a poor design choice to have zones all be broken down by levels such that when you reach max level you have no reason to go back to 80% of the zones in the game.  Going forward I'd love to see games expand on this aspect of GW2 to the point that, like in real life, monsters of all "level's or "power" or whatever, can migrate all over the place.  There is no reason that level 50 dragon can't fly 2 zones over and land in the level 10 zone if he wants to. 

Maybe this can be tied into a phasing-type system like WoW has.  Maybe once you hit Max level lots of higher level monsters can populate any zone.

I'll think of more later.

Originally posted by Crusix221
Why not make the main character NPCs actual GMs and have there job to be create content and play the role of that character? Hire them full time as an "actor".

 

Now there is a solid idea. 

Why does Mr.Kern keep coming off as if he's trying to brown nose with ArenaNet? I've not seen a single shred of evidence pointing to any of his wild claims with regard to GW2?

Is it just me :/?

Originally posted by halflife25

Originally posted by Eir_S
I agree that even better dynamic events are the future, GW2 just opened the door a little wider.  Time is certainly a factor I haven't seen used in their implimentation yet.  Good ideas, Mark!  It's exciting to think about.  Quest hubs had their time in the sun.

 

I really doubt that. As Trion's devs said that players love questing so NPC offering quest isn't going anywhere. In his words 'there is something ZEN about completing quests' and i agree with it.

I don't want questign to be gone just like how i don't want every MMO to be littered with DE's. I want both. options and choices is better. I can think for myself and don't want game devs to save me.

 

I enjoy quests also but saying that quest hubs are done is not the same as saying quests are done. The hearts in GW2 are really just a form of locational quests that consolidate 2-5 tasks into one completion meter that also simply don't need you speak with the NPC in order to start. I would say that they are still essentially quests but with the delivery changed up a bit.

The questions become, 1) will we be seeing individual tasks continue or will they be consolidated. 2) will these tasks need to be accepted before starting them. 3) will tasks disappear all together in favor of something more like DEs.

1) consolidated tasks are very nice, especially if you like doing one thing more than another. Feed the cows or fight the bandits. I would rather fight but I can feed cows if no bandits can be found. It is also nice to not feel like you just need 1 more special bandit so now you need to weave between all the normal bandits wandering around because they wont give you quest credit. Long before GW2 I have imagined the farmer wanting to say, "Gah, just kill me some bandits. 10 would be great but more is even better."

Which brings up the only thing I think GW2 did wrong with the hearts. Once you fill the meter magically the farmer could care less any more if you killed another bandit in your life. Yet they are still crawling all over his farm. If the farmer wanted you to kill bandits in the first place then surely he would appreciate you continuing to do so. I am sure Anet caps this because they don't want people to bot but again that strikes me as poisoning the fun well for everyone so that the bad guys cant do what they want.

I would like to see games go more in the direction of go over here and help so and so as much as you want with diminishing returns after a certain point to encourage you to move on and help lots of different people but ultimately you decide how much you will help farmer Dan. Less artificial limitations on questing but there will still be questing.

2) yeah it is nice to not have to accept the quest before hand. Although it is a bit unrealistic to come into an area and magically know what farmer Dan needs done.  What if Farmer Dan or one of his family were to come up to you and say "hey, I am glad to see you, would you be willing to do somethings for me?" and then have the quest automatically land in your log with the details. Meh, just a detail really. Wouldn't change anything. I think it works either way to have a group of quests or a consolidated quest land in your task list automatically when you get to a new place. I definitly like it when NPCs in GW2 direct you to particular events. What I don't like is when those events are finished before I get there.

3) I don't think task, missions or little quests will disappear in favor of dynamic events. The Hearts in GW2 or hubs in other games are a good mechanic to draw you though a world and make sure you at least hit all the big locations. And I think that things will remain geographic only because it is too easy to go though an area at just the wrong time and not see any events pop up. I we place all content on a space/time maping then we run the real risk of our timing being bad. Further, even if you do see a good bit of the content, people will still only be seeing a part of what you worked on. I think spreading SOME content across a time dimension is good in that it makes things seem more realistic and it makes for great replayibility but that also makes it more expensive because you will have to have much more content over all since you have to take into account people missing a certain percentage of that content when they go though. I think this model will become more populate at the high end of MMOs but not necessarily over all. Possibly this will become what separates Buy or Sub to play from Free or Shop to play.

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

Originally posted by RefMinor
It didn't change everything, so the premise of your question is incorrect.

Definetly this.

 

1) GW2 got rid of quest hubs: Yes, it also pretty much got rid of quests too. So.... I'll take quest hubs over that. The game is at least 98% kill/gather/destroy tasks. You know, those exact things people complain about in other games but for some reason when ANet does it, it is revolutionary.

 

2) GW2 is B2P: Yes, they successfully tricked players into paying $60 for a F2P game. Yet again, because it was ANet, it is revolutionary and will be the future of gaming. So the future is we'll all pay $60 for a F2P when currently you get F2P games for free to start with... good improvement.

 

3) GW2 auto grouped everyone: Yup, and they killed all socialization by doing so. Good to know the future of gaming is an MMO where no one ever talks to each other. Sounds fun.

 

4) GW2 did combos!!: Oh wait, other games already did those.

5) GW2 did Dynamic Events!!: Oh wait, other games already did those.

6) GW2 did WvW PvP!!: Not any different from RvR that has been done before only this time there is absolutely no point to it at all so it is boring as hell. Not a good improvement.

 

 

If we base the future of gaming off of GW2... we're f&%ked.

Could not of said it better myself,on top of that GW2 lacks depth.

GW2 changed nothing and the lack of content past the leveling experience (but for the endless loop that is PVP) will make this game fall down very very fast imho.

Nothing in particular wrong with the game but I was literally able to consume all of it contents within a matter of 2-3 weeks which subsequently made go back to my old mmo. Sure its a nice and long game, for the casual carebear gamer, but they will run out of content as well eventually with nothing to hold them and make them want to come back for more.

Originally posted by Sylvarii

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

Originally posted by RefMinor
It didn't change everything, so the premise of your question is incorrect.

Definetly this.

 

1) GW2 got rid of quest hubs: Yes, it also pretty much got rid of quests too. So.... I'll take quest hubs over that. The game is at least 98% kill/gather/destroy tasks. You know, those exact things people complain about in other games but for some reason when ANet does it, it is revolutionary.

 

2) GW2 is B2P: Yes, they successfully tricked players into paying $60 for a F2P game. Yet again, because it was ANet, it is revolutionary and will be the future of gaming. So the future is we'll all pay $60 for a F2P when currently you get F2P games for free to start with... good improvement.

 

3) GW2 auto grouped everyone: Yup, and they killed all socialization by doing so. Good to know the future of gaming is an MMO where no one ever talks to each other. Sounds fun.

 

4) GW2 did combos!!: Oh wait, other games already did those.

5) GW2 did Dynamic Events!!: Oh wait, other games already did those.

6) GW2 did WvW PvP!!: Not any different from RvR that has been done before only this time there is absolutely no point to it at all so it is boring as hell. Not a good improvement.

 

 

If we base the future of gaming off of GW2... we're f&%ked.

Could not of said it better myself,on top of that GW2 lacks depth.

1) True

2) Careful saying they "tricked" anyone, you'll might be called the T word.

3) True

4) True

5) They weren't Dynamic, they were scripted chain events.

6) Wasn't really RvR, more like a bastardized version.

Conclusion: I disagree, I'm not seeing the massive move by the market towards the GW2 structure.

Originally posted by VikingGamer

snip

 

I enjoy quests also but saying that quest hubs are done is not the same as saying quests are done. The hearts in GW2 are really just a form of locational quests that consolidate 2-5 tasks into one completion meter that also simply don't need you speak with the NPC in order to start. I would say that they are still essentially quests but with the delivery changed up a bit.

The questions become, 1) will we be seeing individual tasks continue or will they be consolidated. 2) will these tasks need to be accepted before starting them. 3) will tasks disappear all together in favor of something more like DEs.

1) consolidated tasks are very nice, especially if you like doing one thing more than another. Feed the cows or fight the bandits. I would rather fight but I can feed cows if no bandits can be found. It is also nice to not feel like you just need 1 more special bandit so now you need to weave between all the normal bandits wandering around because they wont give you quest credit. Long before GW2 I have imagined the farmer wanting to say, "Gah, just kill me some bandits. 10 would be great but more is even better."

Which brings up the only thing I think GW2 did wrong with the hearts. Once you fill the meter magically the farmer could care less any more if you killed another bandit in your life. Yet they are still crawling all over his farm. If the farmer wanted you to kill bandits in the first place then surely he would appreciate you continuing to do so. I am sure Anet caps this because they don't want people to bot but again that strikes me as poisoning the fun well for everyone so that the bad guys cant do what they want.

I would like to see games go more in the direction of go over here and help so and so as much as you want with diminishing returns after a certain point to encourage you to move on and help lots of different people but ultimately you decide how much you will help farmer Dan. Less artificial limitations on questing but there will still be questing.

2) yeah it is nice to not have to accept the quest before hand. Although it is a bit unrealistic to come into an area and magically know what farmer Dan needs done.  What if Farmer Dan or one of his family were to come up to you and say "hey, I am glad to see you, would you be willing to do somethings for me?" and then have the quest automatically land in your log with the details. Meh, just a detail really. Wouldn't change anything. I think it works either way to have a group of quests or a consolidated quest land in your task list automatically when you get to a new place. I definitly like it when NPCs in GW2 direct you to particular events. What I don't like is when those events are finished before I get there.

3) I don't think task, missions or little quests will disappear in favor of dynamic events. The Hearts in GW2 or hubs in other games are a good mechanic to draw you though a world and make sure you at least hit all the big locations. And I think that things will remain geographic only because it is too easy to go though an area at just the wrong time and not see any events pop up. I we place all content on a space/time maping then we run the real risk of our timing being bad. Further, even if you do see a good bit of the content, people will still only be seeing a part of what you worked on. I think spreading SOME content across a time dimension is good in that it makes things seem more realistic and it makes for great replayibility but that also makes it more expensive because you will have to have much more content over all since you have to take into account people missing a certain percentage of that content when they go though. I think this model will become more populate at the high end of MMOs but not necessarily over all. Possibly this will become what separates Buy or Sub to play from Free or Shop to play.

I liked your sig so much I rewrote it to fit these forums better :3.

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

3) GW2 auto grouped everyone: Yup, and they killed all socialization by doing so. Good to know the future of gaming is an MMO where no one ever talks to each other. Sounds fun.

I don't think it is the autogrouping itself that is the problem. It just makes it more noticeable when someone helps you out and then simply pushes on. Other games have little socialization as well, but there someone will simply avoid helping you at all in the first place.

The real problem is that people don't want to take the time to type something if they were just passing by so maybe you get a macro'd thank you and that is it.

Ideally It would be great if we could simply talk to people as easily as we can in the real world. But having a voip channel that is roughly equivalent to a short range /say is just asking for socially autistic brats to start voice bombing everybody they see. Unfortunately social civility only maintains itself in a cultrually enforceable context.

Originally posted by grummz

I've heard the MMORPG audience is a tough crowd. I think you guys have every right to be angry that MMOs haven't changed much in the past 10 years. Glad to see people still want more, as it really makes me want to figure out what the "more" is as a game maker.

- Mark Kern

and cars have changed very little since the days when the first model T rolled off the line

how about games ? baseball, football ? basketball ? uniforms and some small rule changes but a home run is still a home run. Chess rules been the same for several hundred years.

on a MMO the designers still are forced to work within the limits of the technology, you have a pixilated character tha is limited to movement and intereaction with mobiles.You can't smell taste ot do much withthem except destroy them or move them from point A to point B. Not sure what peoiple expect.

you can make that mobile represent a pirate, a space trooper, a rat, or a zopmbie but at the end of the day you are going to have to kill ten , twelve or seven of them to advance your character. That is just the nature of the MMO, don't like it then find a new hobby or come up with some ground breaking idea.

Sam Rayburn once said " Any jackass can kick down a barn but it takes a carpenter to build one.

Are any carpenters here? or just a bunch of jackasses

Guild Wars 2 changed nothing!  It made some slight changes to existing to existing design ideas, but there was nothing very innovative in the game at all.

If you notice GW2 is still a class/level system which puts extreme limits on character development.  As long as you use such a design you are going to be placing big limits on what people can do in a MMO.   

The next step:

1. No leveling at all.
2. Much more dynamic content (longer downtime, longer chains, more branching).
3. Content made by players (dungeons, quests).
4. Content that can be played without using force (Classical adventuring, were you just talk to people and run around to solve a mystery).
5. More complex riddles, traps and secret doors with a minigame-system that involves skill to disarm and open.
6. Classes do not only differ in their combat-style, but also in their social style: thiefs are connected with a secret guild, that often has its headquarters in hidden parts of the city (instanced only for thiefs), they also have some skills to work as cone artists (disguise, cheating in games, etc.) and can do some fluffy stuff like juggling. This could even lead to the effect, that they are wanted in some cities. Class-quests can lead to conflict between classes. So Necromancer may have a quest to call for a demon that dynamicaly triggers a quest for Priests and Paladins to get rid of this demon.

1. Physics Engine - Players can interact with the enviroment in a creative way, eg build a bridge of planks to get over an obstacle.
2. Personality Engine - Designers just give an NPC some parameters (Dwarf, likes to drink, does not like Elfs, greedy for money) and the engine is responsible for the behaviour.

I don't think GW2 changed anything so much as nudged the genre in down a path the genre has slowly been following for years...

For a while, MMOs have become about a grind.  Grinding "quests" to level up.  Grinding instances to gear up.  Grinding token-systems to get rewards.  Grinding achievements for even more rewards.  Essentially, MMOs have long primarily catered to that urge to get-that-carrot.  We play to level up.  We play to get that new chest piece.  We play to boost our achievement points.  Whereas... shouldn't we be playing because we really want to prevent centaurs from overtaking a village?  We really want to defeat the uber-evil-dragon-of-dimensions and temporarily prevent an apocolypse?

For a short while, GW2 does something different.  It encourages players to just "experience" the game and its content.  For a while, the player is engaged not necessarily because there is a reward at the end of it, but because its interesting and fun.  However, the game does eventually settle into a carrot-driven-design.  For a while, the game does get you to think, "I really don't want these centaurs to succeed!".  And then, it becomes... "Oh look, those centaurs are trying to take over that village.. and I need karma!"

I think players really want a game where consequences are legitimate.  Where, if you fail a quest... there are consequences you have to deal with...  When you wrong another player, your reputation within the community may be severely impacted.  Where there is always a hint of unknown and mystery... 

I would argue that Dynamic Events are a step in the right direction.  But, they aren't "meaty" enough to be truly game-changing.  As with Rift and WAR - there is too much "static" and not enough "dynamic" in these events.

Edit:

As others have pointed out, ANet has done an awesome job.  I love the auto-level-scaling.  I really enjoy the crafting system and having to "figure" out recipes.  I really enjoy the fact that the gear grind that exists is almost purely cosmetic in nature.  I also enjoy their take on the traditional "tabbed targeting combat".  There is a lot of GOOD work in GW2.  The game is full of love, and you can sense it.

I am with the others that did not see much change, overall. Quests didn't really change much in the end of the day, and in spite of everyone saying they are so much different from PQs in Warhammer and RIFTs would be from DEs, they feel pretty much the same to me.  Mechanically speaking, it feels pretty much the same. Combat is a bit different, but not all the changes in combat are a positive imo. 

Don't get me wrong, I like this game and am having a good time with it, but it surely isn't the messiah of MMORPGs heralding the trumpets of change or revolution in the industry. I have to be honest, it feels way more like every other themepark MMO that I have ever played than I thought it would given the expectations.

It could, possibly, alter the subscription model, and make B2P the norm (a change I would not like, btw), but only in GW2 has good, solid, long term financial numbers. They need to make a good profit off the rmts and keep the development of expansions quick, without suffering poor quality. If all that can happen, and IF they are still well in the black, I suppose future devs will look at that as a viable way to collect profits for their game. But the jury will be out on this for a while.

Like all MMOs, I think those that come in the future will look to the past and use what works (which is of course why we have 100 incarnations of WoW). They will do the same with this game. Future developers will cherry pick a few things from the skeleton of GW2, but I don't see how GW2 changes much of anything going forward.

It feels more like the past than I hoped it would...but then maybe I am playing it wrong. ;-)

Originally posted by Jackdog

Originally posted by grummz

I've heard the MMORPG audience is a tough crowd. I think you guys have every right to be angry that MMOs haven't changed much in the past 10 years. Glad to see people still want more, as it really makes me want to figure out what the "more" is as a game maker.

- Mark Kern

and cars have changed very little since the days when the first model T rolled off the line

how about games ? baseball, football ? basketball ? uniforms and some small rule changes but a home run is still a home run. Chess rules been the same for several hundred years.

on a MMO the designers still are forced to work within the limits of the technology, you have a pixilated character tha is limited to movement and intereaction with mobiles.You can't smell taste ot do much withthem except destroy them or move them from point A to point B. Not sure what peoiple expect.

you can make that mobile represent a pirate, a space trooper, a rat, or a zopmbie but at the end of the day you are going to have to kill ten , twelve or seven of them to advance your character. That is just the nature of the MMO, don't like it then find a new hobby or come up with some ground breaking idea.

Sam Rayburn once said " Any jackass can kick down a barn but it takes a carpenter to build one.

Are any carpenters here? or just a bunch of jackasses

 

Great point, where the hell is my flying car?  I was promised one back in the 60's and yet here in 2012 I still don't see one anywhere. (same with my jetpack btw)

Because that's really what we're asking for, stop evolving the model T, do something radically different, some entirely new system of transportation like teleporters.

Same with MMORPG's, let's see some really big innovation/change here and knock my socks off. (think New Cap City in Caprica)

As for being a carpenter, leave that to the people who are paid to build these worlds, up to them to figure it out, stop giving me excuses why they can't do it.

Excuse me, my household robot just served my lunch. 

(now, if I could only get "her" to.... )