Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Guild Wars 2 Worth it?

Tags:
  • PC gaming
  • World Of Warcraft
  • Skyrim
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
September 10, 2012 11:16:21 PM

I want guild wars 2, but I have skyrim, and I have played WoW, but i get bored of the repetitiveness, I do like the choice of WoW though, I love strategic games and league of legends, do you think I could get into gw2, and love it? or do you think I will get bored of it?

More about : guild wars worth

September 10, 2012 11:30:51 PM

If you don't like repetitiveness, GW2 will not be your cup of tea. The pvp is largely inconsequential and spammy, and the leveling gets EXTREMELY repetitive. After your 500th random event of kill x skritts collect x bottles etc, you wonder if you're not actually playing WoW.
m
0
l

Best solution

a b Ý World of Warcraft
September 12, 2012 6:09:53 PM

Well, casualcolors, with an outlook like that I'd say that OP won't like any MMO that is out there, because in the end all of them can be said to be repetitive. After all you get to fight monsters over and over, but isn't that the basic mechanic behind the RPG?

Personally, I haven't found GW2 to be repetitive, there's a good variety of monsters that you encounter while you traverse the land and encounter events (yes events, there's no quests, aside from the personal story line). Plus various tasks that these events give you differ quite a bit and sometimes there's quite fun ones - like you get morphed into a panther and to complete the event you need to run around and play with panther cubs or hunt birds that are hiding in bushes.

There are very few quests that are actually about specific number of this or that (what casualcolors describes). Most of the events are centered around some goal, but can be reached by many players contributing to the same thing. So for instance there's rampaging minotaurs running through the fields and you're asked to eliminate them. There's a total counter in % that tells you how many are remaining, but the point is that you get credit for participation whether you killed 1 or you killed 100. Basically as long as you've contributed and the end goal is reached, there's no specific number that is dangling in front of you.

I do agree that like 90%-95% of the game content focuses around doing battle with your character, but on the other hand if you're looking for different content rather than battling in this type of game you're probably looking in the wrong genre. I mean repetitiveness can be attributed to the fact that you have to use your battle skills or shoot your bow over and over and over. Yeah well, that's kinda how the game works, you cannot exactly make an RPG without that, has nothing to do with WoW for that matter.
Share
Related resources
September 12, 2012 7:40:21 PM

AntiZig said:
Well, casualcolors, with an outlook like that I'd say that OP won't like any MMO that is out there, because in the end all of them can be said to be repetitive. After all you get to fight monsters over and over, but isn't that the basic mechanic behind the RPG?

Personally, I haven't found GW2 to be repetitive, there's a good variety of monsters that you encounter while you traverse the land and encounter events (yes events, there's no quests, aside from the personal story line). Plus various tasks that these events give you differ quite a bit and sometimes there's quite fun ones - like you get morphed into a panther and to complete the event you need to run around and play with panther cubs or hunt birds that are hiding in bushes.

There are very few quests that are actually about specific number of this or that (what casualcolors describes). Most of the events are centered around some goal, but can be reached by many players contributing to the same thing. So for instance there's rampaging minotaurs running through the fields and you're asked to eliminate them. There's a total counter in % that tells you how many are remaining, but the point is that you get credit for participation whether you killed 1 or you killed 100. Basically as long as you've contributed and the end goal is reached, there's no specific number that is dangling in front of you.

I do agree that like 90%-95% of the game content focuses around doing battle with your character, but on the other hand if you're looking for different content rather than battling in this type of game you're probably looking in the wrong genre. I mean repetitiveness can be attributed to the fact that you have to use your battle skills or shoot your bow over and over and over. Yeah well, that's kinda how the game works, you cannot exactly make an RPG without that, has nothing to do with WoW for that matter.


Every event is the same as "Kill Hogger" wrapped in Tera's Nexus system (which was not a success in Tera either). Whether you want to call them events or quests or quest events, it's all the same. Perform X task for experience. And you can cheese gold-level contribution with very little actual effort.

GW2 is definitely a pvp-focused game so all of that is not its biggest downfall, but its spammy low-skill ceiling combat system IS its biggest downfall. It doesn't have the basis for any metagame depth outside of the combo system, which itself is fairly simplistic. There are no shared diminishing returns and the number of abilities that any one person can bring into a fight is relatively sparse compared to almost any other MMO. Really GW2 feels like it perhaps should have been called World of DoTAcraft imo.

And to be honest, almost every single Heart in the world is exactly a "kill specific number of this or that". Like 95% of them to be precise.
m
0
l
a b Ý World of Warcraft
September 12, 2012 9:32:38 PM

casualcolors said:
World of DoTAcraft
:lol:  I kinda like that idea.

I think I have to agree that the abilities don't see to present as much of an impact. My comparison goes with an mmo much older than WoW, but Ragnarok Online had pretty defined roles for each class and with a specific build you could make a big difference. I remember there were dungeons or bosses that people hunted that would necessitate like 9 people party, with dps being 1 specific class with a specific build and like 3 people to support that guy so he wouldn't die in 1 sec. Well, point is, you casted 1 skill it made a difference - safety wall - next 7 physical attacks from any source will miss. Depending on the attack speed of the Boss that could be 1-7 seconds of safe time.

There are some similar skills in GW2, like guardian shield bubble that pushes enemies away and prevents any projectile attacks for 2-3 secs. Effectively it's a 2-3 sec AOE invul. Sadly, there's very few skills like that, making significant skills that matter very few indeed.

m
0
l
a b Ý World of Warcraft
September 12, 2012 11:30:55 PM

GW 1 felt similar in regards to skills. Most skills were powerful, but either they were very restricted as to what it targeted or protected you from, or they required a specific action taken on you, for you to counter it.

I personally didn't like it much, but many people loved it. I haven't played GW2 yet, but it does sound like it still has that same feel with skills as GW1 had.
m
0
l
a b Ý World of Warcraft
September 13, 2012 9:22:13 PM

Hmm, well as it is right now. There's a lot of skills that like do damage and also add some form of condition:

ie ranger shortbow skills:
1 - normal attack that adds bleeding if you're attacking from the back
2 - shoots a volley of arrows in front of you in a spreading horizontal pattern that inflict poison
3 - shoots and enemy inducing cripple, while at the same time jumping back and giving you haste for 2 sec
4 - cripples the enemy for 5 sec
5 - dazes the enemy for 2 sec

And so on, there's very little skills that actually do something that is radically different than the regular attack, but I suppose that is pertinent to that specific class. Mages have many different spells that look very different from a normal projectile staff attack.
m
0
l
September 19, 2012 11:58:20 PM

Best answer selected by siksniper1996.
m
0
l
!