In case some have missed it: release has been delayed for some EU countries. Germany, Austria and Switserland can start today/tomorrow. France, Benelux and Scandinavia will be delayed a week (and can start on the 5th of december).

Official announcement here: tcos.com/sbforum/viewtopic.php

Originally posted by redOrc

pvp level will be capped. PVE not.

Also unlike GW1 they will open all skills for PVP characters, so if you want to PVP you will have no grind at all.

 

True, but only half. There will only be 2 forms of PvP in GW2. Something that is similar to GvG and something called World PvP. As far as I know, 'World PvP' isn't level capped. Only the mode that's similar to GvG will be.

Originally posted by Crichton

i was a fan of the original. i bought it the week it launched back in 05', was in a top pvp guild (we were in the top 20 consistently) for the first 5 months. then it became very very lame.

first as they advertised the game as no grind at all, everything would be accessible, it wasn't. if you truly wanted the open range of pvp options you had to grind in one form or another, to "unlock" that content for use. and despite the fact they advertised the game (circa 2004, PC Gamer, CGW, etc) as no grind, it had a fair bit of grind in it.

Basically the same here, but I still occasionally play, since there's nothing better around still. But I was pretty pissed about the 'Skill over time, instead of time over skill' advertising back then. I was lucky in the first week. I found a Superior Vigor rune. But plenty of my guildies just couldn't get one. It made a hell of a lot of difference in PvP, not having the sup vigor. And there are more examples like that. The Balthazar Faction Points made it more bearable, but it still was grind.

Seeing that GW2 is going to be 'WoWified' with unlimited levels and the same advertising 'No, really! The levels won't matter that much!' (mind: levels won't matter that much, but they will matter to some extent, apparently): I am not going to fall in the same trap again.

Originally posted by Retrad

Please be more informed before posting.

 

Guildwars 2 will have levels, but they will basically be only a symbol of how long you've played the game. I remember reading that the head developer said there will be at least 100 levels and possibly an indifinite number because in GW2 levels will only a way of distinguishing a veteran player from a new player.

Levels will not factor into the game as far as, my lvl80 will kill your level 10. It will rely more on skill as GW did.

As far as I know, you still have some advantage with higher levels. The advantage only gets exponentially less the higher you get, and that's the selling point: "No, you don't need to go to max level, because the difference will only be small". But the fact is: the difference between levels is there, small or not. If there wouldn't be any difference, then why even raise the levels from 20 to 100 in the first place? Wouldn't make sense.

Originally posted by nomadian

Firstly I didn't play much of Guild Wars- but my understanding is that the level up was a 1/2 day affair and then after that it was essentially a no-level game(focused more on the skills/pvp/teamplay etc). If Guild Wars 2 does the same then surely this is hope for the non-level based fan? No longer having the shortfall of Guild Wars of not really being persistant, as well as containing possible meaningful pvp (as opposed to something like WoW) then surely this is one to watch?

Guild Wars 2 is going to stray from the original path and it's going to have tons of levels.

Originally posted by Loke666 

That is true with armour but certain green weapons are actually better than anything else. My nice green bow is far better than the regular golden ones, but that is about it. It takes some work to get a green one if you don't buy it from someone, but it ain't so much work as getting a raid weapon.

That's if you go through PvE. In PvP, it's much easier to get something similar as a PvE green weapon. Just to clarify, for the OP: you don't need green weapons in PvP to be competitive.

Originally posted by Zanzeer

i have been playing war since it came out .....and stuff...the game has goten to were you cant do anyhting without 10 bright wizzys and such nukeing you down in pvp....and the game has died out since WOTLK came out ....i dont wanna go back to wow cause of the lame pvp system in that game ..i love wars pvp but that game has alot of work to do before its stable ...the pop seems to be droping also on that game ...everyone is rolling order to play a BW ....i was looking at this message bored for guild wars ....is this game worth playing ?i herd you can get a level 20 pvp toon ...right of the bat ...whats the rewards for pvping do you level ....gear etc ? how hard is it to level ....?and why do people say guild wars is not a MMO?

Yep, you can get a level 20 PvP toon right off the bat. There's one downside: you need to unlock runes, waepon mods and skills for on your skillbar on your account to spice it up. You can unlock either through PvE or PvP. In PvE you go through the campaign and start at level 1, and depending on the campaign, it will take you between 10-40 hours to get to level 20. During PvE, you can unlock skills and stuff which you can then use on your PvP character. Or...You start PvPing right away, and earn so called Balthazar Faction Points during PvP. Those points can be used to unlock stuff for PvP. Another possibility is buying unlock packs in the official shop.

Once you're finshed with unlocking, well, why do you PvP? For all sorts of different reasons: challenge, fun, titles, climbing the world ladder and fame :) Same reason why you would play an online FPS over and over again.

Why GW is not an MMO? I never really understood why. It's Multiplayer, it's Massive, it's Online. But some people seem to think that a game which uses instancing isn't an MMO.

Originally posted by Dameonk

I'm American and I think this is a horrible move.  I hate when developers put artificial limitations on OUR choices because they think they know what is "best" for their players.

It's things like this that are early warning signs that the developers don't care about their players.

I've been looking forward to TCoS for years, but if this IP banning stays in place, I won't even be playing the trial.

I don't think it's a case of deciding what's best for players. It's all about money, distribution rights, localization and stuff. It's probably a case of the publisher (Acclaim) saying (just a wild guess): "If we get distribution rights for NA, we want UK too, or else we won't do it".

Anyway, it definitely IS an early warning sign that publishers (not so much the devs in this case, I think) don't care about players.

This whole UK/EU split is one of the worst ideas I have seen recently, apart from the pricing scheme of Hellgate. It's over the top, and it completely ignores any common sense. I wish TCoS good luck. They will need it.

Originally posted by Aiomon

Ok... The burning Isle. But it looks like crap. I want one ( I know it's dumb) that looks cool and is good. Comon dudes. Just follow the format for everyone. IS THE DRUIDS ISLE GOOD? IS THE WIZADARDS ISLE GOOD?

Ok, since you are dead set on completely ignoring what some people said here in this thread, and you vehemently want to go for looks:

10/10 rating

Overview of the Guild Hall

P.S. Please use my format

P.S.S. Here is a list of all the Guild Halls

Prophecies -

Burning Isle (Ring of Fire theme) 10/10
Druid's Isle (Maguuma Jungle theme) 10/10
Frozen Isle (Shiverpeaks theme) 10/10
Hunter's Isle (Kryta theme) 10/10
Isle of the Dead (Catacombs theme) 10/10
Nomad's Isle (Crystal Desert theme) 10/10
Warrior's Isle (The Battle Isles theme) 10/10
Wizard's Isle (pre-Searing theme) 10/10

Factions-

Imperial Isle (Raisu Palace theme) 10/10
Isle of Jade (The Jade Sea theme) 10/10
Isle of Meditation (Shing Jea Island theme) 10/10
Isle of Weeping Stone (Echovald Forest theme) 10/10

Nightfall-

Corrupted Isle (Realm of Torment theme) 10/10
Isle of Solitude (Vabbi theme) 10/10
Isle of Wurms (Desolation theme) 10/10
Uncharted Isle (Istan theme) 10/10

DRUIDS ISLE IS TEH SHITZ. WIZARDS ISLE IS AWESOEMESAUZE.

Originally posted by Aiomon 

This forum is for posting information about all of the Guild Halls (for stupid people like me) and for rating (out of ten).

Here is the format I would like.

 

That's pretty impossible. Like someone already mentioned, it all depends on your team build and playing style and you can't rate GHs 'just like that'. With build A I would rate GH A a 5/10, GH B 9/10 and GH C 3/10. With build B it could be totally different: GH A suddenly is 9/10, GH B 6/10 and GH C 7/10.

What I would advice: watch Observer mode a lot and look at the top guilds. What GH are they using, and what team build do they have and what playing style (agressive? defensive?) do they have.

In general: 'Obs' is a great source of information if you want to get into GvG. Good training: copy a team build from a top guild, and try to figure out how THEY play this build. The build is good, since, obviously, they win a lot with it. Biggest pitfall of starting GvG guilds is that they keep tinkering with builds and keep changing skills in and out of the build, and end up getting stuck in discussing builds, instead of their own personal performance. If they lose a match, they blame the build, and not the player skills, and eventually get nowhere. So that's why I advice to copy a build from a top guild: there's no excuse for blaming the build, since it obviously works. It forces you to look at your individual performance.

Going to play single player games mostly. Ordered and asked some for Christmas. That, and Guildwars (yet again; friend of mine finally started playing it, three years too late, but it's fun to go through the whole thing with him).

Never played WoW, and I'm not going to start either. Spellborn: got into beta, and it doesn't wow me, so it's off the list as well. Darkfall: I doubt it will be out for Christmas.

Originally posted by lorndarken 

in some games where there was pvp , most people would not dare compete in the pvp because the pvp was risky, eq , you die  the enemy could then loot your corpse , sell it or use the items you took

The yellow highlight there is the key. You're hitting the nail right on the head: harsh death penalties kill PvP activity.

Originally posted by Sovrath

Again, have you tried The Lord of the Rings?

Good community (of course my advice is to go to a very populated server such as Brandywine but I'm sure they are all decent), many people play alts, very story driven.

It has a very leisurely pace about it as you don't really have to rush to do anything. Heck, I got to lvl cap sometime back and still haven't finished the main story line as well as seen some of the new areas (waiting until the expansion hits this month for that - right now I'm working on traits which is a way to better your character).

And since the new expansion IS hitting this month there will be a lot of returning players as well as new players.

I was about to say the same...

I played LoTRO 3 months after release, then went back half a year later for another 2 months. Personally, there's not enough PvP in LoTRO to keep me entertained, but I do know one thing: when I came back, I started a brand new character, and I had no problem at all finding groups or run into people in the lowbie areas. The game is extremely casual, and most players are as well. 1-2 hours a day is actually quite a lot, seeing how often and how much the average LoTRO player logs in.

Especially with the new expansion coming up with 2 new classes, I bet the lowbie areas will be even more crowded.

Originally posted by pencilrick

Right?  The big boy from Sony is still on the block.

If this is sarcasm:

Originally posted by Steelrose 

RPG is a way to roleplay your character, it doesn't mean just playing a different role in a game. Character advancement and levels are not signs of a RPG. The Sims is more a roleplaying game than oblivion or mass effect. They are both a hack'n slash action games.

All the better then! The OP stated he was addicted to Diablo for 2 years.

Originally posted by snowytechna

I see that almost everyone has mentioned Fable 2/Mass Effect/ The Witcher/Oblvion/Fallout 3...I guess these people have recently started playing RPG's..The games mentioned above are craptastic compred to gems like Baldurs Gate 1 and 2, Planescape Torment, Fallout 1 and 2. Seriously whats so good in Fable, it is freaking so simple to play.

I for one didn't start RPGs recently. But I think most people think that the OP is looking for newer games, but it isn't clear from his question. However, in another post he mentions Diablo 2, so he probably has played older games as well. No need to recommend 10 year old games then.

And yeah, I know, everything used to be better in the old days. When I was little barely anyone had a dish washer and you needed to do dishes in the sink. On television, there were only 2 channels.

Originally posted by Steelrose

Oblivion and Mass Effect are not RPG's and I don't care how much they payed for its publicitiy.

I would really like to know your reasoning behind this? And if it's not an RPG, what is it then?

Originally posted by hater88

tired of the online thing, gonna take a break, any suggestions?!

It's going to get boring, but I'm joining the majority of the recommendations: Fallout 3.

And if you haven't gotten around to that one last year: The Witcher (Enhanced edition).

Originally posted by Korvenus 

If you know AION is not going to Break The Mold then why are you here? Why not go to the forum of a game that nobody has ever heard of and nobody cares about and hope it turns out to be what you want.

This is the General forum? The thread is not in the Aion forum. If you post about a specific game in General, you can expect criticism. I'm not even sure why it wasn't moved to the Aion subforum by now. Usually, mods move threads like these to the subforum where they belong.

Originally posted by N1ghtsta1ker 

Back on topic, why is everyone complaining about the game being a "traditional" MMO?  People cried for innovation and they got Tabula Rasa, Age of Conan, Auto Assault, among other games.  All of them have failed miserably, with Auto Assault even closing it's servers very early in its lifespan due to lack of interest.  WoW built on traditional concepts, and 11 million people play it.  Warhammer used the same traditional MMO structure and tweaked a few things, and it's popular now as well.  I think it's obvious people want improvements, not entirely new concepts.

There are also plenty of traditional MMOs that failed just as much (Archlord, RF Online, Vanguard... to name a few). The question is: why did innovative MMOs fail? Was it because they had new concepts, or because of something else? :) I don't think it's that obvious, as you call it, that people don't want entirely new concepts.

Another example: Guildwars was a new concept, so much so that some people don't even regard it as an MMO. And look how popular that is. Or Eve. Barely generic either and it didn't fail. So new concepts CAN succeed.

Btw, traditional MMOs are fine. For other people besides me. Got tired of them, basically. Really, why should I play a new MMO when it's basically just the same experience as 10 other MMOs I've played, except for a different lore and different graphics? I just don't see any point in it. It's the reason I don't see any point in picking up Aion either, since it's a traditional MMO.