Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Distopia

Originally posted by BadSpock

I guess I don't remember then.

I thought your health/action/mind bars were static no matter how high you leveled proffs (except for doctor buffs of course)

Most builds were based off stats received, like I took pistoleer as a third profession simply for the bonuses to dodge, knockdown and dizzy defenses.

Don't remember the term Defense stackers hehe? TKM master brawler sword was the most popular of those builds, all for the stats.

Mmm.. moist Teris Kasi masters... ;)

damnit you changed it!

 

ROFL yeah, I almost didn't though, I knew that would get some attention :P/

I really see the 3 sections of gw2 (pve/structured/WvW) as 3 different games combined.

I can't fathom how the pve side of gw2 isnt RPG in its true form. you start at level 1, therese ton's of progressions level, gear, stat wise. exploration mobs, dungeons personal story quest and so on. 

I think of structured pvp as a stand alone moba put into the game. and lore wise makes sense, the mist is a portal to the past.  They battle at kylo and otheres already took place, which is why your max level, you go into the past to fight as someone that's your class in a battle that already happend.

WvW being the same as the pve side just with fighting real people instead of only A.I  if you go in at level 10 you may have the stats of a level 80 but you can still progress stat gear and level wise. as even though your level 80 stats it shows like this: (80) 10.

i really dont get how its not a mmorpg because you can't get new gear past the cap of max level 80 gear.   but you do get better gear from 1-80.

Originally posted by Requiamer

---

Ye i had the exact same thought about Uo and GW2 progression systems, they are both very different, no wonder here, they are really miles away. Well somehow it seam like they both want to reach similar goals, naturally one is like 15 years older so Uo had other things to deal with, but still. Ye i had the same though as you BadSpock. Honestly i still think Uo system is smoother, more organic, and make more sense, less on the coding but more on the design side. But i personally see some similitude.
 

I am a firm believer that GW2 appears to have some of the same design principles, on a meta "grand idea" level as some of the older sandbox titles.

 

Originally posted by Metentso

So this game is only good for the people that played GW1?

Yeah, you know, like how GW1 was only good for the people who played GW0

Originally posted by Requiamer

 

---

---

So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story?
 

What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.

Originally posted by Malaksbane

Originally posted by Requiamer

 

---

---

So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story?
 

What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.

Don't worry there are plenty of rat killings in GW2, you won't be disappointed.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by BadSpock

Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO.

There was no gear progression either.

Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition?

Perhaps not, at least as commonly defined by the need for progression of character.  Maybe it was the first MMOARPG?

But as I recall, you could skill train in UO (capped?) which is a form of progression.

And over time did UO evolve and allow further character progression?

Them's fighting words!

I'd go as far to say UO has been one of perhaps a very few "true" MMORPG's because it was NOT all about progression through gear and levels.

If you every played UO you'd know there wasn't very much about it that would be considered "MMOARPG"

It was click to move and 2D isometric lol

Hate to say it Kyleran, nothing but respect, but your argument in this case is poppycock.

 UO not about progression??

I don't know if we played the same game, but I remember standing in a wall of fire for like hours on end trying to get my magic resist to raise one point.  Or grinding daemon after daemon trying to get enough gold for a house.

I mean, sure it had player made towns and a lot of social aspects.  But all those social aspects were constructed by people buying houses with gold that they grinded for.  In fact...UO was almost more "purely" about progression because there were no quests or story to speak of.  It was basically, here you are, you've got these skills...raise them.  You're poor...get money.

Anyway, I'm not trying to say that a game with progression is better than one without...I'm just clarifying what the RPG genre means.  And well, RPGs have to have progression.  If they don't, they aren't RPGs.

Take Zelda for example.  It's got a story, puzzles, dungeons, fantasy theme, magic, etc.  And yet, it's not and RPG, it's an "action-adventure" game.  And I'm pretty sure the reason for this is that it doesn't really have much progression other than getting new items.

If Link "leveled up," I'm betting Zelda would be billed as an RPG.

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by BadSpock

Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO.

There was no gear progression either.

Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition?

Perhaps not, at least as commonly defined by the need for progression of character.  Maybe it was the first MMOARPG?

But as I recall, you could skill train in UO (capped?) which is a form of progression.

And over time did UO evolve and allow further character progression?

Them's fighting words!

I'd go as far to say UO has been one of perhaps a very few "true" MMORPG's because it was NOT all about progression through gear and levels.

If you every played UO you'd know there wasn't very much about it that would be considered "MMOARPG"

It was click to move and 2D isometric lol

Hate to say it Kyleran, nothing but respect, but your argument in this case is poppycock.

 UO not about progression??

I don't know if we played the same game, but I remember standing in a wall of fire for like hours on end trying to get my magic resist to raise one point.  Or grinding daemon after daemon trying to get enough gold for a house.

I mean, sure it had player made towns and a lot of social aspects.  But all those social aspects were constructed by people buying houses with gold that they grinded for.  In fact...UO was almost more "purely" about progression because there were no quests or story to speak of.  It was basically, here you are, you've got these skills...raise them.  You're poor...get money.

Anyway, I'm not trying to say that a game with progression is better than one without...I'm just clarifying what the RPG genre means.  And well, RPGs have to have progression.  If they don't, they aren't RPGs.

Take Zelda for example.  It's got a story, puzzles, dungeons, fantasy theme, magic, etc.  And yet, it's not and RPG, it's an "action-adventure" game.  And I'm pretty sure the reason for this is that it doesn't really have much progression other than getting new items.

If Link "leveled up," I'm betting Zelda would be billed as an RPG.

The similitudes i see are that you can go anywhere on the map, there is no level crap, you can play with any kind of friend and bring them anywhere or almost anywhere in Uo, this kind of stuff. Pvp toon were also fast to develop, maybe a week tops, ye resist magic was slow to gain but you could just go pvp with 50 and the rest maxed, because it was really the only pvp skill that was slow. But ye it wasn't the same system for sure, its just that the level less design have some similitude with GW2.

Originally posted by nomatics856

I thought mmorpgs were about progression, if I automatically wanted to get into the fray of things and have a game about 100% skill, wouldnt I play a twitched based FPS, mmorpgs should be 50% skill, 50% progression

Yes, the equal playing field concept is spooking a lot of people who depend on their superior grinding ability to overcome their opponents.  It will be a rough ride for those whose skills are subpar.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by BadSpock

Ultima Online was one of the very first MMORPGs and it had very, very "light" progression in comparison to the "modern" MMORPG. Certainly in comparison to Everquest, the other big grand-daddy MMO.

There was no gear progression either.

Is UO then not a proper MMORPG by the classic definition?

Perhaps not, at least as commonly defined by the need for progression of character.  Maybe it was the first MMOARPG?

But as I recall, you could skill train in UO (capped?) which is a form of progression.

And over time did UO evolve and allow further character progression?

Them's fighting words!

I'd go as far to say UO has been one of perhaps a very few "true" MMORPG's because it was NOT all about progression through gear and levels.

If you every played UO you'd know there wasn't very much about it that would be considered "MMOARPG"

It was click to move and 2D isometric lol

Hate to say it Kyleran, nothing but respect, but your argument in this case is poppycock.

What?  That's like saying TSW isn't progression based because that progression isn't about gear.  Ultima has skill progression and is nothing like GW2.

Have you played GW1 where the skills between two level 20 characters are the same exact power and functionality based on how many attribute points they assign to them?  This is a lot like how GW2 will work.  As you put more points into a tree you will get more powerful in that tree, but there is no skill strength progression like in Ultima or EQ2.

Progression and gaining power doesn't have to be relegated to one type of mechanic.  There are a lot of different mechanic types that can contribute t character progression.  It might be classless and levelless but have skills that get more powerful as you use them, or resistances that increase over time.  It might be about gear and powerful items.  It might be about gaining "levels" and increased stats and health/power.  The point is that characters gain power and progress beyond the "commoner" they started out as.

The Guild Wars system has the most minimal implementation of that which is then neutered by level and gear equalization in pvp and pve.  Guild Wars "characters" have very little intrinsically tied to them that makes them unique with strengths and weaknesses.  I could delete my Guild Wars ranger of nearly 6 years, make another, level him to 20 in a few game hours, and no one, including myself, could tell the difference.  They're only characters in the most fluffy sense of the word and not in the RPG sense.

Originally posted by Unlight

Originally posted by nomatics856

I thought mmorpgs were about progression, if I automatically wanted to get into the fray of things and have a game about 100% skill, wouldnt I play a twitched based FPS, mmorpgs should be 50% skill, 50% progression

Yes, the equal playing field concept is spooking a lot of people who depend on their superior grinding ability to overcome their opponents.  It will be a rough ride for those whose skills are subpar.

It will be a rougher ride for those whose "twitch" skills and latency are subpar.

Originally posted by Torvaldr

Originally posted by Unlight

Originally posted by nomatics856

I thought mmorpgs were about progression, if I automatically wanted to get into the fray of things and have a game about 100% skill, wouldnt I play a twitched based FPS, mmorpgs should be 50% skill, 50% progression

Yes, the equal playing field concept is spooking a lot of people who depend on their superior grinding ability to overcome their opponents.  It will be a rough ride for those whose skills are subpar.

It will be a rougher ride for those whose "twitch" skills and latency are subpar.

Well, what I do know is that I'll be able to run through all the PvE content that I want, and then still be able to jump into PvP with both feet because there won't be ubergeared nerds to faceroll me.  Anyone who does, I know will be a better player than me and deserves the victory.  But I'm sure there are many who won't accept that and will instead choose to blame everything from lag to the phases of the moon on their inability to win in a fair fight.

Guild wars 2 is three games, three games, three games in one!

Well, sort of, but close enough.

Let's look at what happens after you create a character and decide to participate in the three seperate game zones:

I make a character named Honora, a level 1 Thief and enter the game world.

I do the tutorial zone and she reaches level 2 before transitioning into the main PVE game world.

I have three major game mode choices as soon as I arrive outside my racial capitol city.

1. Play and progress in the PVE world, which might entail exploration, dynamic events, tasks, personal story or a combination of the above. I can earn levels, gain loot, unlock trait points and unlock/earn skills. Progress here carries through into WvW as well, one character, two game modes.
2. I can head right to the portal into The Mists, and chose the portal that will take me to the World vs World zones. My true level is level 2, so I only have a few skills and pretty limited gear, but while I'm in World vs World my character's effective level is 80. I can earn XP and loot in World vs. World, so my character can progress entirely in WvW, if I want to. Progress in WvW does carry over into the PVE world.
3. I can also head right to Competative PVP. In CPVP, you basically get a doppleganger of your PVE character. Your true level becomes 80, you have access to all skills and traits and also have access to max stat gear, at no cost. Nothing you do here carries over into PvE or WvW. It's all about skill based PVP in arena combat. Some matches are casual, others will be part of formal tournaments. Ratings and rankings track the best players and players can unlock alternative armor looks, (there are hundreds of cosmetic armor pieces that can be unlocked for each armor class, so people can pursue a very individualized look).

Originally posted by Ankur

Originally posted by Malaksbane

Originally posted by Requiamer

 

---

---

So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story?
 

What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.

Don't worry there are plenty of rat killings in GW2, you won't be disappointed.

Bad day with reading comprehension?  There'll be plenty of killing but as far as the info goes you're not going to be asked kill ten rats, then kill 15 wolves, then ... etc. But the post was about how in MMO's you'll typically be doing the exact same thing as everybody else, which doesn't make it very personal, whereas GW2 seems to be offering more options to follow a path, a story, that is different for each pc.

Originally posted by Malaksbane

Originally posted by Ankur

Originally posted by Malaksbane

Originally posted by Requiamer

 

---

---

So where do you put some of the deeper role playing feature like the personal story?
 

What does personal story have to do with being an action-rpg or not? GW2 seems to offer more personal story then most contemporary MMORPG's - at least you will not be doing the same heroic rat-killing as obviously as is usual.

Don't worry there are plenty of rat killings in GW2, you won't be disappointed.

Bad day with reading comprehension?  There'll be plenty of killing but as far as the info goes you're not going to be asked kill ten rats, then kill 15 wolves, then ... etc. But the post was about how in MMO's you'll typically be doing the exact same thing as everybody else, which doesn't make it very personal, whereas GW2 seems to be offering more options to follow a path, a story, that is different for each pc.

No i am very good at reading. And yes DE's are full of objectives where npc ask you to collect, kill and fetch x number of things. This picture explains it the best...

Originally posted by fiontar

Guild wars 2 is three games, three games, three games in one!

Well, sort of, but close enough.

Let's look at what happens after you create a character and decide to participate in the three seperate game zones:

I make a character named Honora, a level 1 Thief and enter the game world.

I do the tutorial zone and she reaches level 2 before transitioning into the main PVE game world.

I have three major game mode choices as soon as I arrive outside my racial capitol city.

1. Play and progress in the PVE world, which might entail exploration, dynamic events, tasks, personal story or a combination of the above. I can earn levels, gain loot, unlock trait points and unlock/earn skills. Progress here carries through into WvW as well, one character, two game modes.
2. I can head right to the portal into The Mists, and chose the portal that will take me to the World vs World zones. My true level is level 2, so I only have a few skills and pretty limited gear, but while I'm in World vs World my character's effective level is 80. I can earn XP and loot in World vs. World, so my character can progress entirely in WvW, if I want to. Progress in WvW does carry over into the PVE world.
3. I can also head right to Competative PVP. In CPVP, you basically get a doppleganger of your PVE character. Your true level becomes 80, you have access to all skills and traits and also have access to max stat gear, at no cost. Nothing you do here carries over into PvE or WvW. It's all about skill based PVP in arena combat. Some matches are casual, others will be part of formal tournaments. Ratings and rankings track the best players and players can unlock alternative armor looks, (there are hundreds of cosmetic armor pieces that can be unlocked for each armor class, so people can pursue a very individualized look).

I hope that clears things up a bit, while remaining simple enough to understand for those recent to following the game.

If what you say is true then GW2 looks to be a real treat for both PvEers and PvPers. I am honestly getting very excited about this game. Not TOR excited mind you! I was semi-burned on that but excited still.

---

Originally posted by Ankur

No i am very good at reading.

---

 
Then please do, the post was about the personal story and everyone (not) doing the same things, your reaction was about something else, although related.
Quests to kill the ten rats in the basement, or something similar, usually have little to add to the story, be it the personal or the game story, but everything I've seen about Guildwars II points away from the ocheap kill-ten-rats style of quests.
But if you only care about PvP, or (endlessly) bashing things then, I imagine, neither of the styles will appeal and the distinction becomes irrelevant.

Originally posted by Malaksbane

 

---

Originally posted by Ankur

 

No i am very good at reading.

 

---

 
Then please do, the post was about the personal story and everyone (not) doing the same things, your reaction was about something else, although related.
Quests to kill the ten rats in the basement, or something similar, usually have little to add to the story, be it the personal or the game story, but everything I've seen about Guildwars II points away from the ocheap kill-ten-rats style of quests.
But if you only care about PvP, or (endlessly) bashing things then, I imagine, neither of the styles will appeal and the distinction becomes irrelevant.

 

So you are saying you are ok with killing 10 rats as long as it is not included in personal stories?

I find it silly aswell that a MMORPG has the feature to skip all the levelling and unlock everything to play structured PvP right off the bat. Personally I would've liked to see a requirement (level a class to 80) before you could hop on to structured. It kinda spoils the fun of opening weapons skill and exploring for for healing/utility/elite skill when you can simply click a button to acquire them all even if it's only for structured PvP.

If I'm going to play GW2 I won't be touching the structured before I'm done with the PvE/WvWvW part of the game since for me it's a major spoiler to start playing around with a maxed toon :o

Originally posted by headphones

Originally posted by nomatics856

I thought mmorpgs were about progression, if I automatically wanted to get into the fray of things and have a game about 100% skill, wouldnt I play a twitched based FPS, mmorpgs should be 50% skill, 50% progression

oh noes - i can't gank no more! :( sad troll is sad.

had to read it twice to wonder if nomatics was serious tbh, why should a PVP game allow a level bias to determine the outcome of individual combat, i think the one thing that stands out in Arenanet's favour, head and shoulders above other games that have PVP components, is that it is player skill and player teamwork that defines the outcome of any PVP encounter, anyone who prefers the level bias version maybe ought to stick to 'older' MMO's and no im not saying WoW (even though i am)