Jump to content


Photo

Guild Wars 2 Endgame: You Actually Get to Eat the Carrot


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#17 years1hundred

years1hundred
  • [DkR] Clan Member (Inactive)
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Ames, Iowa

Posted 16 February 2012 - 04:41 am

May be we missunderstood each other. You refered to the problem as "must-play-endgame-content-to-get-best-gear problem" so I simply wanted to say, you don't have to play endgame content to get the gear. It may be more time comsuming to get the tokens from other events or quests, but you don't have to play the hardest dungeons to get it. So ones you have reached this point, you are right, you will play the endgame content just for the two reasons you metioned obove, maybe also to help a friend.

Oh yeah, I see what you mean, and I believe you're right - I guess I should have phrased it as "feel-obligated-to-play-endgame-content-to-get-best-gear". Like, I'm a full time college student with a lot of extracurricular activity, so I don't have much time to play games. Thus, when I do play, I can't afford to be dilly dallying around if I want to make the best use of my time. Now, I know that's a personal opinion, but I also know many other players who are likewise short on time and feel the same way - so I guess I'm saying that while you're not forced to play endgame content, you kinda feel like you have to if you don't have too much time like myself.

Which is why I guess I think Arenanet should make all content give the same rewards at a certain point. I mean, technically, if you auto-scale to the level of an area, the challenge for the whole game should remain overall very consistent (unless you're doing an elite event or something), so why shouldn't the rewards remain very consistent as well? While Donkz mentioned farming lower level content, this really can't be a problem in Guild Wars 2 due to auto-scaling - and if rewards remained consistent, then the entire game would indeed transform into "endgame", as there would be no true difference between level 30 content and level 75 content.

I dunno, whadda you guys think?
  • 0

#18 Darkademic

Darkademic
  • – Enigmatic Overlord –

  • 4,971 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Short Name:Dark

Posted 16 February 2012 - 01:06 pm

Concerning Endgame Content [...] honestly, you got me here [...]. I didn't realize the amount of level 80 content Guild Wars 2 had, so I do agree that Guild Wars 2 seems to have more endgame content than SWTOR does. But currently, the new Operations and Flashpoints in SWTOR do go concurrently with the old level 50 content, so it isn't like new content renders old content obsolete.

It seems to be a misconception a lot of people have, but if SWTOR does a similar thing then great. My main concern about SWTOR would then be its similarity to WoW. Having played both a decent amount, I can tell you they 'feel' almost identical in terms of the combat. SWTOR is far superior in its storytelling, but I'm not sure that's enough to draw in players who want a WoW-style game who've probably already got a lot invested in WoW.

Concerning Gear Treadmill: SWTOR cleverly gets around this by rewarding level 50 content (such as Operations and Flashpoints) with tokens that can be redeemed for endgame gear. In addition, it has been hinted at by Bioware that should the level cap increase, Operations and Hard-Mode Flashpoints will scale to the new max level, which means that they will not become outdated. And with the token system I just mentioned, it also ensures that you play the Flashpoints you want to play rather than the ones you feel you need to play.

Sounds very similar to what GW2 is doing then, which is great.

Concerning Gear Progression: You mention that there won't be gear progression in Guild Wars 2 - I'm just curious, how do you mean this? I was very much under the impression that Guild Wars 2 has gear progression (which is why they revealed Transmutation Stones way back in 2010), so if this has been change recently, I'd love to know about it! :D

Basically I mean progression in power. There'll be lots of ways to customise the look of your armour though dyes and transmutation stones, and ways to modify the stats with crests. Unlike WoW (and SWTOR if I'm not mistaken), there isn't a specific stat or selection of stats that a specific class *should* get. All of the stats are beneficial to every class in GW2, so it'll come down to balancing them according to your play style.

Concerning Skill: While it's true that a highly geared player in SWTOR can steamroll through early-game content (such as lower level Flashpoints), skill still literally makes all the difference with endgame content. Moreover, while it is true that Guild Wars 2 players will be side-kicked down to lower levels when they enter a lower-level area (which means that their gear won't win the day for them), they'll still have access to traits, additional skills, and elite skills that will enable them to breeze through early-game content. And at your current level, skill will indeed make a difference, but so will your attributes, your traits, your skills, your weapon sets, your elites, and your gear. I'd honestly argue that skill is of equal importance in both games - neither one caters to players who don't continually improve.

Perhaps, but like my dear wife Lollipop (:)) said, the primary benefit of side-kicking isn't being able to go back and do content for getting rewards or for the challenge of it, but rather simply being able to experience it more or less as it was intended to be experienced, AND to prevent friends being separated by huge differences in power. In terms of endgame content though, I don't think you can get around the fact that GW2 is based on your skill, and your own decisions you make when creating a build, whereas WoW and SWTOR are heavily based around gear - even if skill certainly factors into it.

One Final Point/Query: I still, however, don't feel that the main point has been addressed - mainly, that Guild Wars 2 avoids the must-play-endgame-content-to-get-best-gear "problem". If anything, now that you pointed out how much endgame content Guild Wars 2 truly does have, I feel that more than ever players will have to do endgame content to get the best gear available. Which means that while Guild Wars 2 will allow you to play lower level content if you want to, you still will only get the items you need if you play endgame content.

All of the stuff that's grindy in GW2 will not affect character power, it'll all be cosmetic (armour/weapon appearance, achievements, titles), and you'll quickly get access to the best gear available once you reach the level cap. After that, it's a case of whether you can beat the content that is provided using the tools that you've been given (and that everyone will have reasonably easy access to).
  • 0

darkademic_thin_sig.png
Рациональный разум. Военачальник Загадочных Призраков.


#19 years1hundred

years1hundred
  • [DkR] Clan Member (Inactive)
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Ames, Iowa

Posted 16 February 2012 - 07:34 pm

It seems to be a misconception a lot of people have, but if SWTOR does a similar thing then great. My main concern about SWTOR would then be its similarity to WoW. Having played both a decent amount, I can tell you they 'feel' almost identical in terms of the combat. SWTOR is far superior in its storytelling, but I'm not sure that's enough to draw in players who want a WoW-style game who've probably already got a lot invested in WoW.


I haven't played WOW so I can't speak there. But another misconception a lot of people get is that SWTOR set out to make a MMO system different from that of WOW, when in reality, Bioware stated from the very beginning that they were going to base SWTOR off of WOW. SWTOR is meant to provide a unique approach to MMOs in terms of storytelling, but a traditional approach in terms of many other MMO systems. Having played to level 50, I know many, many former WOW players who feel that SWTOR went above and beyond, however, in the "traditional" approach and made things much more enjoyable than they had been in WOW (whether it was combat, traveling, content, etc.). So I do know that SWTOR improved over a lot over WOW. Meanwhile, Guild Wars 1 was a completely weird MMO (more like an instanced cooperative online game), and when Arenanet announced that they were going to be making Guild Wars 2, they also said they were going to make something completely new and different than anything else that had been made before. Which is well and good (and I think I'm gonna fall in love with Guild Wars 2 once it finally releases), but many people went on to criticize SWTOR for imitating WOW in light of Guild Wars 2, which isn't fair to SWTOR at all. Besides, WOW wasn't unique or original either - it copied from a lot of MMOs (including Ever Quest 2).

Sounds very similar to what GW2 is doing then, which is great.


Yeah, it's a new system that I think is gonna end up becoming standard in MMOs from now on - yay for innovation and listening to player feedback! :D

Basically I mean progression in power. There'll be lots of ways to customise the look of your armour though dyes and transmutation stones, and ways to modify the stats with crests. Unlike WoW (and SWTOR if I'm not mistaken), there isn't a specific stat or selection of stats that a specific class *should* get. All of the stats are beneficial to every class in GW2, so it'll come down to balancing them according to your play style.


It is true that Guild Wars 2 doesn't have class-specific attributes, but honestly, it's been that way since Guild Wars 1, so that really isn't anything new. But in Guild Wars 2, this is due to the role-less system, so it's to be expected. SWTOR is traditional, so it does have role-specific classes, but the beauty with that is that almost all classes have access to all roles - which means that 90% of the time, a player can choose a class for a theme and a story rather than for a playstyle. Thus, even though there are class-specific stats in SWTOR, there is still a large amount of variation. Indeed, SWTOR's armor customization system is almost a direct copy of Guild Wars 1's item modification, except on steroids. This is because in SWTOR, armor stats are simply determined by what mods they have in place - so say I enjoy the look of a level 5 piece of armor, I can keep stripping mods from higher level pieces of armor and putting them in my level 5 armor piece, which means my armor can level up with me - I never have to feel obligated to wear a certain piece of armor because of its stats, as said stats are tied with the mods, not the armor itself. And as I said before, the "Match To" system will be coming out soon, which means that color will also be determinable, although not in as dynamic a way as with Guild Wars 2 or even Guild Wars 1's dye system.

Perhaps, but like my dear wife Lollipop (:)) said, the primary benefit of side-kicking isn't being able to go back and do content for getting rewards or for the challenge of it, but rather simply being able to experience it more or less as it was intended to be experienced, AND to prevent friends being separated by huge differences in power.


Indeed - as I said earlier, side-kicking is great for building a social community, so I did appreciate it in Champions Online even if I never used it myself, and I really wish SWTOR had something like that.

In terms of endgame content though, I don't think you can get around the fact that GW2 is based on your skill, and your own decisions you make when creating a build, whereas WoW and SWTOR are heavily based around gear - even if skill certainly factors into it.


To a limited extent, yes. But honestly, unless you're doing Nightmare-Mode Flashpoints and/or Operations, if you know the strategies for the content you're doing and you're good with your build and class, you can easily do Normal-Mode and even Hard-Mode Flashpoints and/or Operations - since I was one of the SWTOR pioneers on my server (playing since Day 1 of Early Access! :D), we had to tackle Flashpoints and Operations that way, so I'm speaking from personal experience. :)

All of the stuff that's grindy in GW2 will not affect character power, it'll all be cosmetic (armour/weapon appearance, achievements, titles), and you'll quickly get access to the best gear available once you reach the level cap. After that, it's a case of whether you can beat the content that is provided using the tools that you've been given (and that everyone will have reasonably easy access to).


That's true, and I also think it's true for SWTOR - that game pretty much rains good gear at the end (again, after hitting level 50, by the end of a week or two, playing casually, I had the best armor available in the game). But yeah, I see what you're saying for GW2. :)


Oh, and again, thank you for hearing me out and inviting me here. I do enjoy the chance to discuss this with you! :D
  • 0

#20 Darkademic

Darkademic
  • – Enigmatic Overlord –

  • 4,971 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Short Name:Dark

Posted 17 February 2012 - 12:35 am

I haven't played WOW so I can't speak there. But another misconception a lot of people get is that SWTOR set out to make a MMO system different from that of WOW, when in reality, Bioware stated from the very beginning that they were going to base SWTOR off of WOW. SWTOR is meant to provide a unique approach to MMOs in terms of storytelling, but a traditional approach in terms of many other MMO systems. Having played to level 50, I know many, many former WOW players who feel that SWTOR went above and beyond, however, in the "traditional" approach and made things much more enjoyable than they had been in WOW (whether it was combat, traveling, content, etc.). So I do know that SWTOR improved over a lot over WOW. Meanwhile, Guild Wars 1 was a completely weird MMO (more like an instanced cooperative online game), and when Arenanet announced that they were going to be making Guild Wars 2, they also said they were going to make something completely new and different than anything else that had been made before. Which is well and good (and I think I'm gonna fall in love with Guild Wars 2 once it finally releases), but many people went on to criticize SWTOR for imitating WOW in light of Guild Wars 2, which isn't fair to SWTOR at all. Besides, WOW wasn't unique or original either - it copied from a lot of MMOs (including Ever Quest 2).

Indeed, and in and of itself it's not necessarily a bad thing to emulate WoW; WoW is a good game. Still, I think it unfortunately means that players don't see enough of a difference, and if they've already invested a lot of time in WoW, they've no reason to switch. SWTOR is a good game, but after playing so much WoW, I'm ready for something very different.

It is true that Guild Wars 2 doesn't have class-specific attributes, but honestly, it's been that way since Guild Wars 1, so that really isn't anything new.

Actually in GW1 there were no attributes, so it is quite a big change.

IBut in Guild Wars 2, this is due to the role-less system, so it's to be expected. SWTOR is traditional, so it does have role-specific classes, but the beauty with that is that almost all classes have access to all roles - which means that 90% of the time, a player can choose a class for a theme and a story rather than for a playstyle.

Hmm I'm not sure how it can have roles and be roleless. The 'holy trinity' (that GW2 is getting rid of) is where you're locked into being either a tank, a healer or a DPS, (whilst in combat; since obviously you could switch between specs in WoW/SWTOR). SWTOR, as far as I could tell when I played it, used the WoW system. Some classes had a spec for all three roles, but some didn't (e.g. Sith Warrior could only be tank or DPS). This isn't what I was referring to when I mentioned stats though (see below).

IThus, even though there are class-specific stats in SWTOR, there is still a large amount of variation. Indeed, SWTOR's armor customization system is almost a direct copy of Guild Wars 1's item modification, except on steroids. This is because in SWTOR, armor stats are simply determined by what mods they have in place - so say I enjoy the look of a level 5 piece of armor, I can keep stripping mods from higher level pieces of armor and putting them in my level 5 armor piece, which means my armor can level up with me - I never have to feel obligated to wear a certain piece of armor because of its stats, as said stats are tied with the mods, not the armor itself.

Did you ever play Diablo II? Every level you could distribute a stat point in either strength, dexterity, vitality or energy. In GW2 you can do this as well (except in power, precision, toughness and vitality), so you have control over your stats not only based on the armour you wear, but as you level up as well (whereas in WoW and SWTOR stats are distributed automatically as you level up).

My other point is that whereas in SWTOR, a Sith Assassin might need to focus on willpower and crit (and similarly in WoW a priest might focus on intellect and spirit), you can choose any of the stats in GW2 depending on how you want to play your class. I could be a Mesmer and focus on toughness so I take less damage when hit, or focus on precision to get a higher crit chance. None of them are specifically suited to my class above all others.

IOh, and again, thank you for hearing me out and inviting me here. I do enjoy the chance to discuss this with you! :D

No probs! If I didn't respond to any points it's just because I don't really have anything to add to what you said.

And as an aside, feel free to apply to join DkR if you decide to give GW2 a try.
  • 0

darkademic_thin_sig.png
Рациональный разум. Военачальник Загадочных Призраков.


#21 CdV Jesus

CdV Jesus
  • Forum Member
  • 6 posts

Posted 17 February 2012 - 01:36 am



It is true that Guild Wars 2 doesn't have class-specific attributes, but honestly, it's been that way since Guild Wars 1, so that really isn't anything new.


Actually in GW1 there were no attributes, so it is quite a big change.


To be totally correct in Guild Wars 1 every class had its own attributes. BUT this attributes mostly effected only the skills of this particularly class and not health, mana or whatever and I think there were very few weapons which effected these attributes. so you were both right and wrong

Edit: didn't mean to be a wise guy. It's just to prevent further discusion abot about attributes yes or no. ;-)
  • 0

#22 Darkademic

Darkademic
  • – Enigmatic Overlord –

  • 4,971 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Short Name:Dark

Posted 17 February 2012 - 01:48 am

if you be totally correct in Guild Wars 1 every class had its own attributes. BUT this attributes only effected the skills and not health, manna or whatever and I think there were very few weapons which effected these attributes. so you were both right and wrong

Edid: didn't mean to be a wise guy. It's just to prevent further discusion abot about attributes yes or no. ;-)

Lol, well yeah it had those, but I meant more like strength, dexterity etc. that you get in most RPGs. GW1's system was pretty unusual come to think of it (in a good way).
  • 0

darkademic_thin_sig.png
Рациональный разум. Военачальник Загадочных Призраков.


#23 years1hundred

years1hundred
  • [DkR] Clan Member (Inactive)
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Ames, Iowa

Posted 17 February 2012 - 05:33 am

Indeed, and in and of itself it's not necessarily a bad thing to emulate WoW; WoW is a good game. Still, I think it unfortunately means that players don't see enough of a difference, and if they've already invested a lot of time in WoW, they've no reason to switch. SWTOR is a good game, but after playing so much WoW, I'm ready for something very different.


True. Luckily for me, I only played Guild Wars 1, so SWTOR was indeed very new and fresh for me. But yeah, I see your point.

Actually in GW1 there were no attributes, so it is quite a big change.


I was kinda referring to what CdV said earlier. :)

Hmm I'm not sure how it can have roles and be roleless. SWTOR, as far as I could tell when I played it, used the WoW system. Some classes had a spec for all three roles, but some didn't (e.g. Sith Warrior could only be tank or DPS). This isn't what I was referring to when I mentioned stats though (see below).


It is true that the Warrior/Knight classes can only be tanks or dps, but that's because those are the only two roles that work with the lore of the classes. And likewise, the Smuggler/Agent classes cannot be tanks, 'cause that's also contrary to lore. But I never ran into even one person who felt that he was forced to play a role that he didn't want to play.

Did you ever play Diablo II? Every level you could distribute a stat point in either strength, dexterity, vitality or energy. In GW2 you can do this as well (except in power, precision, toughness and vitality), so you have control over your stats not only based on the armour you wear, but as you level up as well (whereas in WoW and SWTOR stats are distributed automatically as you level up).


I never really got into the Diablo series, but if anything, this means that this is one less area where Guild Wars 2 is not innovative. Not that that's a bad thing, but it gives credence to the argument that Guild Wars 2 isn't doing things nearly as innovatively as many people think.

My other point is that whereas in SWTOR, a Sith Assassin might need to focus on willpower and crit (and similarly in WoW a priest might focus on intellect and spirit), you can choose any of the stats in GW2 depending on how you want to play your class. I could be a Mesmer and focus on toughness so I take less damage when hit, or focus on precision to get a higher crit chance. None of them are specifically suited to my class above all others.


The flexibility in SWTOR comes from the fact that, for example, while it is true that an Assassin must pick Willpower to max his damage, he can then pick any combination between Alacrity, Crit, Power, and Surge to create effectively different builds for different purposes.

No probs! If I didn't respond to any points it's just because I don't really have anything to add to what you said.

And as an aside, feel free to apply to join DkR if you decide to give GW2 a try.


Haha, I plan to be pre-ordering once a release date is given. :)

And I appreciate the offer! You guys all seem pretty cool - everyone has been very nice and mature in this thread despite the potential controversial nature of what we're talking about, so yeah, I'll think about it. :)
  • 0

#24 Darkademic

Darkademic
  • – Enigmatic Overlord –

  • 4,971 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Short Name:Dark

Posted 17 February 2012 - 05:17 pm

It is true that the Warrior/Knight classes can only be tanks or dps, but that's because those are the only two roles that work with the lore of the classes. And likewise, the Smuggler/Agent classes cannot be tanks, 'cause that's also contrary to lore. But I never ran into even one person who felt that he was forced to play a role that he didn't want to play.

Yea, but whether it's due to lore or not, that's the holy trinity. Of course, players will pick a role that they want to play, and it can be a lot of fun (I played a healer in PvE in WoW for example). The disadvantages are more related to the dependency involved - where you need particular roles to be filled in order to attempt particular content (which leades to queues and/or people not being able to participate). It also leads to combat being much less dynamic than it could be. A tank just maintains aggro, a healer just keeps everyone's bars full, and DPS just go through their rotations; there's no switching between these roles in the fights themselves. This may come down to preference though, some people may prefer a more ridigly defined set of roles.

I never really got into the Diablo series, but if anything, this means that this is one less area where Guild Wars 2 is not innovative. Not that that's a bad thing, but it gives credence to the argument that Guild Wars 2 isn't doing things nearly as innovatively as many people think.

The flexibility in SWTOR comes from the fact that, for example, while it is true that an Assassin must pick Willpower to max his damage, he can then pick any combination between Alacrity, Crit, Power, and Surge to create effectively different builds for different purposes.

Well you could say that about any game really - what's important is how the various element combine together and make a complete game. I'd point out that MMO's don't usually give you a choice of equally viable attributes though; even Diablo II had optimal stat distributions, which is why WoW did away with it altogether and distributed the stats for you. GW2 however has four different stats which are all beneficial and which you prioritise depends on your playstyle. SWTOR sounds like it has that to an extent, but I would expect that certain combinations are more optimal than others. I shouldn't exaggerate the difference though, it's only a slight one. My point is just that GW2 focuses on customisation based on preference and style, which SWTOR may do in similar ways.

Haha, I plan to be pre-ordering once a release date is given. :)

And I appreciate the offer! You guys all seem pretty cool - everyone has been very nice and mature in this thread despite the potential controversial nature of what we're talking about, so yeah, I'll think about it. :)

Yeah I do my best to remain objective.

Cool, well, you know where to find us. :D
  • 0

darkademic_thin_sig.png
Рациональный разум. Военачальник Загадочных Призраков.


#25 CdV Jesus

CdV Jesus
  • Forum Member
  • 6 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 03:48 am

Just found this Video about the absence of the holy trinty.
I think especially interesting is the part about the aggro system at about 8:40 which is very simple: the player nearest to the enemy gets the aggro.
Its interesting because you can see how easy it should be to rotate "tanks" during a fight. on the other hand in random groups without teamspeak it might get pretty hard to time the rotation right.
by tanks I refer to the player who takes most of the damage at this point so others can recharge their health or energy.
  • 0

#26 years1hundred

years1hundred
  • [DkR] Clan Member (Inactive)
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Ames, Iowa

Posted 20 February 2012 - 10:32 pm

Just found this Video about the absence of the holy trinty.
I think especially interesting is the part about the aggro system at about 8:40 which is very simple: the player nearest to the enemy gets the aggro.
Its interesting because you can see how easy it should be to rotate "tanks" during a fight. on the other hand in random groups without teamspeak it might get pretty hard to time the rotation right.
by tanks I refer to the player who takes most of the damage at this point so others can recharge their health or energy.


Actually, according to devs (from this one review I read), aggro is a fairly in-depth mechanism that takes a lot of factors into consideration to determine who "has threat" at any given moment. So it's not that easy to determine who grabs aggro, but it seems like a cool and innovative system.

As it is, I kinda wanted to get you guys' opinion on a "concern" (which isn't the best word, but is close) with the Guild Wars 2 tank/dps/heal system (since I refuse to go by the derogatory ANet term "holy trinity"). To me, while Guild Wars 2 has good intentions with the tank/dps/heal system being formless, I don't really see it as non-existent either. I say this because of the Guardian's presence in the game - if the Guardian didn't exist, then I would tend to totally believe Arenanet on this. But as it is, Arenanet has described the Guardian as a class that does less dps and more healing/support overall. As such, it's obvious that this class must have a place in the game, as if a purpose for it didn't exist, then it wouldn't be included.

Which means that the tank/dps/heal system, while minimized, does exist to some extent - only it's been changed from previous MMO's iterations of it. Lets say we have three friends who group together and make their classes how they want. For example, a Necromancer spec into many different roles, but say it goes primarily into healing. Then, we have an Elementalist who specs into dps, and we have a Guardian who specs into tanking. From here, while it's true that all three classes can assume each other's roles to a certain extent, the most logical setup will be for the Ele to do dps, the Necro to heal, and the Guard to tank. Thus, anytime a dungeon or something involving strategy is run, these three friends are gonna assume the roles that they are specced for.

So they're running a dungeon and their tank char goes down. While the Necro might switch over and start off-tanking for a little bit, they're really gonna end up being screwed unless they manage to get their tank friend back up. Likewise, if their healer goes down, the Guard might assume his role for a little while, but with the Necro's traits, attributes, and gear they way they are, the Guard just won't be able to pump out the numbers that the Necro is able to, which again means that unless they get their Necro friend revived, they're gonna go down.

This, I don't really see the "holy trinity" being gone in Guild Wars 2 so much as it has been given a different twist and form. Instead of being forced on players, it is optional (albeit necessary) and class-independent. But it's still there, it still affects gameplay.

But that's just my two cents - what do you guys think?
  • 0

#27 Nvrdie

Nvrdie
  • [DkR] Clan Member (Inactive)
  • 245 posts
  • Short Name:Never

Posted 21 February 2012 - 12:33 am

Hi Years1Hundred.

I enjoyed reading your last post, you encapsulated what many people are concerned about with the new ANet party model.

The absence of the Holy Trinity is just that, but the roles still do exist. Confusing I know.

I wont attempt to explain this, as I don't think I can do better than Mr GW lore himself WoodenPotatoes in his recent uTube upload...

No Trinity?!
  • 0

#28 Darkademic

Darkademic
  • – Enigmatic Overlord –

  • 4,971 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Short Name:Dark

Posted 22 February 2012 - 01:40 pm

Big thanks to TubeElephant for mentioning the article in one of his videos.


  • 0

darkademic_thin_sig.png
Рациональный разум. Военачальник Загадочных Призраков.


#29 years1hundred

years1hundred
  • [DkR] Clan Member (Inactive)
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Ames, Iowa

Posted 22 February 2012 - 02:09 pm

Hi Years1Hundred.

I enjoyed reading your last post, you encapsulated what many people are concerned about with the new ANet party model.

The absence of the Holy Trinity is just that, but the roles still do exist. Confusing I know.

I wont attempt to explain this, as I don't think I can do better than Mr GW lore himself WoodenPotatoes in his recent uTube upload...[/url]


Unfortunately, even after watching the video, I think what I said is still valid - the "holy trinity" isn't gone, it's just a lot less restricted. Nevertheless, it still exists and will still dictate the way classes are set up and the game is played. For example, building a character that invests a little into tanking, dps, and healing will result in a somewhat useless character (maybe not for easy solo content, but decidedly for dungeons and the like). Meanwhile, while Arenanet has said that it's totally possible for five Necros to take on a dungeon, they never said it would be possible for five Necros specced as tanks to take on a dungeon - you will still need people specced in all three roles to accomplish such content. Which means that roles aren't gone as everybody seems to think; indeed, they are very much in-game and must be adhered to - the only difference between Guild Wars 2 and a lot of other MMOs is that anyone can assume their desired role regardless of class choice.
  • 0

#30 Darkademic

Darkademic
  • – Enigmatic Overlord –

  • 4,971 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Short Name:Dark

Posted 22 February 2012 - 02:20 pm

Unfortunately, even after watching the video, I think what I said is still valid - the "holy trinity" isn't gone, it's just a lot less restricted. Nevertheless, it still exists and will still dictate the way classes are set up and the game is played. For example, building a character that invests a little into tanking, dps, and healing will result in a somewhat useless character (maybe not for easy solo content, but decidedly for dungeons and the like). Meanwhile, while Arenanet has said that it's totally possible for five Necros to take on a dungeon, they never said it would be possible for five Necros specced as tanks to take on a dungeon - you will still need people specced in all three roles to accomplish such content. Which means that roles aren't gone as everybody seems to think; indeed, they are very much in-game and must be adhered to - the only difference between Guild Wars 2 and a lot of other MMOs is that anyone can assume their desired role regardless of class choice.

The holy trinity is defined by being locked into the roles, rather than the roles themselves.

If the mere existence of taking damage, dealing damage, and support/healing meant that the holy trinity exists, then pretty much every game ever made would have the holy trinity.

You can allocate your stats to prioritise one of these three things, but you'll never be able to be a tank because you'll never be able to take damage indefinitely and because of the way aggro works, and you'll never be able to be a healer because each profession only has one dedicated healing skill and it's usually on a long cooldown.
  • 0

darkademic_thin_sig.png
Рациональный разум. Военачальник Загадочных Призраков.


#31 CdV Jesus

CdV Jesus
  • Forum Member
  • 6 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 03:18 pm

As it is, I kinda wanted to get you guys' opinion on a "concern" (which isn't the best word, but is close) with the Guild Wars 2 tank/dps/heal system (since I refuse to go by the derogatory ANet term "holy trinity"). To me, while Guild Wars 2 has good intentions with the tank/dps/heal system being formless, I don't really see it as non-existent either. I say this because of the Guardian's presence in the game - if the Guardian didn't exist, then I would tend to totally believe Arenanet on this. But as it is, Arenanet has described the Guardian as a class that does less dps and more healing/support overall. As such, it's obvious that this class must have a place in the game, as if a purpose for it didn't exist, then it wouldn't be included.

So here is my opinion and interprtation of this matter based on the reports after the press beta event. At first I think your are right that some classes are better in dps, support or control than others, I think every class can handle two roles fairly well. since you can max two traitlines.

Which means that the tank/dps/heal system, while minimized, does exist to some extent - only it's been changed from previous MMO's iterations of it. Lets say we have three friends who group together and make their classes how they want. For example, a Necromancer spec into many different roles, but say it goes primarily into healing. Then, we have an Elementalist who specs into dps, and we have a Guardian who specs into tanking. From here, while it's true that all three classes can assume each other's roles to a certain extent, the most logical setup will be for the Ele to do dps, the Necro to heal, and the Guard to tank. Thus, anytime a dungeon or something involving strategy is run, these three friends are gonna assume the roles that they are specced for.

So they're running a dungeon and their tank char goes down. While the Necro might switch over and start off-tanking for a little bit, they're really gonna end up being screwed unless they manage to get their tank friend back up. Likewise, if their healer goes down, the Guard might assume his role for a little while, but with the Necro's traits, attributes, and gear they way they are, the Guard just won't be able to pump out the numbers that the Necro is able to, which again means that unless they get their Necro friend revived, they're gonna go down.

Here you're right again, but I don't think it's much of a problem since everyone can revive other players AND the dungeons are made for 5 players not 3 so if the tank goes down there will be hopefully at least one char specced to take over the tanking role so one dps player starts to revive the main tank. So I think it will result in a more complex gameplay than in other mmo's. You'll have to watch your teammates, the fight and react to constantly altering situations. I think I've seen a video or article where Colin Johanson stated they finished an explorable dungeon with five elementalists, also surly it's not the optimal groupbuild it shows that even a profession like the ele can play all roles and succesfully finish some of the harder content, explicitly build for coordinated groups.

This, I don't really see the "holy trinity" being gone in Guild Wars 2 so much as it has been given a different twist and form. Instead of being forced on players, it is optional (albeit necessary) and class-independent. But it's still there, it still affects gameplay.

But that's just my two cents - what do you guys think?

And again youe're right, but why completely erase trinity if players want to play it that way. I think it's all about the freedom to choose as ANet stated more than once. You want to play a kind of trinity in your group, do it. You want to play with five dps-maxed chars, do it, you have a fair chance to reach your goal. So I doubt there is any necessity to play trinity-style anywhere in the game but you always free to do so.

EDIT:

The holy trinity is defined by being locked into the roles, rather than the roles themselves.

If the mere existence of taking damage, dealing damage, and support/healing meant that the holy trinity exists, then pretty much every game ever made would have the holy trinity.

Right by that definition the holy trinity doesn't exist in GW2. But trinitylike playstyle might be possible even if the tank can't take damage indefinitly there will be classes wich can fill the control part better than others. so you will be forced to switch the part you fill in your group constantly but can try to play in a style where one player is mainly a support charakter another more of a control one and the other three maxed their dps traits. it doesn't mean that you won't be forced to play another part for a short time.

You can allocate your stats to prioritise one of these three things, but you'll never be able to be a tank because you'll never be able to take damage indefinitely and because of the way aggro works, and you'll never be able to be a healer because each profession only has one dedicated healing skill and it's usually on a long cooldown.

I thought these things were known by now. Which made me belive years1hundred meant a playstyle where one person has mainly the task to support the others and another to control the enemy but as I said you have to constantly evaluate the fight and alter your actions according to it

Edited by CdV Jesus, 22 February 2012 - 03:42 pm.

  • 0

#32 years1hundred

years1hundred
  • [DkR] Clan Member (Inactive)
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Ames, Iowa

Posted 22 February 2012 - 04:41 pm

All very good points.

I guess I was just saying that that while Arenanet said that the "holy trinity" was completely gone in Guild Wars 2 (which is something fans have been vapidly lording over other games), it's really still in Guild Wars 2, only this time with a lot more flexibility and a little less structure.

Haha, actually, I find all of this really hard to discuss with you guys, as you are all so nice and fair - from my experience, so many Guild Wars fans are trolls, as they think that the different direction Guild Wars 2 is taking makes Guild Wars (and themselves) better than everything else. Discussing on the "Eat The Carrot" article was a pleasant surprise, as I had been expecting to be flamed, and since coming here, I've continued to be pleasantly surprised by the mature and informed comments, so I guess I wanted to thank you all for being so awesome. :)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users