I'm trying to play GW1 to see the lore so I can better appreciate GW2 and playing the game just reminds me why I QUIT years ago.

The need for henchmen is ceratinly one element, it sucks needing this pack of NPCs following you around and NPC heroes are only marginally better.

Worse for me is the complete lack of explaination from ArenaNet regarding their game systems.   Hell, their developers have admitred in GW2 interviews where they mention the flaws of GW1 like how the  game just throws players into system with  massive number of skills and no explaination what they should do with them.  

 ArenaNet expects the community to provide all the support that THEY should be providing.    A game should NOT be about freaking HOMEWORK where you have to research how to make your character playable.  

 At the very least ArenaNet should supply official character builds or something so players can be sure they can at least be functional.  

The only reason I'm following ArenaNet is because they admit their mistakes and seem to have learned from it.   The problem is that this doesn't fix the  WRETCHED  flaws in GW1 that continually keep the game from being enjoyable. .   

I may still slough through the game just to see the story but it's about as much fun slamming my hand in a door over and over.  

Originally posted by Ozivois

Everyone notice how FF XIV's score here has dramatically dropped since OB? It is disappointing that this game didn't turn out to be what many of us hoped it would be. 

Now I need to know, what is the next MMORPG in development to start following and get excited about?

The open beta revealed one of the more annoying and irritating MMO experiences in my recent memory.   This game was made by a bunch of JRPG developers so full of themselves they never bothered to see how MMOs (and gaming in general) have evolved from the 90s.  

Then there's the more fundamental problems, like the horrible game camera and sluggish response to the most basic commands.   The game is coming in how many days?   Coding issues like these should have been fixed MONTHS ago.

My recommendation would be to check out Guild Wars 2.  Or if you don't like fantasy there's Warhammer 40K or Star Wars the Old Republic. 

Originally posted by vesuvias

Originally posted by Alienovrlord

MMOs haven't lost  this broad camaraderie, MMOs never had it outside of PvP content.   Previous MMOs starting from UO were based on pitting players in competetion with each other for resources in PvE (XP, gold etc).  

 

Well Said. We don't really know what the broader implications for this will be yet. This could change things to such a degree to almost be considered a new genre.  Though I suspect when most people actually get used to it this way, they will ask "Why wasn't it always this way?".  

Heh, I think that last sentence is very true.   It's like the zipper, it seems so obvious now but it took a while to get invented.  Truly good ideas are often like that.

Originally posted by ropenice

Not true that camaraderie exists only with PVP. Everquest you had to group or be in a tight or large guild or you were at a huge disadvantge in leveling. The community was really good and making friends or at least allies happened every time you played. The main reason the communities stopped being important is because games cater to a larger, more casual player base leading to less challenging mechanics-soloing, no death penalties, easier leveling, etc. If you don't need to interact with community to succeed, then most won't. Hate to say it, but you have to force the grouping so players have to depend on each other. That builds trust and camaraderie. That is why the dynamic events model is so interesting, it encourages grouping/interaction, but doesn't force it, add open world pvp and the community should be strong and active.

I agree that Dynamic Events encourage player interaction without forcing it but your example of the EQ-style groups and guilds is exactly what GW2 is trying to avoid.   From  the article:

I think if you look at MMOs the really frustrating thing is that I am playing this game online with thousands of people and I don’t interact with hardly any of them. Maybe with the people on my friends list or in my guild and that’s it.  In old school MMOs you didn’t want other players around you because they were kill stealing from you or they would get in the way of the stuff I was trying to do. That can drive a player nuts.

GW2 is trying to make a game where you're not limited to only wanting to interact with the few dozen (or less) people in your guild, but everyone on the server.     This is a completely different level than anything that could be attained in EQ or any other previous MMO, if ArenaNet can pull it off.

Old-school guild players always accuse casual gameplay of letting people play a solo game when it's supposed to be a MASSIVELY Multiplayer game.   It's time to throw that tired old argument back into their faces.  What's so MASSIVE about only wanting to interact with your guildmates when they only make up a tiny fraction of the server population?

GW2 seems to be aiming to create a server-wide community that is based not only on just those players who want to be nice but actual game mechanics that support real player cooperation.

I was originally pointing out how the interview implied that this was something old-school MMOs had lost when in fact they never had something on this level simply because of their instrinc game mechancs.    Heck, the orignal interview question seems to say that guild groups are responsible for the loss of the very camaraderie you talk about.    I would agree with you that what camaraderie (in its limited fashion)  that there has been in previous MMOs was the result of EQ-style guilds.

But ArenaNet has decided that they can make a game that can do far better than that. 

Decent interview with good answers, but MMORPG.COM needs to listen more closely to ArenaNet is saying because they clearly don't get with with questions like this:

You talked a lot about camaraderie among players. Many MMOs have lost this on a wide level because of guild groups and smaller factions. How do you see players joining up on a large scale in Guild Wars 2?

MMOs haven't lost  this broad camaraderie, MMOs never had it outside of PvP content.   Previous MMOs starting from UO were based on pitting players in competetion with each other for resources in PvE (XP, gold etc).   That was because it slowed down everyone and insured those monthly subscriptions kept coming in. 

DOAC was able to achieve a broader sense of server camaraderie as far as PvP went which is why that game is still brought up as an example but no game has done that the PvE side

ArenaNet is not trying to re-capture something that MMOs have lost.   They are creating something that has never existed in the genre, a truly cooperative MMO where you look forward to seeing another player, rather than view them as someone who is going to steal your XP/kill. 

Don't try repainting the past.  Recapturing old-school MMORPGs in not the goal of GW2 because those "glory days" never existed, they never had the kind of gameplay that GW2 is offering.   The goal seems to be to take the fundemantal traditions of those previous MMOs and bury them.      ArenaNet has had to fly in the face of the inherently flawed mechanics of  old-school MMORPGs (from the class trinity  to the leveling curve to server cooperation to all the rest) to do what they are doing.   And if they pull it off, this genre will finally see some long-overdue evolution.

Details of the perpetrator of the Discovery Channel hostage incicent have come out and  while it is unfortunate that the police had to kill the suspect, one can't help notice that the media are not making any tremendous outcries over how the suspect seems to have been inspired by a book on environmentalism that they read.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/09/01/maryland.discovery.suspect/index.html

If this person had said they were inspired by Grand Theft Auto or PacMan, you know we would have seen that factoid plastered over every single news broadcast across the country with huge headlines and the pundits would be lining up to decry how video games are wrong and we shouldn't expose our chidren to them. 

The next time any idiot tells you that video games is turning our children into violent criminals, send them this link and show them the *real* danger - BOOKS!  

If they still don't get it, which they probably won't since they're idiots, explain to them how this is an example that anything from books to movies to video games to muffins can become a focus for a mentally unstable person, because you know, they're mentally unstable. 

It's something to see all this excitement over a game from a company that has basically said that old-school MMO mechanics were flawed and needed to be fixed.

I have to chuckle back at all the times I've read people on this site complaining about the evolution we're witnessing in MMOs away from those wretched, tedious, hardcore game mechanics that go all the way back to UO. 

And now that we're starting to see real evidence of what kind of game evolves out of the concept of questioning everything those old-school MMO established as traditions, many people are becoming excited or at least cautiously optimistic. 

The future of this genre might not be that grim if people are willing to follow the path ArenaNet is blazing as they throw out old-school mechanics that have stagnated MMOs for years. 

It's long past time a developer stepped up and pointed out how old-school MMORPG mechanics are flawed (and always have been flawed) and need to be fixed.   Remember these words from the video "If you hate MMORPGs you really need to play Guild Wars 2"    

ArenaNet was basically telling every MMO developer who has ever released a game and is planning to release a game that there's a better way.    Something those developers have ignored ever since MMORPGs were created.   Here's another great quote from an interview on Gamereactor

http://www.gamereactor.eu/articles/4498/Interview:+ArenaNet+on+Guild+Wars+2/

If you can cast your mind back in time to when Ultima Online had been announced but not yet released, we all believed that in truly free online worlds in which things could really change according to the actions taken by players 

And then UO was released and that concept was lost (not that Garriott ever had the talent  to even understand it).    ArenaNet is trying to bring it back.   Another quote:

The MMO industry has been kind of stuck in a rut, with a lot of games working identically. We're trying to get back to that joy, that early promise

Perhaps it is all just hype.  We've all sorts of empty talk before from MMO developers, but unlike many other developer ArenaNet has already created a game that sold six million copies.   And in less than a week we'll be seeing a demo that will show how much of this is hype and how much is fact.    

There's still a long road to making a stable, fun game but if ArenaNet pulls it off, all those old-school MMORPG developers had better be ready to finally start using their brains if they want to keep up.    

Here's another excellent quotes from the same interview.

We're looking at all these things online worlds were meant to be and thinking: we can make that happen. So this is our manifesto, this is our way of saying we, as an industry, can be more than this...

The MMORPG industry might be on the brink of an important (and LONG OVERDUE) step forward in its evolution.  

Any updates for July?   

And thanks to the OP for attempting to bring in a nice splash of simple, straightforward reality.    The numbers may not be accurate to the 0.001% but they certainly paint a picture that people can see.  

Double post

I was in the beta of this game.  Or at least I would have been if I could have gotten a client that actually loaded on my PC.I posted my complaints only to be ignored or told I had no reason to complain by the brain-dead Spellborn community.

Now the developer's incompetence is catching up with them as and the fanboys get to finally witness the results of not seeing the obvious signs on the wall.

http://www.massively.com/2010/06/29/chronicles-of-spellborn-shutting-down/#continued

Running a MMORPG is more than just coming up with cool ideas, it's about successfully  *implementing* them.   These developers never had what it takes to do that.   

Originally posted by MikeB

I'm going to have to disagree here, the countless examples of emergent gameplay, compelling drama, and "real" stories created as the result of CCP's EVE Online contend strongly with the potential for a great pre-written narrative. They both have their place.

Edit

There is room for hybrids as well. Let's not forget The Matrix Online, which featured a well crafted narrative that was guided in part (and supplemented) by the actions of players, and their own stories. 

 Edit

In fact, Bioware accepts these modules as an example of potential writer/designers' work as part of the application's required submissions.

These "bad Mary-Sue fan-fics" are getting many people jobs writing the narratives in the games you adore.

I very much doubt that many of those module submissions to Bioware actually ended up in getting jobs.    A good writer can make a story in any context but I'm willing to bet Bioware gets far more garbage than quality applications.

You also don't bolster the validity of your views with an example like Matrix Online which was such a vast financial success it got shut down.   At least EVE wasn't a disaster,  but there hasn't been any rush of developers to copy them.    Success usually breeds emulation, curious how that's not the case.   

As for the rest of your points, we'll see what the future will hold won't we?    

The one thing the last few years have shown us is that old-school expectations of MMORPGs failed repeatedly with MMORPG 'gurus' like Garriott, McQuaid, Jacobs and the rest producing disasters.   And don't forget that creating a real-world simulator/sandbox is one of the original old-school expectations of of this genre.   Don't be surprised if it proves to be one of the oldest flaws.  

I want to add that games trying to be world simulators are completely different from games with user-created content, which I think certainly has a place in the future.   There is a huge difference in City of Heroes Mission Architect tools compared to allowing players to roll up shirt-maker and musician characters just so they can be part of an over-designed economic system.    

Giving players tools means giving them rules and restrictions in using those tools.    Which is why that kind of mechanic will evolve into future games far better than the open-ended systems expected of simulator/sandbox games.  

I thought Bioware had said they had some 'clever' system that would prevent players from seeing clones of their companions with other players.     There is no mention of anything like this and it seems as though every Sith Warrior can have a Vette Twi'lek.

The thing that is really annoying is that Bioware could have released enough information to clarify this and some of the other questions, instead they put a Companions page on their website that explains nothing about the actual gameplay mechanics.  So all the community is left to do is guess and wonder.   

This with only 8 months until their release, there shouldn't be guessing about core mechanics at this point.   They should be telling specifics.  

Maybe they're saving things up for some big reveal on E3.    But honestly, it is concerning.  

There is a richness to the art and GW1 engine itself that I haven't seen very often in games.   It will be something to see what they do in GW2.   

ArenaNet doesn't have to prove anything with GW2, they've already proven that their financial model works with GW1.

They sold 6 million copies of GW  and earned enough profit and success with that  to allow them to make GW2.  

The only real mystery is why other developers haven't tried to copy ArenaNet and continue to stick to old-school MMORPG business models.      But then realizing when something actually works has seldom been a trait of many MMORPG developers.  

I have to say GW1 was my first truly enjoyable experience of PvP in a MMORPG.     I'm expecting ArenaNet will be able to deliver something just as much fun in GW2. 

I'm looking forward to hearing people's impressions of the hands-on demos.   Those kind of opinions are worth more than all the hype from companies and magazines IMO

Unless their public demos are completely contrary to what ArenaNet is saying, I will likely pre-order this game. 

Or I might do one of those midnight sales if they have one around where I'm living

Gotta go with a human, descendant from my GW1 character of course :) 

It will be interesting to see the responses to the free trial.  

If a big patch was going to be coming out, why would anyone offer a free trial before the patch was released?   But then, I've given up trying to find any logic in the way  Aventurine and Tasos operate.   

Has there been a closed beta test going on?   I haven't heard anything about it.

If not, they better start one pretty darn soon.   MMORPGs need as much beta-testing as they can get, it's not something you short-change if you want to produce a decent product.