Slashdot Mirror


Guild Wars Expansion, Sequel Officially Announced

katalin writes "Arenanet, makers of the Guild Wars Massive game, have announced the first 'true' expansion pack to the game - Eye of the North. Next year will also see the beginning of a Beta test for a true sequel to the original Guild Wars. The new game will be substantially different from the current offering, with many elements similar to a more traditional fantasy Massively Multiplayer game. It still, however, will not require a monthly fee to play."

52 comments

  1. I'm looking forward to this. by Tokimasa · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I currently play Guild Wars and I love it. It's an MMORPG the way it's meant to be - no monthly fees, a fun game, and one that you can just sit down and play with a group of friends or random people from the Internet. Both the expansion and GW2 look nothing short of awesome. I can't wait for more details!

    --
    --Thomas J. Owens
    1. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > It's an MMORPG the way it's meant to be

      Not everyone wants everything outside of towns to be instanced. :-)

    2. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the love of all that is holy, stop calling Guild Wars an MMORPG!

    3. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The thing that really killed Guild Wars for me was a feeling of isolation. Regardless of its other bad points, WoW at least had a sense of community even for the non-guilded player. Of course, my experience was on Feathermoon, the oldest and most populous RP server, which tended to have a reasonably friendly crowd. What I liked about WoW was that a player could be struggling with a quest, or getting ganked by a random mob, and another player just happening to come by could leap in to help. I made some very good friends that way and it really fostered a sense of community.

      In contrast, GW felt like going into a Counterstrike server. This is fair enough, I suppose, as GW has always billed itself as not a MMORPG but rather a competitive online environment. But the often offensive names, general foulness on the chat channels, and complete isolation due to instanced everything really prevented me from feeling any kind of connection to the game or the people playing it. I enjoyed the PvP aspect of GW and made a genuine effort to enjoy the PvE storyline, but just couldn't maintain interest. I periodically load up the game to give it another shot, but the result is always the same and for the same reasons.

      That said, I'm glad that GW has been successful as both a game and a revenue model, and I hope that GW2 will be similarly successful. I just hope GW2 will foster a bit more community.

      --
      P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
    4. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      Same here, I liked how GW handled a lot of things, but I did not like the total instancing of everything outside towns. It felt very empty as a result. A blend between a persistent world and an instanced one is just more entertaining for me personally.

    5. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by jfodale · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Guild Wars is a decent game, but it is no more an MMORPG than Diablo 2 is.

      --
      Waiting for Warhammer Online.
    6. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      I could not agree more. That's one of the things I don't like about GW. Also, the "everyone on the same server" setup does far more harm than good. It completely destroys any real sense of community. In a real MMO where you have to choose your server and there's only a few thousand people per faction on each server (as in WoW) you eventually get to know players by name that you've never even done anything with. Random encounters with other players become a lot more meaningful, as there's a good chance you'll find yourself playing with them again in the future provided you stick around. Not so with Guild Wars. You might have a great evening with a great team, and unless you actually make a point of doing so you probably will never see or play with any of those players again, even if you play regularly for months and years.

      Sadly, it sounds like they're still planning to keep this model for the sequel.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    7. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by NUBlackshirts · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is the reason I enjoy GW and not other online RPG's I have played. My Wife, my daughter, and I have created our own little adventuring group and really couldn't care less if anyone else joins in or not. We wanted a game where the 3 of us could play when we want and not feel obligated to play just because we were paying a monthly fee for it. GW fits our gaming needs perfectly. We have tried others, most recently D&DO, but quickly tired of the need to go find a bigger group to join with in order to do certain quests. I realize that we are probably in the minority here, but we will be playing GW for a long time.

    8. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by f_raze13 · · Score: 1

      You know you're going to have to say that at least 15 more times in this topic, right?

    9. Re:I'm looking forward to this. by rpj1288 · · Score: 1

      Well, then you'll be happy to know that one of the major features of GW 2 that PC Gamer reported was many, many more persistent areas with many players interacting at once.

      --
      Marvin knew: "Think of a number, any number..."
  2. No level cap by Sciros · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm still curious to see just how the concept of a very high or nonexistent level cap is going to factor into the Guild Wars design of PVE-even-with-PVP. Considering how focused ArenaNet has been at keeping PVP a very level playing field for everyone, any levels above something like 20 or 30 I assume will provide PVE-only benefits, if anything. Gaile Gray says the high level cap was a direct result of player request, but I imagine that request came from predominately PVE players. PVP-oriented players tend to want nothing to do with PVE and many resent the two modes of gameplay being so closely related. Guild Wars suffered more than anything from poor, linear level design. There were no open-ended quests, no two ways to go about solving a particular problem. Replaying the game with multiple characters truly amounted to doing the exact same thing all over again. That is what I hope they are able to avoid with GW2, although I think the design team would need to be replaced by another for that to happen...

    --
    I like basketball!!1!
    1. Re:No level cap by Tokimasa · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Why would you need to replace the design team for that to happen? That's just a silly thought, IMO. As for PVE, I would envision some separation between PVE and PVP. There are two forms of PVP now - the standard GW1 PVP and a new PVP. I would expect the old-style PVP to use a level cap while the new PVP follows the leveling of PVE. To assist, you wouldn't be able to bring your PVE character into the old-style PVP but you could bring it into the new PVP mode.

      --
      --Thomas J. Owens
    2. Re:No level cap by Sciros · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well as far as design teams are concerned, I just basically never see a single design team do a total 180 and make something 10x more creative in the same genre (let alone a sequel). So, yeah I don't expect the current design team to make GW2 much less linear than the current game.

      --
      I like basketball!!1!
    3. Re:No level cap by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 1

      Finally some games that look like I would want to spend hours upon hours gaming again.

      --
      the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    4. Re:No level cap by yoyhed · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't really call Guild Wars linear, after having put in 1200 hours. Sure, the main story of each chapter is linear, but that's not really "the" game. I spent most of my time in GW doing what I wanted, when I wanted, where I wanted, so I'd call that pretty open-ended.

      --
      WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
    5. Re:No level cap by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      I guess that all depends on what you consider "linear". After having put in more than 1600 hours in Guild Wars I would definitely have to call it quite linear. To be able to do "what you want, when you want, where you want" you have to play through all the content up to that point. And once you've done that, there's really not much reason to go back through it and do "what you want, when you want, where you want", because you've already been there done that. If anything, there's less reason to revisit places in GW than there is in most RPGs. Gear and money are not an issue, as the game is constructed in such a way that you'll have the money and gear you need when you need it. (In fact, gear itself is so unimportant in this game that a highly-skilled player with no gear can do better than a moderately skilled player with the best gear.)

      Where Guild Wars is linear all the way through to the "end" of the game, most MMORPGs are only linear up until you reach the level cap. And even in leveling, some of them such as WoW are a lot less linear than Guild Wars. For instance in WoW, both factions have four different starting areas that take you all the way to at least level 15, and even after that there's usually at least two choices for places you could go to level up, all the way to 60. In WoW you could easily level four or more characters all the way to 60 and never do the same content twice.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    6. Re:No level cap by Sciros · · Score: 1

      I've put in 2000 hours on a single character alone and I have 3 at this point... as far as RPG quests go, Guild Wars's quests fall strictly into the "linear" pile. Open-ended quests such as what Elder Scrolls games have (or Fable, and to a lesser extent Bioware RPGs) are sadly nowhere to be found in GW. As an ex-alpha I've tried to suggest more open-ended quests which allowed for multiple approaches (as have others), but so far have seen nothing go in that direction. It may be that GW2 will have *less* linearity, but I have very strong doubts there it will be as open-ended as an MMORPG has the potential to be.

      --
      I like basketball!!1!
    7. Re:No level cap by yoyhed · · Score: 1

      As another ex-alpha (for Factions and Nightfall) I can tell you they've never listened to such large design decisions from us. And I do know the quests are pretty strictly linear, but those aren't really what I played, I was speaking more in terms of everything you can do (running, playing the market, working out a solo build for that boss, etc).

      And no one ever comes close in open-endedness to Elder Scrolls games, which is why Morrowind and Oblivion are my favorite games of all time :-)

      --
      WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
    8. Re:No level cap by Sciros · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're totally right about them not listening to alphas in terms of big design changes. Overall as an alpha I felt underappreciated :-)

      I agree of course that GW is open-ended in terms of gameplay, and I better understand now what you meant by your first reply. I just wish the actual *plot progression* was less linear. That's where good writing comes in -- something that GW, for all its strengths, utterly lacks.

      Elder Scrolls games are the standard by which I judge all other RPGs, and which all other RPGs for now have paled in comparison to. I'm looking forward to seeing what Mass Effect will bring to the table.

      If you play GW you should look me up sometime -- IGN is Sciros Darkblade. You may have heard of me! :-P

      --
      I like basketball!!1!
  3. Guild Wars lacking in PvE by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

    They could have done so much more with the PvE side of things. The campaigns themselves are excellent, but there's really nothing to do in the game that isn't directly related to powering yourself up for PvP. Equipment in the game plays a minimal role: there's not much you can carry and it isn't very important, and doesn't considerably strengthen your character. There are also no usable items, and the cool armor suits you can make are more for looks than function. There's really nothing to do in the game except PvP, but if you're into PvP then GW is a pretty solid game, moreso than WoW.

    It's puzzling that they put so much effort into the PvE campaigns (cutscenes, voice acting and a linear story in the original GW) even though the PvE portion is little more than a way of leveling up and getting skills for PvP.

    1. Re:Guild Wars lacking in PvE by Thorizdin · · Score: 1

      From a long time player I've often wondered why they bothered with PvE in GW, the implementation is at best boring and it cuts down on the competitive aspect of the game. The scenery and the art work is pretty, but the actual game play leaves me cold. GW2 sounds like they are moving more toward a more traditional MMO setup.

    2. Re:Guild Wars lacking in PvE by secolactico · · Score: 1

      Think of PvE in GW as a sort of tutorial. That's what I'm using it for. I just bought Nighfall (not having played the other two campaigns) and I'm using PvE missions to get used to it. It takes a bit to retrain your WoW interface habits (I'm *so* used to targeting with tab and then pressing 1 to start combat that I always activate a skill I didn't mean to).

      I am not giving up WoW. The pve quests are much too fun. For casual PvP, however, GW rules (or so I hope)

      --
      No sig
    3. Re:Guild Wars lacking in PvE by yoyhed · · Score: 1

      And now you can hit 'C' to target the closest enemy, and tab through the enemies if you want. And you just hit Spacebar to start combat. And then (here's what makes GW more fun than WoW) you actually have to think about which numbers of 1-8 you press!

      --
      WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
    4. Re:Guild Wars lacking in PvE by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      Think of PvE in GW as a sort of tutorial. Only it's not, except in the broadest sense. PvE functions as a tutorial only in that it helps you get to know your skills, but even in that it might not help much with PvP. Some skills that are very valuable for PvP are nearly useless for PvE, and the bread-and-butter skills of PvE that work really well for almost anything generally aren't worth squat in PvP. Even with the "improvements" to the AI, they still require two very different approaches. Also in PvE you can generally be prepared for what you're about to face. You can take skill sets designed specifically to deal with what you're going to be facing. You only need to go to an area once (or look it up online) to get this information. In PvP, you're always rolling the dice when you choose your skills. No matter what team build you take (whether solid all-around or specialized) you may be facing a team with a skill set specifically designed to tear yours apart.
      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    5. Re:Guild Wars lacking in PvE by secolactico · · Score: 1

      And now you can hit 'C' to target the closest enemy, and tab through the enemies if you want. And you just hit Spacebar to start combat. And then (here's what makes GW more fun than WoW) you actually have to think about which numbers of 1-8 you press!

      I did't know that, thanks! I'm sifting thru the GW wiki for this sort of tips since I didn't buy the boxed set and the PDF of the manual makes me want to rip out my eyes.

      But the different skill combinations is what drove me to GW in the first place. No longer it's a matter of endlessly farm for the ultimate gear. I guess you can still do that, but proficiency in choosing your skills and using them can offset that.

      Erm... you wouldn't happen to know if GW has a "combat log" or equivalent, would you?

      --
      No sig
    6. Re:Guild Wars lacking in PvE by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 1

      dont think GW has a combat log O.o

      andd top tier items drop often end game, it's just a matter of finding the bits you want. The only things impossible to get without farming or paying a lot of money are fancy skins with equal damage to non-fancy ones.

      --
      I like muppets.
    7. Re:Guild Wars lacking in PvE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the contrary, there is a lot to the game if you don't look at it as PvE/PvP. The scenery, the items (who cares about stats when you can look like Ganondorf right down to the sword?), the environment.

      I got sick of WoW, wear I couldn't wear something because it looked cool because unless I was wearing THE BEST GEAR I couldn't compete.

  4. No monthly fee, no free content by EvilGoodGuy · · Score: 2, Informative

    While Guild Wars [GW] differs from World of Warcraft [WoW] in that there are no monthly fees, GW doesn't gives users free content like WoW does. And while a WoW player will pay more than a GW player, if you want to be competitive, you have to keep buying the expansions the GW crew is rolling out.

    But, also keep in mind for any of you who have not played both, or either, they are entirely different types of games. If you want PvE, GW just doesn't have it. And WoW's PvP takes a lot more work to be competitive.

    1. Re:No monthly fee, no free content by jandrese · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I love how MMORPGs can charge their players $10-$15/month and still get to say that they're giving away "free" content. When you consider how each additional piece of "free" content takes 3 to 6 months to develop and deploy, you're really paying somewhere between $30 and $90 for that "free" content.

      And don't try to sell me that "it takes $10 a month to run the servers" crap either. The total bandwidth you suck down in those games isn't all that large (even though you do have to download great big patches every so often, which can add quite a bit), and the storage/admin costs are negligible when spread across the entire population of players. You're really paying for that new content, which is why it is such a shame that it's often lackluster.

      Take City of Heroes for example. The original game had around 15 zones, not to mention the rest of the game. Well worth the $50. However, after that each expansion comes with maybe 1 zone (albeit better designed than the starting zones) and a handful of new features, yet it costs more than the original game when you add it up. It's no wonder MMOs are crazy popular with game publishers right now, it's like printing money after the first couple of months. You can even pare down the development staff to apparently almost nothing and still rake in money hand over fist.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    2. Re:No monthly fee, no free content by Samus · · Score: 1

      Buying the expansions isn't really about being competitive. It just gives you more content and access to more territory. If you don't want it then you don't have to buy it. If you do want it but don't want to pay full price, wait a few months. I picked up Nightfall a couple months after release for $30. I'll probably do the same for the new expansion pack as well. Unless it already cost that much since it is supposed to be a true expansion pack.

      --
      In Republican America phones tap you.
    3. Re:No monthly fee, no free content by FinchWorld · · Score: 1

      No, I can think of a few things which have been added to campaigns, the biggest of which was probably Sorrow's Furnace. Thats dicluding the wintersday events, dragon festival etc.

      --
      "I may be full of crap about this game, and I may be wrong, and that's fine." -Jack Thompson
    4. Re:No monthly fee, no free content by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1

      And don't try to sell me that "it takes $10 a month to run the servers" crap either. The total bandwidth you suck down in those games isn't all that large (even though you do have to download great big patches every so often, which can add quite a bit), and the storage/admin costs are negligible when spread across the entire population of players.

      If those were their only costs, yes, that would be possible. But those aren't the only costs in running a datacenter. Blizzard also has to pay maintenance costs for their infrastructure (switches, routers, servers, etc.), service and support costs for any licensed software and other costs. Someone once told me that they have an Oracle backend - I can't verify this as true, but having negotiated Oracle contracts, I can tell you that this would be a huge chunk of change.

      They also have to pay the folks that actually create the content - neither programmers nor artists work on spec and both tend to be very well paid for some very good reasons...

    5. Re:No monthly fee, no free content by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      GW doesn't gives users free content like WoW does. And while a WoW player will pay more than a GW player, if you want to be competitive, you have to keep buying the expansions the GW crew is rolling out. Not entirely true. GW gave us free content in the form of Sorrow's Furnace, which compares quite favorably with the free new content WoW got in the form of instances. And to be competitive in WoW, you also have to buy the expansion pack they just rolled out. Blizzard just hasn't been as quick as ArenaNet in rolling out new expansions.

      And FWIW, I've played over 1600 hours of GW and more than 2000 hours of WoW.
      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    6. Re:No monthly fee, no free content by Augmento · · Score: 1

      GW has added content without charging extra for it. Sorrow's Furnace comes to mind and a few others that slip my mind at the moment. invalidates your title a bit.

    7. Re:No monthly fee, no free content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sheesh, I cannot make up my mind wether you're an eight year old spouting nonsense as fact or a half-arsed attempt at a troll.

      While Guild Wars [GW] differs from World of Warcraft [WoW] in that there are no monthly fees, GW doesn't gives users free content like WoW does.
      GW *has* added free content: Sorrows Furnace. And off course there is no free content in WoW. Every endgame instance which gets added in a patch is paid for; remember those monthly fees?

      And while a WoW player will pay more than a GW player, if you want to be competitive, you have to keep buying the expansions the GW crew is rolling out.
      And what the fuck do you call The Burning Crusade? Or is your lvl 60 "competitive" with the lvl 70's?

      And WoW's PvP takes a lot more work to be competitive.
      That's right. WoW PvP takes work, GW PvP takes skill. Farming ftl.
    8. Re:No monthly fee, no free content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WoW's PvP takes a lot more work to be competitive, but a lot less brainpower. So I guess it's a wash...

      Oh, except that WoW wasn't built for PvP, so it isn't any fun.

  5. As long as it's more than another tired rehash by techpawn · · Score: 1

    I've played GW from nearly day one... And I've all but quit... It becomes quite the same thing OVER and over and over! Same monsters, quests, and same nerfs as soon as you find the working skill combo you like. I enjoy the fact it's not play to play, I accept the bit of lag I get and even the pain in the ass kids in outposts. But the original got VERY tired after the second rehash. Hopefully the new one will let me have my Charr Pyromancer!

    --
    Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
  6. You've missed the whole point of GW then by Morgaine · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But the original got VERY tired after the second rehash.

    This merely indicates that you approached GW as if it were EQ or WoW or AO. It's not.

    GW isn't about grinding over and over again, with just the geography changing to make you think that you're doing something different. That's the old traditional tedium that GW was designed to leave behind, and it succeeded, superbly.

    Instead, GW is about exploring the universe of SKILLS and CHARACTER BUILDS, and making yourself more and more competent by being ever more skillful with your builds and your use of those builds. It requires true player skill of the very deepest kind, full understanding of how the thousands of complex skills work, and also ability to use them well through sheer player practice and experimentation. For those who want to press the Attack key and then go to sleep for 10 minutes as in some traditional MMOG raids, this is the wrong game. But if you like to use your brain when playing, then GW is THE game to play -- it should definitely appeal to the computer science types. :-) And it even requires high manual dexterity in the harder zones, and a good sense of tactics.

    GW is a joy to play once you're really skillful. Before GW, I completed two traditional multi-year MMOGs, and they were utterly empty of real player involvement and gameplay compared to GW, despite each of them requiring many years of level grinding.

    So, your "got very tired" is no reflection on GW ... it's merely that you totally failed to understand the game, because every profession is *utterly* different once you understand their skills and begin to master the builds.

    GW is extremely easy for casual play, and extremely hard and complex for deep play. You were at the casual end.

    --
    "The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
    1. Re:You've missed the whole point of GW then by techpawn · · Score: 1

      Yes, with no monthy fee it is very attractive to the casual gamer.
      However, even we'd like something with a little spice that doesn't involve too much thought, we get specialized with our skill set. The few puzzles they started to introduce in the later versions where a nice change of pace and the mission that require dipomacy over brute force was brilliant.

      I take nothing from the game. I have many friends who still play and love it. Just the original is no longer for me. You can only go into an area and kill the same kind of monsters so many times. The Jade Sea was just a Green crystal Desert...

      --
      Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
  7. Marketing Gurus or Game Developers by KalgarThrax · · Score: 1

    After reading the description of Guild Wars 2 and the Eye of the North expansion, it sounds like the biggest reason to play one of them is because it's linked to the other. COME ON GUYS. Do not insult my intelligence with your 25 year old gameplay and rabid greed. I am going to go back to playing Moo2 or U7 now.

  8. More Races by tbcpp · · Score: 1

    I really loved playing GW. But the thing I didn't like was that all the characters are human. It would be really nice if there could be multiple races. Plus add the ability to customize the character at the beginning a little more. Give the character 10 points to spend on strength, speed, mental powers etc. The whole primary/secondary profession thing is nice, adds allot of options. Now just throw in races and a little more point allocation at the beginning, and that would be nice. Being a Charr W/E would be really cool.

    --
    Man is the lowest-cost, 150-pound, nonlinear, all-purpose computer system which can be mass-produced by unskilled labor.
    1. Re:More Races by Wylfing · · Score: 1

      I believe multiple playable races was one of the named features of GW2.

      --
      Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
  9. Liar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Liar! Sorrows Furnace was free

  10. Fee...free? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who's head exploded after reading this?

  11. Love GW, not sure about the No-level-cap idea by mbourgon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I love GW, and have waaaaaay too many hours in the 3 thus far. However, part of what I like is that the level cap is basically non-existent (albeit not in the first game, Prophecies, where you hit the cap about half-way to 2/3rds into the game). In the latest, Nightfall, you can basically hit "max" in 15 hours, and after you leave the "training island" you're in the thick of things. Which is great - no worrying about having to "level up", you find new skills as you hit new areas, and so you gain flexibility even though your power stays the same.

    I'm unsure who wanted "no level cap" - PVP is designed around everyone having equal power, while PVE is set as "you versus the environment", with the monsters getting more powerful (and thus requiring more intelligence, both in strategy and use-of-skills) as the game progresses. I love this model - I don't have to "grind" unless I really want to (Factions was pretty bad about that, relatively speaking, and though there are some artificial constraints in NF they're nothing horrible. And in Prophecies the only grinding you did was for money to buy cool new stuff). I'm also concerned about how this affects things. The number of skill points you currently get is by level (Level + 1 attribute points for each level - this means at 17th level you have 100 attribute points, and at 20 you have 200 (there's a quest to get you from 170->200)). So a level 24 character would have about 300 attribute points, and a level 100.... well, that's getting silly.

    Anyhow, what I want to say - I'm one of the many people perfectly happy with the way it is. But, given their few missteps so far (aka "Factions"), I'm fairly confident it'll be fun. And if not, I'll still have Tyria, Elona, and (um, the other one) to keep me busy. :)

    --
    "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
  12. This Expansion worries me by ucaledek · · Score: 1

    I love GW. It's one of the only PC games I still find time to play. The lack of monthly fees got me into it, but I stayed for the sheer casual aspect of the game. I don't have to grind all that much if I don't want to. Sometimes I can just get on for the Alliance battles. It has replaced most of the shooters I used to play in that sense. Instead of getting on to frag for a while, I get on for some flag capping. And the PVE is still fun at the higher levels. Admittedly, I don't play the high-end PVP stuff, but I probably could and do pretty well. With the new stuff with level caps, I worry that I won't have that anymore. To not build from scratch a PVP-only guy will mean I will have to grind and worry about farming and all that. I don't have time for all this extra work on keeping up with the Joneses. I dunno, it seems like this will drown out the casual players like me. That's the grief I hear from my friends who play WoW and EVE. And it's those complaints that made me ditch those two for GW. Hopefully they'll manage not to force out what I think is a big chunk fo those who play GW.

    1. Re:This Expansion worries me by tomblag · · Score: 1

      I tried gw when it first came out. I liked some of the ideas the dev team had: more character setup options, instant top level pvp; balanced skills across archetypes; and point resets in town with no money cost. I'm sure their are others, those are the ones that come to mind.

      Ultimately, I couldnt get into the game because:
      a) I was playing wow at the time, and the combat in gw felt really sluggish (I liked the wow fpsish feel)
      b) there was no z axis.. which annoyed me to no end, even though games with z-axis don't totally take advantage of it

      I tried the nightfall xpac too, but still couldnt get into because of the sluggish combat feel. Comparatively it felt like eq'ish mmos vs a fps. Have they changed any combat mechanics since last year or so?

    2. Re:This Expansion worries me by Fozzyuw · · Score: 1

      The lack of monthly fees got me into it, but I stayed for the sheer casual aspect of the game.

      I picked up GW from Gamestop because of a special promotion at the time ($15 off the discounted price or something). I only picked up the original, but I was close to picking up the other 2.

      I must say, I really like GW for 2 reasons... the no monthly fees and Henchmen!! WoW's expansion came and and I stopped playing and I really do enjoy playing WoW... at least leveling, because that's something I can do myself. That's probably also the reason I quite WoW how many months ago.

      I hit level 60 back then, sat around going "hmmm.. what should I do? I cannot find a group or I've done instance X a million times and I've already maxed out all my skills, even the pointless ones and I do not feel like rolling another character only to kill all the spiders, rats, and bats all over again." In The Burning Crusade" (TBC) expansion, it was fun until I hit level 70. I'm not spending hours looking for a group to finish some quest lines or get into an instance I've not done. 2 Hours looking, 3 hours in an instance and I'm about ready to shoot myself for spending so much time on a video game, even when it IS my hobby!

      I've canceled WoW again. Primarily due to financial reasons and I look forward to going back to GW, which will cost me nothing. It does the one thing I really enjoy, I log on, pick-up some Henchmen and run off to explore, level, and experience the game story. Yes, I do not like the AI of the henchmen or the Monk abilities so much. More than 8 spell slots would be nice, but it's also an interesting aspect that forces you to plan ahead. Oh, I also love how you can jump from one city to another instantly. That's SO much better than waisting 5-20 mins traveling. I look forward more details on this expansion. Oh, and also how I can re-spec my skill points at anytime with no punishment. I guess I like a lot of things about this game. =) However, I'm more of a PvE person, though I always end up enjoying PvP I've a bit skeptical on playing it yet. I've got a lot left to experience, but I look forward to going back to it (and it won't cost me anything to do it)

      Cheers,
      Fozzy

      --
      "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
  13. No level cap for PvE... PvP is another matter. by wilgibson · · Score: 2, Informative

    Arena.net's Gaile Gray has already said that the high or no level cap would only apply to the PvE portion of the game. When playing PvP everyone would be on a balanced playing field. I can't give you an exact location of the quote for this, but I know it was discussed in this thread on one of the bigger fan sites.

    1. Re:No level cap for PvE... PvP is another matter. by Sciros · · Score: 1

      That makes sense... anyway for now they haven't really decided what to do with the higher level cap themselves, so I won't worry over it for at least a couple more years. However, it is currently the single greatest point of contention when it comes to people feeling ambivalent about GW2, and it may have been too early to announce the high/nonexistent level cap.

      I track what Gaile says for the most part... I talk to her on Alliance Chat sometimes... and yeah lately she's been mostly put on the defensive about the issue :-/

      --
      I like basketball!!1!