Here is an analogy of why people are pissed.

Think of the Trinity system as.... well, a unilateral triangle (duh), where each of the three points represent three very distinct roles.

Top: Tank
Bottom Left: Healer
Bottom Right: DPS

Now place a dot anywhere inside the area of this triangle which represents YOUR play style, the way YOU know how to have fun.

Now draw a smaller triangle inside the first one roughly 25% of the size of the original.

If your dot is in the space between the two, you're probably pissed off with GW2. If your dot is in the middle of the smaller triangle, you're probably ok. Arenanet, in their best efforts, tried to fix a problem that has plagued MMMOs since EQ, which demanded a resource that was constantly low (healers or tanks).

Their fix went about it the wrong way. By making EVERYONE dps, tank, healer... they muddied up the perceived VALUE of each distinct role, the dependency between each role and strategies that emerge from having such distinct roles.

---

Originally posted by Tibernicus

---

Originally posted by zindel  

---

Originally posted by Tibernicus

---

Originally posted by zindel  

---

Originally posted by Tibernicus

---

Originally posted by Krytycal GW2 is (or will be) a success because it's doing what WoW did in 2003. It took all the features people liked about the current MMOs, combined them and improved upon them.

---

First, it was 2004, second, WoW didn't do that.   In fact they left out the vast majority of features people liked. WoW's success is more or less solely attributed to their marketing and brand name.

---

  Wrong. Wow's success wasn't solely attributed to any ONE thing. It was in fact partially attributed to collecting good features from other games and executing on them to the highest quality.

---

Highest quality means no one did it better... yet they had the worst raids and dungeons on the market.   Their MAIN reason for success is without a doubt their 2+ year long marketing campaign and brand name recognition, appealing to non MMO gamers.

---

  "Highest quality means no one did it better... yet they had the worst raids and dungeons on the market." This is YOUR opinion, not fact... at some point (around TBC) 11 million people would have disagreed with you.  

---

Oh good, the old population defense. Except that 9 of that 11 million weren't actual subscibers, and of the remaining number, the vast majority played WoW as their first MMO, so they wouldn't be able to say one way or another if it was better than anything else. It was simply the first MMO they'd ever heard of, and that's the result of marketing and momentum.

---

LOL it's not just a population defense DOOD. Do your research. Try reputable sites like Gamasutra or Gamedev.net. There are plenty of articles and discussion by qualified people who point it out... The accessibility, is what made the game popular. The game made it easier for people who don't normally play games, to pick up and play. Never, in my 16 years of graphical MMOS do I remember people talking about their 40-70 year old uncles, aunts and grandparents playing a RPG... online.

Guild Was 2 (if it can overcome its failures) will shine for this reason also. Gamers have no patience anymore. They have the attention span of a friggin squirrel on crack. This game caters to the majority. The new breed of gamers don't want to know where the quest giver was located so they can get their reward, or even what their objective is. They don't want to worry about what their "role" is. They want to feel rewarded for doing whatever it is they happen to be doing at any given time. GW2 is even more accessible than WOW ever was.. and to stay on topic I'll say IF they can beat wow, this will be one of the major reasons.

---

Originally posted by Tibernicus

---

Originally posted by zindel  

---

Originally posted by Tibernicus

---

Originally posted by Krytycal GW2 is (or will be) a success because it's doing what WoW did in 2003. It took all the features people liked about the current MMOs, combined them and improved upon them.

---

First, it was 2004, second, WoW didn't do that.   In fact they left out the vast majority of features people liked. WoW's success is more or less solely attributed to their marketing and brand name.

---

  Wrong. Wow's success wasn't solely attributed to any ONE thing. It was in fact partially attributed to collecting good features from other games and executing on them to the highest quality.

---

Highest quality means no one did it better... yet they had the worst raids and dungeons on the market.

Their MAIN reason for success is without a doubt their 2+ year long marketing campaign and brand name recognition, appealing to non MMO gamers.

---

"Highest quality means no one did it better... yet they had the worst raids and dungeons on the market."

This is YOUR opinion, not fact... at some point (around TBC) 11 million people would have disagreed with you.

Maybe you should spend more time reading more analytical articles and discussion by qualified sources (gamasutra, gamedev.net), than forming your own opinions and stating them as fact.

---

Originally posted by Tibernicus

---

Originally posted by Krytycal GW2 is (or will be) a success because it's doing what WoW did in 2003. It took all the features people liked about the current MMOs, combined them and improved upon them.

---

First, it was 2004, second, WoW didn't do that.

In fact they left out the vast majority of features people liked.

WoW's success is more or less solely attributed to their marketing and brand name.

---

Wrong. Wow's success wasn't solely attributed to any ONE thing.
It was in fact partially attributed to collecting good features from other games and executing on them to the highest quality. If you know ANYTHING about Blizzard, you know... this is what they do.
It WAS largely attributed to the games increased accessibility, which is what brought new "gamers" of all ages to play.

I don't either, why I'm asking. The name was very plain, easily discernible, and it matched the name I placed on ignore at R12, in case anyone thinks it's a mixup between two similar named characters.

An odd thing happened yesterday. I was farming ch7 influence in shadowlands by myself, and after about an hour a group of three came to the area to do the same. Two R12 DOK and one Maurader. I asked them if I could join their group because it wasn't publicly opened and eventually got a rude reply. So I put the one R12 DOK on ignore and went about doing other things. Only ~2 hours later the same person shows up at R19.

I don't have any screenshots to prove it, so trust me if you will, but I'm curious if this seems legitimate amount of time to gain 7 levels from 12-19 in just ~2 hours, or is there some exploitation that only a few know about?

I wouldn't say they are OP, but definitely on the high end of damage and survivability. I said that the Chosen felt pretty powerful last PW and apparently people thought I was full of shit. Power to the noobs I guess.

---

Originally posted by grimboj
this is blatently an attempt at generating links for that web site :P

---

What hardcore gamer doesn't read Kotaku?

This is happening to me as well.

First time it crashed it wouldn't go past the patcher. Reset password and game launched but same error once again.

Edit: Read the Warhammer Alliance forums, tons of people are having this issue.

It's not a silly question, rather a very serious one about combat exploitation. I've seen this happen in other games, I'm just curious of what counter measures there are.

Perhaps you'd rather be answering the redundant questions WAR vs. WOW? =p

...a brigade of say 14 Bright Wizards spamming AOEs in RVR would be?

Had this discussion over lunch with a few friends, and wondered if some of the older testers could shed some light on whether or not something like this (even with other classes) would be a problem?

overflow

You are 3 days late...that funny was already made.

I can relate to the OP here.

I'm thinking about canceling every MMO that hasn't been developed yet. They all suck.

---

Originally posted by argos5

---

Originally posted by HBlite

 

---

Originally posted by argos5
MMOs and non-MMOs are two different breed of creatures.
 
Let me draw another parallel. In this day and age, if you're a gamer... you'll most likely do this:
 
If you're a console gamer. You have 2 or all of these:
Xbox 360
Playstation 3
WII
 
If you're a PC gamer, you're upgrading your PC in some way or form 1-4 times a year.
 
As a gamer, this is not the day and age where you're a broke as mutha chet where you can only afford a few of anything. Buy and play MMOs for most of your days, play non-MMOs when you feel like it. Gamers aren't limited. I don't know why you are, OP--- even if you're young and only get allowance--- there are ways through these problems, with or without a social life.

---

 
Woah woah woah there, you are stepping in some high waters saying gamers are not limited. I know most my college classmates which took 3d modeling for video game art and implementation were pretty damn limited as well as I am. Not everyone has the best job in the world and not everyone can dodge a bullet that life gives you. I have so many holes in my shirt it looks like swiss cheese.
Fathers have to provide for their child/children instead of their addiction to video games. There is always a limit, you may not have seen it yet but wait until life pushes you in an unwanted direction.

---

 
Of course you're right. But first, I would like to say that "3D Modeling for Video Game Art" is a money siphon used by college and educational institutions to take advantage of the video game community... if they're taking a standard 3D Modeling course, power to them! Great 3D modelers either schooled themselves or took a standard 3D modeling course... those specialized classes--- I loathe this preying on gamers. Rendering, rigging, functional interfacing--- I see it often on television and they're just luring gamers in.
But to the point. Yes, even I don't have the money to buy all those games the OP listed. This is the age of casual gaming. EA made the smart move of giving people options to pay for what they want.
However, overall. No one is limited. They can only limit themselves to whatever they choose to do. People who choose to prioritize their lives as students, parents, etc., I respect these folks very well. But it is not high waters that I run through, to say that gamers are not limited. We are not limited generally... we are limited specifically--- and that is the key distinction.
 
That response I made previously was to the OP. The one I just typed right now, is to you HBlite. Two different points, both personally addressed. And I apologize for not using Private Messaging.

---

This is way off topic, but argos, you aren't completely wrong, but you aren't completely right either. There are lots of schools that dangle the game job carrot in front of the gamers noses and take their money (these are easy to spot WWC...ITT). And then there are legitimate schools specialized in gaming that are backed by the industry. USC and SMU Guildhall are two schools with programs I could highly recommend for all disciplines, and Art Institute seems to be flooding the industry.

PS, and there is no SW:TFU for PC =(

Mainly because if you're not RVRing or PVPing in the areas that are designed to be fought in, you're not contributing anything to your war effort, and possibly being set back in your progression by fighting in PVE areas.

The only reason you would want to play on an open server, is if you enjoy ganking and being ganked.

In the end, there is enough pvp in this game to get your fill without having to fall victim to unsolicited pvp by some low, self-esteemed asshats every 5 minutes.

---

Originally posted by Ryman86

---

Originally posted by zindel

Koscher or Queer? hehe
Which is more queer?
1. A male player at character creation, going "oh yeah, nice lips on that face, nice ass, height..... yah shes hot" *Submit*
2. A male player spending the same amount of time and effort trying to make a "good looking" dude.

Not that there is anything wrong with gay or lesbian players (known a few females who played male toons), but if you're a phobic and guys playing girls wigs you out, might check yourself to see if you're not the queer one.

(that was a general statement, not directed towards you enigma)

---

Actually, you need a reality check bud. Most gays act like girls, which explains their abundance in fashion shows and what not. Personally, #2 only shows that the guy is perfectly fine with his sexuality, while #1 shows the guy needing to prove his sexuality.. which all in all, shows an immense chance of "hiding in the closet".
/sarcasm (That was a general statement, not directed towards you zindel)
and
/pwned.
Anime chics FTL!

---

By the tone of this reply, it's obvious you feel the need to defend your sexuality. I'm gonna go with either homosexual or homophobic.

Grow up.

---

Originally posted by Narshe
I didn't check during PW, but is there a male Dark Elf Sorcerer, or is it just Sorceresses?

---

There are both male and female http://www.warhammeronline.com/armiesofWAR/darkelves/Sorceress.php

In that case they are hermaphroditic

---

Originally posted by GreenChaos

---

Originally posted by Deathstiny

---

Originally posted by GreenChaos

On the desto side all greenskins are male only.

---

 
Not to be nitpicky but technically all greenskins are gender neutral. they are all grown like plants and are asexual but yes they do look like guys

---

 
If it looks like a dude, and walks like a dude, and talks like a dude,       it's a dude.
Lets put it this way, there are no greenskins with boobs. 

---

More specifically, they are agamogenetic.