the bashing of TOR comes down to a few things. and trust me OP its been going on both ways

One, you are on MMORPG.com: the p;ace filled with people that got made at the lock of sandbox in fallen earth =]

two, people have seen what both games have to offer, some pick sides

three, some people do not think TOR is good for  MMORPGs as a whole

four, people are misinformed about both games

five, people think GW2 will be like GW

and six, welcome to the internet, say anything you want

devs have completed dungeons with all eles and rangers and theifs...this wont be a problem. sure i assume a mix may be better but contetnt can be completed even if everyone is a warrior

Originally posted by cali59

Originally posted by Dubhlaith

 

I like the idea of having mounts in minigames and certain DEs so they stay uncommon, special, and cool.  The best idea I had in the other thread was to have collectable and customizable mounts for such minigames.  You can have races and mounted combat, people get things to work toward and play with, and it avoids some potential open world problems.

 

and this, inculding some personal story missions, is what the anti-mount (and i am in this crowd as well) people are talking about. 

THIS and ONlY this is the way to make mounts in Guild Wars 2 work. you can even offer holiday mounts for sale in the shop for these mini games and races

keep them out of WvWvW and PvP as well as any open world enviroments then you can keep everyone happy

Originally posted by Zeroxin

Originally posted by mmogawd

Originally posted by Zeroxin

Originally posted by mmogawd

Originally posted by Zeroxin

Originally posted by mmogawd

 

 

In TSW, having PvP in seperate zones makes sense, it fits in with the lore.  They do have a common enemy, so its expected they'll work together when it makes sense.  But they are still enemies, so they'd want to make sure that once the common enemy is gone, they're the ones on top.  As secret societies, they can't just go killing each other in the streets... otherwise they wouldn't remain a secret.

With GW2...  Ok, they're enemies.  Ok, they need to work together.  I got it.  But we're supposed to believe there's NO conflict?  No small skirmishes?  No one working for their own advantage when the dragons are gone?  I'm sorry, but to me that's just unbelievable, and a weak decision.  As for the PvP zones.... wtf?  Some magical land where we're fighting ourselves for no good purpose?  It just lacks meaning and doesn't draw me in the way faction combat would.  And I'm sure they've written in some lore to try to make this make sense... but it seems to me that the lore would just be an afterthought to justify a weak design decision.

Ah but you see, there are skirmishes. They just don't involve players on both ends of the spectrum, meaning that players will get to fight NPC factions with hateful agendas rather than pvping with other players wearing those same colours and carrying those same ideals. The reason for this is, apparently, Arenanet doesn't like to split it's community. This is because when the population is low on one end you tend to see less pvp or worst case scenario, one side always winning(Example; DCUO). Having the whole population in one big group lump and making them fight against themselves ensures that there is always pvp for people to do.

IN GW the whole world is about to go up in flames and the dragons are a real threat. this known, and you as a player knows this becuase the draongs have been around for a bit, i mean hell the dragonbrand , a huge scare though out the eastern part of world can't just be covered up. The mists are in GW1 and yes i understand is a streach for lore just so players can open world PvP, but this is better then no having it at all, or breaking the lore even further and saying each race is fighting for control. Asura would have no reason to fight anything , let alone unify under one person, their egos are way to big for that. as well as Sylvari all they want to do is learn and be a part of the world, no reason to fight the others, unless the grove would be under seige.

Sure Humans and Charr have their differences but the truce they are under due to backroom dealings with their commanders and the Human Queen is strong. I dont want to put any spoilers for those who havent read the book, but there is no way the "run-of-the-mill" charr would break from his commander's orders to fight a human.

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by needalife214

Originally posted by Diovidius

 

Originally posted by Kelthius

I don't think dynamic events are going to be as uh... dynamic as people are saying. Maybe I'm just reading wrong but it seems like people are expecting a unique quest everytime they go back to one of the events. My guess is it will be... Defend/Ignore City under attack by Undead > Did you defend? If yes, event stays the same. If no, Undead took over. New event: Retake/Ignore City. Repeat.

That is the extent I believe it will go to. Now, if the undead continue to take over new cities if people ignore them... that would be awesome. However, it looks like they are wrapping a handful of quests together and allowing you to go back and forth between them. I don't care about PvE either way, but I'm still curious to see how it turns out.

In a way, you're right, basically an event chain looks like this:

a --> b --> c --> d --> e

If the chain is at 'c' then if the players 'win' it gets pushed to 'd' and if players lose it gets pushed to 'b' etc, if it's at 'a' it's stays at 'a' until players change that. It also goes more and more towards 'a' the longer no players intervene in the chain.

well lets take the shatterer for example, if you remeber the demo was sped up so that event will not happen so quickly. Now lets take a deepr look, there were some npc guards there..? why ...  thats due to a whole different event chain that took place that litterally has nothing to do with the shatterer spawning but becuase those charr troops were free they came to help.

also remember those cannons that they were using to fire aganist the dragon? those where there whole a whole escort chain that players had moved from the south.  

if those two chains had not progressed the whay the did, the shatterer fight would have been much harder.

Actually the Shatterer event in the demo has little to do with how it will be in the game. The Shatterer is actually part of a chain but in the demo it was just on a timer.

thought I covered that

Originally posted by Diovidius

 

Originally posted by Kelthius

I don't think dynamic events are going to be as uh... dynamic as people are saying. Maybe I'm just reading wrong but it seems like people are expecting a unique quest everytime they go back to one of the events. My guess is it will be... Defend/Ignore City under attack by Undead > Did you defend? If yes, event stays the same. If no, Undead took over. New event: Retake/Ignore City. Repeat.

That is the extent I believe it will go to. Now, if the undead continue to take over new cities if people ignore them... that would be awesome. However, it looks like they are wrapping a handful of quests together and allowing you to go back and forth between them. I don't care about PvE either way, but I'm still curious to see how it turns out.

In a way, you're right, basically an event chain looks like this:

a --> b --> c --> d --> e

If the chain is at 'c' then if the players 'win' it gets pushed to 'd' and if players lose it gets pushed to 'b' etc, if it's at 'a' it's stays at 'a' until players change that. It also goes more and more towards 'a' the longer no players intervene in the chain.

well lets take the shatterer for example, if you remeber the demo was sped up so that event will not happen so quickly. Now lets take a deepr look, there were some npc guards there..? why ...  thats due to a whole different event chain that took place that litterally has nothing to do with the shatterer spawning but becuase those charr troops were free they came to help.

also remember those cannons that they were using to fire aganist the dragon? those where there whole a whole escort chain that players had moved from the south.  

if those two chains had not progressed the whay the did, the shatterer fight would have been much harder.

EDIT: yes they mvoe in a single "push and pull" chain, but the fact that events can become parts of others creates and overarching WEB

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by needalife214

o.

On top of that, the decision has been been long ago.... "There will be no mounts in GW2". And no poll is ever going to change that...

 

A lot of people complaining about the missing mounts aren't even planning to play GW2... and not for the missing mounts... There are a handfull people at most that will not play GW2 because there are no mounts. And when playing the game i think people will find out that mounts would work contraproductive

 

just having mounts ingame as a collectible without any real use is a waste of development time anyhow...

easy as that

My question is why even bother?   why do you peeople NEED mounts. what makes them SO ENJOYABLE in a game that with out them you find that game lack luster.

IN SWG you needed your speeder, the maps were huge and to cross most of them the speed boost was needed, but in that fact the world felt large, and expansive. in WoW mounts were needed for no real reason aside from the fact that they looked cool. but if you never had them it wouldnt have mattereds. (sure some wotlk and BC stuff would be different due to no flying mounts)

In AoC they had a perspose, but the PvP potential in that game was never fully realized. In WAR, useless, aside from speed boosts, (but if everyone moves that fast who cares....if everyone is speical then no one is, sort of thing) and same thing in DAoC, they were useless aside from speed.

WHY...do people think these things are needed? I just want to know , yeah you look cool, but what about your armor? or weapon? or combat skills?

question is do I HATE mounts?   no of course not. I loved trying to get the cool mounts on WoW and collecting as many as i could. Of course i also tried to get the coolest looking one. But to be brutally honest, If they were gold chains hidden through out the world, or in a better way, just titles to collect. I would still go through all the hell to get them.

Do you guys want to know what I am sad about? No guild halls at launch.  Mounts are simply useless if they do not have a purpose. if you give me a mount for a certain mission, then yeah I would love it. but mad about the lack of mounts when they is already a fast travel system then you can use. thats just silly.

PS

and the map travel system only works for locations you have been too.

Originally posted by hikaru77

Originally posted by MrBoots

We decided that we would call our battlefields warzones because our game is unique and is in no way just a clone of wow with lightsabers.

Or could be DAOC with lightsabers: Since they have the Mythic guys working on the pvp, and did you know that DAOC have battlefields too, right?. Or EQ with lighsabers, even an Ultima Online clone (Again, they have people from that game in swtor). But NO, we still have all this people who really believe that wow is the 1st and original MMO, when is just a copy of almost everything, even the lore of warhammer. 

 

that is an odd use of words my friend. For onehey were persistent , they had a central keep/tower and you fought for control, and 3 way PvP with-in those areas. To say anything compairing instanced and timed PvP to a whole zone that was persistent and everlasting.  yeah. NO DAoC  didnt have your battlefields sir

Originally posted by Distopia

I'd be interested if 4-6 were actually the orginal releases and not the digital remasters, still have my OG VHS for a reason..

QFT, although there is this movemnt buy a guy to bring the OGs to blu-ray.

Originally posted by kingfelix

I'm just curious to hear what playable race people would like to see in an MMO, fantasy or otherwise, that they have yet to see thus far.

 

Personally, I'd like to see Centaurs as a playable race. They are a pretty iconic race from a lot of fantasy worlds, but I have yet to find a game that gives you to opportunity to play as one. Sure, it would be different, but I think it would be pretty cool, especially because you could be your own mount.

Centaurs were playable in shadowbane.................

been so long since i have seen these.

God I hope we can explore some of the chambers and old drawf lore

Originally posted by skulljoe

And lets not forget that monks have active dodging

they have a roll, spells and arrows/bullets will still hit you, becuase that is how WoW works.

guildwars and guildwars2 work in the way that only when something hits you it does the dmg, and projectials fly in a stright line, no matrix/wanted stuff here. arrows fly stright and if you move behind a pillar, you will not be hit. not just LoS, but not struck at all.

so what if the monk class has a role to move out of range, for this to be a dodge function, they would ahve to tweek how their combat works.

P.S  not dising WoW juts laying out the facts

am I mistaken, or are we not supposed to have the lsat class released BEFORE G-STAR??????

I feel as if i have heard this a few times

Originally posted by pierth

Originally posted by popinjay

Then I played Rift and enjoyed the rifts very much in the beginning, but the rest of the game not so much after awhile.

One thing I'd like to add regarding Rift- the rifts and invasions were extremely satisfying while leveling up during headstart and during beta when everyone was level appropriate for the events but upon release and within the first month they were completely ruined when one or two max levels could come in and basically solo it all. I'm really hoping that Anet does something to keep the challenge in DEs.

well remember you will auto level down when you go into a lower level zone, you will have all your skills but your stats will only be a few level highers then the max level for that area, leaving the entire open and even the starter zones wouldnt be trivial to a max level character (something i think a few people wont realize) and personal that a much better way to have the game structured, so when you go back to do those DEs ina  zone you havent been in they wont be super easy for you, this games the game a lot of more options, making zones for everyone istead of creating new zones for 30s  but everyone can go and fight there not just level 30s

on the skipping of the tutorial, have you really forgotten the /level system in DAoC, come on MMORPG.com  i expect better from you =]

Originally posted by wrathzilla

Originally posted by Cruoris

Originally posted by gobla

Originally posted by Cruoris

can ANYONE explain the title of this game plz? 

It's named after a historical event that happened in the lore before the first game.

i see, now the GUILD WARS are all over then

 ..........

 

TL:DR; They left GvG out because getting 8 people to play reliably every day was tiresome.

Did i explain that enough?

also they have stated that they don't want PvP to come down to 3 or 4 guilds, like it did in Guild Wars. they want to open up PvP, as arenanet is trying to take it in the direction of an E-sport

quality of players have droped off