[QuantumDelta]

People will still feel this way when they want to make solid progress. There will still be classes, or abilities that are felt to be almost required, even if the bar is lowered, even if you could 'do it without them'.

[Spoon]

I'm sure there will be a few people like that.
I'm also sure there will be a few people that will like it and people that won't like it.

What of it?

[Fury]

As long as ArenanaNet does their balancing somewhat right, there will be no classes that are "needed" or are "weak". Within a class there may be abilities and whatever that aren't quite up to the bar certainly, this leads to min-maxing within the classes. But no matter what class you play, you're always welcome to any group. This is unlike in WoW, where you need certain number of tanks, healers and then remaining spots are filled with dps and you're left out because you don't play the right class.

GW2 beta has already shown that GW2 balancing was still far from ready. I suspect it'll take months of balancing after release not to make any of the classes or abilities better than others, or weaker than others. In fact, it's a continuing process in all multiplayer games.

GW2 does not have WoW-like threat mechanics and the whole combat is a lot more dynamic. Unfortunately I did not have a chance to experience this myself during the last beta, which was my first.

I can however say with confidence that GW2 is definitely an evolution of MMORPG into a good direction, ArenaNet has done so many things right that were downright annoying in other MMORPG's like WoW. The question is, are they up to the challenge? That we will know roughly a year after the release. Thankfully GW2 does not have subscriptions, so it's not a huge loss if the game tanks despite all the promise it shows.


QD is still right, there will be plenty of min-maxing but I hope all classes are perfectly viable for anything ArenaNet decides to throw at players. No matter what class you like to play. you can enjoy all content without worrying about holy trinity setup.

[Mikes]

People will still feel this way when they want to make solid progress. There will still be classes, or abilities that are felt to be almost required, even if the bar is lowered, even if you could 'do it without them'.

Their stated goal is that classes vary in style... but, depending on their build, can all perform the same functions - just in very different ways.


That is pretty much the opposite of games that follow the "holy trinity model" (i.e. almost all other games), which specifically splits up classes into "tanks, healers and dps".
Don't expect your experiences with those games to be of much value for judging of how GW2 will work. The whole combat system is also hugely different... and relies much more on actual player input...  instead of using character "stats" as a crutch, like those older games.


Your assessment is still true of course... people being stupid, there will still be some people who insist that you "have to have class x y and z" in a group...  call them the GW2 noobs who do not know better yet.

[pecenipicek]

i know that i will be minion mastering my way to the top in GW2, same as i did in GW1...

[QuantumDelta]

People will still feel this way when they want to make solid progress. There will still be classes, or abilities that are felt to be almost required, even if the bar is lowered, even if you could 'do it without them'.

Their stated goal is that classes vary in style... but, depending on their build, can all perform the same functions - just in very different ways.


That is pretty much the opposite of games that follow the "holy trinity model" (i.e. almost all other games), which specifically splits up classes into "tanks, healers and dps".
Don't expect your experiences with those games to be of much value for judging of how GW2 will work. The whole combat system is also hugely different... and relies much more on actual player input...  instead of using character "stats" as a crutch, like those older games.

You'd actually be surprised to know then, I imagine, that both EQ2 and WoW said multiple times at several stages of the games lifespans almost exactly your first sentence ;x

[Spoon]

And what are you trying to say with that exactly?

[QuantumDelta]

"Holy trinity" or not, all games make that claim :x
WoW has like ... what? 33 viable talent trees now, each with different potential specs within now?
EQ and similar games go way beyond that.
You will find however that only very few of those specs are 'truly' viable if you want to be 'world competitive'. No matter what a game claims in it's diversity there will always be a most optimum set up.
So, while I applaud GW2 for trying to do something ....well can't even say new, because other games have done it, but making a point of saying it's different. They are more than likely going to end up with the same deal as every other MMO.
Certain stats will be better than others, certain talents will be better than others, certain classes will be better than others.
Those who want to push the game as hard as they can as fast as they can will do a lot of math to work out which those are, and use them exclusively, and anyone who uses anything else will be 'lesser players' or 'casuals' or 'noobs'.

I'm not saying GW2 is going to be bad, I'm not even saying it's going to be exactly the same as every other MMO, I'm just saying, ya know, based on the track record, even for games that have desperately tried not to become this, it will be like this, in some way shape or form.
So, try not to buy into the marketing.

[pecenipicek]

have you played GW1 or tried the GW2 beta? if not, then stop "debating" as you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

[QuantumDelta]

Yes.
Yes.
You didn't do much PvP I guess?

[pecenipicek]

Yes.
Yes.
You didn't do much PvP I guess?

PvP sucks? In the 5 years i've been playing GW1 i havent had any joy in it. Pretty much anything else was tons more fun.


also, let us not mention the lovely cluster**** that is AB, especially when its AB weekend.


the only good thing about PvP in GW1 was that it was totally and utterly optional, you werent forced into it.

[QuantumDelta]

Well, the point is mostly that in GW1 that's more or less the only 'hard' stuff.. where you need to minmax.. I don't really know what GW2 will have planned for 'end game' but from the things they've said it'll be a bit more interesting than GW1, which will probably mean a bit more of a hardcore pve community, which, will probably mean harder content, which will probably mean 'optimum' characters.

I don't necessarily believe a game should be either side of that equation but it is pretty zero sum, either the stuff is easy and it doesn't matter what gear or spec or class you are, or the content is hard, and there will always be a 'best' way to go about it.
If you're casual, then who cares?

[Spoon]

This just in: Nobody here cares.
Nobody is planning on making this game into a career I dont think. So trying to argue what the 'hardcore' and 'competitive' players might or might not do, or might or might not like seems like an futility. Since you are probably the only one here who has this endless urge to take every game SUPER SERIOUS. 

[pecenipicek]

This just in: Nobody here cares.
Nobody is planning on making this game into a career I dont think. So trying to argue what the 'hardcore' and 'competitive' players might or might not do, or might or might not like seems like an futility. Since you are probably the only one here who has this endless urge to take every game SUPER SERIOUS. 

This. A thousand times this.

[QuantumDelta]

In most games the 'hardcore gamers' are followed, like sheep, by the noobs (read; not casuals).
*shrugs* I doubt I'll go hardcore in for GW2 unless the PvP is /amazing/ this time around

[SpardaSon21]

I just had fun shooting **** with Spoon in the last beta as a couple of Charr gunslingers, so I'll care less about min-maxing and more about whatever lets me have the most fun.

[Fury]

Exactly. The whole point of playing games is to have fun. Since there's no subscription fees, you feel less burdened by having to play to get your money's worth. Screw hardcore and competitive playing.

[Mikes]

People will still feel this way when they want to make solid progress. There will still be classes, or abilities that are felt to be almost required, even if the bar is lowered, even if you could 'do it without them'.

Their stated goal is that classes vary in style... but, depending on their build, can all perform the same functions - just in very different ways.


That is pretty much the opposite of games that follow the "holy trinity model" (i.e. almost all other games), which specifically splits up classes into "tanks, healers and dps".
Don't expect your experiences with those games to be of much value for judging of how GW2 will work. The whole combat system is also hugely different... and relies much more on actual player input...  instead of using character "stats" as a crutch, like those older games.

You'd actually be surprised to know then, I imagine, that both EQ2 and WoW said multiple times at several stages of the games lifespans almost exactly your first sentence ;x

Except that this is simple false. EQ and WoW very clearly ask for tanks, healers and dps in groups. They only offer you different ways of becoming healer, tank or DPS.... but you are always more or less forced to specialize.

Guildwars 2 in theory and practice allows every single class to be customized into any role you see fit, makes it effective not to overspecialize but instead perform multiple roles within a single build, and also emphasizes player skill to an extend that really stands out in the usually stat driven MMORPG genre.

If you haven't tried it... you should. Arena Net has been rather radically different from the "mainstream MMO crowd" for over 7 years now - and they are certainly living up to that with GW2 as well.

Compared to what makes this game innovative - the way classes are handled are frankly only a minor contribution though... to me ... the biggest difference... is that this is actually pretty much the first MMORPG that is build from the ground up to *promote* player cooperation in PvE. That... and eliminating mandatory grind, which I kind of consider a requirement for my games these days.
If you know the genre... and think about these two parts long and hard... you will begin to realize just how much of a big deal that is.

Arena Net isn't just shaking the foundations of the genre (i.e. forced grind, player competition for loot/kills, etc.) ... they completely turned them upside down.
In previous MMORPGs I always felt that our group of people managed to have fun together... despite the underlaying gameplay. Finally... we can scratch that last part.

[ShivanSpS]

It still seems worse than Rift Class and Souls model, that is pretty much excellent compared to the lame wow fixed class/talent model... well Rift is a wow copy, but it fixed most of the bad things on it (but not all).
Also no world pvp on GW2 is very bad too.

[Fury]

I played Rift for a while and it was still about holy trinity system and not too big a departure from WoW now that it too allows switching between multiple specs, so I don't really see where you're coming from. GW2 has world vs world pvp as well as structure pvp. Some time after release there will be guild vs guild pvp too.