As for jmzero... I dont think hes even played it.



Well, uh, you're wrong. I've played about an hour, which was a half hour more than I needed to see this wasn't the game for me. I played the first game really quite a lot.

There are many things you can say about GW2, both good and bad, but "slightly different flavor of WoW" isnt one of them.



I don't think YOU'VE played it. Ha! See how annoying that is?

Anyways, it's a hell of a lot more like WoW than Guild Wars 1, though I suppose MMO connoisseurs probably see all sorts of distinguishing characteristics. I played through the storyline of Guild Wars 1 and only played with other people once or twice (using the AI mercenary things as required). In Guild Wars, I didn't even get to fight the "boss" thing at the end of the tutorial - someone killed it before I got close. That's not the same kind of game.

And they've futzed with the multi-player (which to me was the actual game). I can't just pick the skills I want. I can't just jump into a reasonably balanced (and levelled) PvP character (or, if I can, they didn't present that option very well). In the first game, I made a PvP monk with a bunch of heals, and was doing multiplayer (and having fun) immediately - like, within 10 minutes of installing the game. I have no idea how far off the horizon that is in Guild Wars II, but even when it comes I'm quite sure I don't want to play it. It plays completely different - far more action-RPG focus instead of the old focus on skill-selection and tactics. If I want an action-y game, I'll play a game style that supports that - like DotA.

Guild Wars 1 was a really appealing game for me. Guild Wars II is nothing of the sort - and to me it goes in the same trash-heap as every other "kill 10 rats", "grind equipment and levels" MMO that came before it.

Oh, but yeah, I didn't realize that it's set in the same painfully, painfully generic fantasy universe (I really didn't). Thanks for straightening me out on that.

I have to say, I really enjoy playing this. People go out of their way to help you, it is pretty amazing. Even to the point of getting themselves murdered in the same way you did. Pretty excellent MMO dynamics really.

Well maybe I need a few drinks to really respond to your argument properly, but I'll do my best while sober

I think it's a bug and a coincidence. I was really talking about phones and other embedded devices rather than laptops, but you have a point that it's kinda similar here.

Here's the thing though: Win8 is so different to win7 and vista that Microsoft would be taking a huge risk if they tried to make people switch to it before they got used to the change. Given that people will have to re-learn a whole lot of stuff (or install classic shell) anyway, what's to stop them looking around and buying a macbook air, or installing Ubuntu on their old laptop?

Look, I readily concede that your way is possible, but it just doesn't seem terribly likely to sober me (drunk me could have a different opinion, but I wouldn't listen to him if I were you).
In reply to this comment by zaust:
Hang on a sec - what your saying is old unsupported devices - such as a 4 year old Windows Vista 7 laptop have a best version. So why, JUST NOW, right when win8 is around the corner are the automatic updates which are enabled on every new PC restricting my dad's functionality?

This isn't a case of his installed the latest win8 beta (he has not surprisingly as he was in IT for 30 years - but it's in a separate boot partition and runs all of his usb functions perfectly). This is an update to vista 32 bit drivers which has lessoned his functionally roughly a month before win8 comes out.

Could be a bug, could be a coincidence. Could be microsoft are shaking the tree just enough to make people question if they need the new OS.

Lets take a couple more points of view - you've probably seen the start trek TNG vs special edition videos where the original footage looked WAY worse than what was aired originally. If not maybe your a gamer? Notice how blizzard are preparing "Titan" for launch (new mmo) whilst at the same time releasing a kung-fu panda expansion for wow whilst addressing none of the failings Guild Wars 2 has highlighted.

It pays for companies to make their old products look obsolete whilst retaining their brand loyalty

Sorry for rant - had a few to drink.

Hang on a sec - what your saying is old unsupported devices - such as a 4 year old Windows Vista 7 laptop have a best version. So why, JUST NOW, right when win8 is around the corner are the automatic updates which are enabled on every new PC restricting my dad's functionality?

This isn't a case of his installed the latest win8 beta (he has not surprisingly as he was in IT for 30 years - but it's in a separate boot partition and runs all of his usb functions perfectly). This is an update to vista 32 bit drivers which has lessoned his functionally roughly a month before win8 comes out.

Could be a bug, could be a coincidence. Could be microsoft are shaking the tree just enough to make people question if they need the new OS.

Lets take a couple more points of view - you've probably seen the start trek TNG vs special edition videos where the original footage looked WAY worse than what was aired originally. If not maybe your a gamer? Notice how blizzard are preparing "Titan" for launch (new mmo) whilst at the same time releasing a kung-fu panda expansion for wow whilst addressing none of the failings Guild Wars 2 has highlighted.

It pays for companies to make their old products look obsolete whilst retaining their brand loyalty

Sorry for rant - had a few to drink.

In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
Since the update introduced an unwelcome new feature and you had to roll back, you're kinda supporting my point actually : Every old unsupported device has one "best" version, and it's not always the newest one.

Microsoft say Oct 26 for Win 8, but you'd have to look at the machine specs to see if an upgrade is possible. The interface changes haven't been welcomed by all, either.

Quite a few people hold back on new windows releases until the teething issues have been ironed out... so win 7 is looking good at this point.
In reply to this comment by zaust:
You say that but I was round at my dads today and he'd had to roll back his Vista laptop to an earlier backup because the latest "updates" meant it no longer had the USB resources to run both his printer and scanner. When's Win 8 out again?

I've been a fan of the game for some time. I started playing Beta Weekend Event 1 and every BWE after, and any stress test that I could. Since launch I haven't spent as much time on it as I would like, but unlike a certain other MMO it doesn't matter as there is no monthly fee. You can drop it and come back days later without feeling you wasted time playing other games or living life because it is buy to play. With WoW and SWTOR I often felt I had to play at least $15 worth each month to make it worth while. I really don't know why SWTOR is going full Free to Play rather than Buy to Play given the costs to make the game. Most games are going to cost the same amount anyhow, and then you get a game with a huge amount of content for that $60.

The only complaints I've heard were those who wanted endgame raids, those who miss the trinity, and the usual launch woes. (I still can't link my GW1 and GW2 accounts and customer service hasn't fixed it yet, though I've had a ticket open since the early launch for those who pre-purchased the game.)

I like WoW, and keep my free account. Even if they went BtP or FtP, I would still play GW2 more as I think it is just a better game play experience. I liked SWTOR, and while I don't pay the fee anymore (soon to be moot anyhow) I keep the client up to date and still dip in on the free trial on occasion as I do WoW. But for me, I much prefer GW2. I find it near the perfect game experience for me... now I don't watch people play it on Twitch as I do other games like DOTA 2 or some others, but then I don't watch people play any MMO.

I got an i3 and a GTS 450, so a very low powered system, but it plays very well and still manages to look nice. The new beta drivers I installed from nVidia seem to favor over heating the card and shutting the machine down, so I had to turn some detail down to stop that, but the game still looks great.

Now I must level up so I can find that frog juicing quest if it is real...

I should add, for those of us that have a PC that is a few years old...it still runs pretty ok. I had a hard time running the star wars mmo, but this runs pretty well. Sure, in the battle world when 140+ people start running at each other casting a huge number of spells it can slow a bit, but I am used to far worse with star wars.

I should throw in that I really didn't like star wars, for most of the reasons he stated here. MMOs in generally feel like a single player game you are playing online...which doesn't make sense. This really does feel a lot more team oriented in its fundamental design. I hope this mentality of MMO takes root, because it is the way they should be. I don't feel like I HAVE to play this game, I feel like I get to...which is what it is all about right?

>> ^Yogi:

Is this for real? I've been hearing that it blows.

Its not the revolution this review seems to make it but its not bad. The strongest aspect of the game is how fucking gorgeous everything looks. The areas are pretty draw dropping, you'll want to level just so you can explore further. The combat is also fairly fun, at least for MMO standards.


The questing differences are really only superficial. While WoW might have you collecting hides from random critters GW2 has you doing much the same thing. The dynamic events are painfully formulaic. They pretty much all call for you to kill a boss that spawns, defend a small settlement, escort supplies etc and frankly it becomes quite monotonous.

The principle criticism of GW2 was that it wasn't really a persistent MMO. They've tried to address this in GW2, but in doing so they have introduced a lot of the flaws of the MMO genre. ANET have been very keen to talk about how different GW2 is from the rest of the genre, but really its less of a departure than GW1 for better and for worse. Its a pretty good effort, but its not all BIG ASS party.

I'm on Dragonbrand, but I think I read that server transfers are free for a while during the launch period.

I'm really enjoying it. The MMO platform is evolving (slowly). My only complaints are the integration of the Gem store into things like bank upgrades, but that's not a big deal since there's an exchange rate between gold and Gems.

http://www.guildwarsinsider.com/krewe-guild-wars-2-mmo-busy-adults/

I used to be addicted to MMOs, then I started treating life as one massive RPG. I'm glad I traded a virtual life for the real deal.

This short film takes it to a whole new level of scary though!

Almost makes me want to play it again.

Only almost because its pretty weak on the gameplay and miserable without a corp.

I'm pretty hyped about CCPs next MMO offering set in The World of Darkness though.

Short answer: I like it.

It's much like Diablo 2, but simplified in a number of game design ways. You level up much faster than in D2, and to have it feel good you should really use the auction house to get new items - some times something drops that is better than what you can find for reasonable amounts of gold, and that still feels brilliant.

The launch was shit, but it's much more stable now, so I feel alright about it. I've gotten used to always online from starcraft and MMOs, so I don't think that's an issue.

I only just hit level 60 and started inferno, but I really enjoy running around to get the nephalem valor buff (every time you kill a champion, rare or boss you get a half hour buff with +25 % magic find that stacks up to 5 times). Chasing that and getting drops is fun.

In reply to this comment by enoch:
what you think of diablo3?
and be honest.

Is this another Hotkey mmo that I have to ignore because WoW burned me out forever?

I just think it would have been a better game if they had simply separated the single player from the multiplayer. That way you have a choice in the matter. Gamers like choices and hate it when you take those choices away. D3 isn't a MMO no matter how hard Blizzard tries to convince people it is. The only reason they made it into this forced co-op game is they were greedy and figured that was the only way they could stop piracy.
Problem is the people who were gonna pirate the game weren't ever planning on paying for it in the first place. So they weren't going to lose a dime to those people. Notch said something to that effect about Minecraft piracy I don't remember the exact quote but Notch could care less if you pirate Minecraft, hell he gives away the beta snapshot versions for free.
And if they hadn't forced multiplayer to be always on all these hackers wouldn't be exploiting that very same system to steal items and gold from people so they can then sell them for cash in their idiotic real money auction house. Which will be a disaster if they ever open it because the hackers will flood the market.
And then even though people paid $60 bucks for the game they expect you to shell out another $10 for a physical authenticator in order to hopefully keep your account secure. Even though they don't allow strong passwords on Battle.net.
Which is a moot point because these hackers aren't even hacking passwords in the first place there stealing session id's or forcing themselves onto buddy lists somehow that's why people can still log into their accounts after they have been jacked for everything their worth. But Blizzard is suspiciously in denial when someone brings that up.

All in all their choice to force online access to play their game has resulted in one of the most embarrassing disasters in the history of gaming. Which is sad because it really is a good game. It's just run by greedy idiots.

>> ^lampishthing:

I think Thumper was saying that Diablo 3 is clearly a multiplayer focused game and that Mr. Yathzee Esq. should not expect it to be excellent in single player. Being a games reviewer surely he should have given more attention to the multiplayer as this was the intent of the game etc. I really don't think that Diablo 3 can be blamed for shoving stuff down your throat. That's more your desire to play Diablo 3 shoving it down your throat.>> ^Auger8:
Maybe because some people actually like single player games.
And maybe he's the guy who doesn't need 15 people to go "hey nice backswing on that axe you got there" 50 million times like some attention seeking whore.
Or there like me and don't want their entire party to sudden scream like banshees if I decide to get up and take a leak or grab a snack or simply decide I don't want to play through the entire campaign in a single night.
That's not to say I don't enjoy Multiplayer I simply enjoy not having it shoved down my throat like D3.
>> ^Thumper:
How in the hell can you play Diablo 3 without playing multiplayer. He's the person you never go see a movie with because they ruin it with their trite non-conformity misery. Oh wait that's how, if no one wants to play with you. What a fucking tool.

>> ^00Scud00:

I think both sides are pretty much full of crap in this video, but I will agree that the invention of holodecks would be the end of society as we know it, I can barely drag myself away from video games as it is.


I thought it was insightful the way TNG anticipated and addressed holo addiction in multiple episodes before things like MMO addiction existed. It seems on a Federation ship you are given strict holodeck rations and excessive use is quickly flagged and a super hot therapist dispatched to cure you. Beyond that I'd imagine that the average earth citizen is neither needed or expected to do much work. But the Federation attracts particularly ambitious people who care about real life.