12 hours? Only if you blast through every mission on very easy, skip the entire story, and try to speed run your way through the campaign. Even then I doubt you'll make it on your first time.

If you actually play the game like a normal person, it'll easily take you 20 - 30 hours. Not to mention the high replay value due to mutually exclusive choices you have to make during the campaign, such as permanent unit upgrades, mercs you hire, and mutually exclusive missions.

So yeah, as a guy who rarely finishes games, and almost never replays, the WoL singleplayer alone got me a good ~60 hours of gameplay (once on hard, once on brutal), which is more than I can say about any single player game I've bought in the last decade other than Civ 4 and XCOM (and maybe Fallout NV).

And that's not counting the multiplayer.

I tend to agree. While the story isn't bad, the majority of starcraft players are in it for the competitive multiplayer.

Erm.
Developers: Don't put shit in your trailer, that isn't in your game.
I better have rope-climbing, seiging and whatnot in the game when I play. Otherwise: fuck trailers that showcase nothing related to the game.
@Magicpants @MilkmanDan: Yeah, Elderscrolls used to be my go-to game for non-multiplayer bullshit. I don't have high hopes for this.

More so than the multiplayer tbh.

Ah, memories.
It's a shame that the two most recent incarnations of Mechwarrior have been multiplayer only affairs, give me some decent singleplayer campaigns and I'll tell you to shut up and take my money.

I don't think I understood a single damn thing he said except that he dislikes white privileged people. You know, like him.

Not a CoD fan anyways, for Multiplayer or single player.

Wait...he didn't like a game made for multiplayer? Nooooo...I don't believe it!

It's a shame he doesn't review this game for what they are actually made for.

Can't wait to play in neighborhood. I recognize a lot of the Santa Monica buildings in GTA V. If only they had a decent multiplayer mode.

>> ^TheFreak:

Oh man, I played the CRAP out of descent.
Isn't that Deck 16?


No idea, but it looks rad(ical). I remember playing its time limited multiplayer demo. through Kali!

>> ^jmzero:

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.


1. Basing any game on an hours play is stupid.
2. You talk about how you loved GW1s story, yet you ignored the story in GW2 which said wait for the NPC.... this was there so you didnt miss out on killing the boss.... perhaps you should pay attention next time.
3. In GW1 most people picked the same 3 or so skills for weapons every time, AN simply locked the skills in place to make sure people who didnt understand wouldnt be caught out with a build which was useless. All the other skills can be picked by the player, tho again with more limitations. The GW1 system was powerful, but impossible to balance. The new system is able to be managed by AN, but it sactually more indepth than it seems, tho it is simpler.
4. You can jump into pvp right away actually. Just make a charater (such as a guardian) and goto the pvp lobby. Done, lvl 80 with access to all items, skills and access to the jump in, and tournament play. Again, if you'd bothered to play the game you would have known this. All this information was in the manuel linked right from the launcher.
5. You dont grind equipment and levels. You'll get both by doing whatever you want, be it spvp, wvw, story content or jump roaming around.

Its not perfect, but dear lord play it first to find out for yourself.

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.

>> ^jmzero:

I liked the original Guild Wars. It had a short, tight, enjoyable narrative that served pretty much as a tutorial - and then you played an interesting multiplayer game that revolved around skill choices and interactions between different characters across team archetypes. The team arena in Guild Wars was somewhere between Magic: The Gathering (you kind of built a deck almost) and Defense of the Ancients, with just a hint of Diablo gear collection and what not. I thought the skill acquisition system was great, and there was a great variety of skills (though the skills often felt underpowered). I only quit playing because it was stagnant, and I was quite looking forward to the sequel (especially when reviews were generally good).
I should have paid more attention to what they changed.
The new one is just a slightly different flavor of WoW, and I assume the glowing reviews are from people who generally like WoW but wanted a different flavor (or no monthly charge). It has nothing to do with the original game. It's the fastest I've ever completely given up on a game I spent $60 on.


GW2 is very very good indeed, and because arenanet is actually paying attention to what people are saying its getting better. Many player suggestions were implemented weeks into release, with more to come.

As for jmzero... I dont think hes even played it. There are many things you can say about GW2, both good and bad, but "slightly different flavor of WoW" isnt one of them. And as for the "its has nothing to do with the original game" comment.... yeah nothing.... except it continues the story from GW1, has characters from GW1, has the same races and many of the professions from GW1, then theres the areas, music, signet based skill system etc... christ it even uses the same engine and instancing backend (tho now with persistent zones).

But... if he doesn't like it, fine.... his opinion.

I liked the original Guild Wars. It had a short, tight, enjoyable narrative that served pretty much as a tutorial - and then you played an interesting multiplayer game that revolved around skill choices and interactions between different characters across team archetypes. The team arena in Guild Wars was somewhere between Magic: The Gathering (you kind of built a deck almost) and Defense of the Ancients, with just a hint of Diablo gear collection and what not. I thought the skill acquisition system was great, and there was a great variety of skills (though the skills often felt underpowered). I only quit playing because it was stagnant, and I was quite looking forward to the sequel (especially when reviews were generally good).

I should have paid more attention to what they changed.

The new one is just a slightly different flavor of WoW, and I assume the glowing reviews are from people who generally like WoW but wanted a different flavor (or no monthly charge). It has nothing to do with the original game. It's the fastest I've ever completely given up on a game I spent $60 on.

The blue wire is for multiplayer games.

I might actually get into this now. I've never really been into competitive multiplayer, but I have over 300 hours in Killing Floor.