I hated the first GW, so I"ll probably skip this one....
One of the biggest wastes of money ever.
yeah, hard to top pokemon.
Or the large-scale pvp between realms with no limit on player count. This is a lesson already learned by Blizzard in WoW. It doesn't work. One realm will become the defacto pvp realm and dominate the others. Because that realm keeps winning, the people who care about pvp will switch to that realm and the people that don't care that much will stay on theirs and no longer enter the battles. Put a cap on it, where one team can't have more players than it's opponent and suddenly the problem goes away.
I still engoy GW1; they've done a very good job updating it and adding new things, particularly given there's no monthly fee.
Or the large-scale pvp between realms with no limit on player count. This is a lesson already learned by Blizzard in WoW. It doesn't work. One realm will become the defacto pvp realm and dominate the others. Because that realm keeps winning, the people who care about pvp will switch to that realm and the people that don't care that much will stay on theirs and no longer enter the battles. Put a cap on it, where one team can't have more players than it's opponent and suddenly the problem goes away.
Only ever seen one RPG with a monthly fee, so that isn't really a selling point.
Guild Wars isnt just an rpg.
Well technically it is a CORPG but that is more or less like calling an FPS a COFPS just because you can kill other players. It was a failed attempt of Arena.net to distinguish a difference between their RPG and others. There are differences, but those differences are the same for most RPGs.
For example, the removal of designated tanks and healers. While that sounds interesting, there's a reason why it's a staple in MMO's and RPGs. What decides who the enemy your group is fighting attacks? Is it random? Is it whoever is doing the most damage? Neither way would really work well.
GW2 certainly looks interesting, but I'll wait for reviews before I buy.
It's a staple of MMO design because it allows for lazy design and (somewhat) lazier tactics by players. Designing a more realistic combat or system is more difficult, yes, but still not exactly rocket science.
Thats because WoW was NOT built for pvp in mind..at all.
Large battles DO work between realms, as seen in Dark age of camelot. Its simply a matter of the engine they use. WoW uses a old engine, made for pve from the start.
You dont have the slightest idea what you're talking about.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Main_Page
Read that, then give me the names of these RPGs with similar ongoing support with no monthly fee.
I have played few RPGs that didn't have ongoing support, and none ever needed a monthly fee. What you consider special isn't that special. I was wearing an Arena.net shirt when the game released, I knew more about it before release than most. I don't need your wiki.
Yeah. It looks too good for something with no monthly fees. Prolly gonna be lots of micro transactions. And I ended up having to buy every campaign in GW1 to be able to have meta (up-to-date/competitive) skill sets. So, like $150 over two and a half years?looks so good. no monthly fees for gw2 right?
what is it about maintaining servers and constant online support for a game like GW any different from a game like WoW, except for population?
I mean, many seem to think that subscriptions are necessary to keep everything running.
...but it obviously isn't necessary. What is it about the actual technical aspects of keeping a game that, at this level, is exactly like every other subscription-based online game, that somehow allows it to succeed without subscription?
yes, they have a different payment model, but WoW and others do this same shit, on top of subscriptions.
you're talking about RPGs. I can't think of any that are online with the level of design and content like GW that do so without a subscription.
I suspect you are comparing something like Oblivion to GW? what do you mean when you say "I have played plenty of RPG's that...."
intentionally vague, here?
I suppose this is meant to be some zinging personal attack, but it doesn't really making sense. Pokemon is far from one of my favorite games.
At least pokemon has a purpose though, as a fun portable RPG for dull moments during the day.
GW to me just missed the ball completely, falling in a dark zone between MMORPG and simply RPG + mutilplayer and lacking any real unique and positive features. I bought the game at launch, and it is one of the few games that I've bought at launch and then quickly shelved and never touched again.
It worked in DAOC because they had 3 factions, and if one faction was dominating the other two tended to team up against them. I doesn't look like GW2 will have this going for it.