GW: Booooring

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

(sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so bored
in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).

Jonah Falcon
19 answers Last reply
More about booooring
  1. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    Jonah Falcon <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >(sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so bored
    >in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).

    It's a shame you couldn't start playing the day you bought
    it. You missed all the good stuff.

    Pete
  2. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    Peter Meilinger wrote:
    > Jonah Falcon <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >> (sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been
    >> so bored in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >
    > It's a shame you couldn't start playing the day you bought
    > it. You missed all the good stuff.
    >
    > Pete

    Ouch.

    --
    chainbreaker
  3. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    "Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    news:d62n3p$38m$1@news3.bu.edu...
    > Jonah Falcon <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >>(sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so
    >>bored
    >>in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >
    > It's a shame you couldn't start playing the day you bought
    > it. You missed all the good stuff.
    >
    > Pete
    >

    muahahahaha!
  4. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    On 13 May 2005 17:11:21 GMT, Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote:

    >Jonah Falcon <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >>(sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so bored
    >>in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >
    >It's a shame you couldn't start playing the day you bought
    >it. You missed all the good stuff.

    ROFL That's it, rub it in.
  5. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    "Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    news:d62n3p$38m$1@news3.bu.edu...
    > Jonah Falcon <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >>(sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so
    >>bored
    >>in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >
    > It's a shame you couldn't start playing the day you bought
    > it. You missed all the good stuff.

    I don't get it.
  6. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    "Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
    news:c_4he.137$w21.29@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
    > (sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so
    > bored in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >
    > Jonah Falcon


    well it lasted longer than most games do with you
  7. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    Me either...
    "ppppp" <oooo@iiiii.cog> wrote in message
    news:%Lphe.13054$sV7.10156@fe02.lga...
    >
    > "Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    > news:d62n3p$38m$1@news3.bu.edu...
    >> Jonah Falcon <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >>>(sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so
    >>>bored
    >>>in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >>
    >> It's a shame you couldn't start playing the day you bought
    >> it. You missed all the good stuff.
    >
    > I don't get it.
    >
  8. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    "Joiner" <joiner@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:MJlhe.1261$Yb5.101@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    > "Jonah Falcon" <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote in message
    > news:c_4he.137$w21.29@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
    >> (sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so
    >> bored in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >>
    >> Jonah Falcon
    >
    >
    > well it lasted longer than most games do with you

    Er, I'm still playing the original Deus Ex, Civ III, HoMM4, UT 2004 etc.
    Want to try again?

    Jonah Falcon
  9. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    On Sat, 14 May 2005 11:34:03 -0500, "ppppp" <oooo@iiiii.cog> wrote:

    >
    >"Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    >news:d62n3p$38m$1@news3.bu.edu...
    >> Jonah Falcon <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >>>(sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so
    >>>bored
    >>>in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >>
    >> It's a shame you couldn't start playing the day you bought
    >> it. You missed all the good stuff.
    >
    >I don't get it.

    He bought the game earlier from a "dodgy" retailer, got it home, realised he
    couldn't play because they hadn't opened the servers to the public, then came
    here bitching about it even though their website stated clearly what the
    release date was. All kind of ridiculous really.
  10. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    I gotta agree. It started out being all shiny and new but 2 weeks
    later its the same thing over and over. Go here kill these monsters
    return for reward. PvP is a fun distraction for like an hour, but then
    that gets old too. If you don't mind fighting the same mobs over and
    over and over and occassionally getting some decent loot drops, its
    right up ur alley. Nice D2 replacement.

    I find myself quiting and playing Dungeon Lords. Now thats sad.
    Serious drought for non MMOrpgs making me hallucinate decent games.
  11. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    Mean_Chlorine wrote:

    > It's a cooperative morrowind with optional consensual pvp. What did
    > you expect.
    > I don't have much experience with mmorpgs, it's pretty much limited
    to
    > a little A Tale In The Desert and the first 6 levels of Everquest 2,
    > but for what little it's worth the quests in GW are better and more
    > varied than EQ2 at least. Actually I'd say they're better and more
    > varied than Morrowinds too - I don't recall ever having to heard pigs
    > in Morrowind, for instance, or use artillery, HL style, against mobs.
    > Plus the world is much, much, bigger and more varied than Morrowinds
    -
    > although I guess many only do the missions to get to lvl 20 and the
    > pvp ladder as fast as possible.
    >

    Funny, I would have thought you never played a MMORPG if you think GW
    is one. The world is huge, but still on rails, hardly explorable. The
    maze of trails all lead to the next story arch. Morrowind was pretty
    open-ended, your level 1 character could walk over just about the whole
    map. What time is it in GW? Oh thats right, time doesn't matter.
    Morrowind had in-game time that other than giving you day/night cycles
    (helps with that immersion thing you know) some quests required you to
    be somewhere at a certain time and the NPCs played along too. Gothic
    did this best tho, NPCs actually went about daily chores. If you
    recall Morrowind did something revolutionary, you actual got better at
    skills by using them. In GW you can only improve skills when you
    level. So how is GW a Morrowind clone? I don't even know how
    Morrowind came up. It was a good game, with flaws, but still good. GW
    is a good game too, its got its own flaws, but still good.

    > >right up ur alley. Nice D2 replacement.
    >
    > D2? I don't see _anything_ resembling D2 about GW.
    > You sure you're not disappointed because you were expecting D2 and
    got
    > a Morrowind clone?
    >

    Did i say it was D2 clone? For those people who are still playing D2,
    they might want to try GW because it is a natural progression of the
    action/rpg/battle.net style of gaming. That's logical isn't? Combat
    with waves of continuously respawning meaningless mobs, special "boss"
    mobs that don't really mean anything, random loot drops that sometimes
    are "unidentified" items with blue or purple lettering. All that
    grinding for the next level. Come on. So you're gonna recommend GW to
    someone that liked Morrowind? Huh? I can see recommmending Gothic,
    but GW? Other than the huge empty world (GW isn't that empty, just go
    back to a town and all the mobs come back). Maybe my memory is bad, I
    haven't played MW in two or three years.

    > >I find myself quiting and playing Dungeon Lords. Now thats sad.
    >
    > Perhaps it says something about what kind of rpg's you like.

    Perhaps you have a problem with reading for comprehension. Where in
    that statement did I say I liked DL? The very next line I said the
    shortage of non-MMORPGs is making me imagine some games are decent. Is
    that too complex of a statement for you to comprehend?
  12. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    Thusly "EMan" <supreme.evolutionary@gmail.com> Spake Unto All:

    >
    >I gotta agree. It started out being all shiny and new but 2 weeks
    >later its the same thing over and over. Go here kill these monsters
    >return for reward.

    It's a cooperative morrowind with optional consensual pvp. What did
    you expect.
    I don't have much experience with mmorpgs, it's pretty much limited to
    a little A Tale In The Desert and the first 6 levels of Everquest 2,
    but for what little it's worth the quests in GW are better and more
    varied than EQ2 at least. Actually I'd say they're better and more
    varied than Morrowinds too - I don't recall ever having to heard pigs
    in Morrowind, for instance, or use artillery, HL style, against mobs.
    Plus the world is much, much, bigger and more varied than Morrowinds -
    although I guess many only do the missions to get to lvl 20 and the
    pvp ladder as fast as possible.

    >right up ur alley. Nice D2 replacement.

    D2? I don't see _anything_ resembling D2 about GW.
    You sure you're not disappointed because you were expecting D2 and got
    a Morrowind clone?

    >I find myself quiting and playing Dungeon Lords. Now thats sad.

    Perhaps it says something about what kind of rpg's you like.


    --
    A True Hero: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/03/magazine/03ALI.html
  13. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    Thusly "EMan" <supreme.evolutionary@gmail.com> Spake Unto All:

    >> It's a cooperative morrowind with optional consensual pvp. What did
    >> you expect.
    >> I don't have much experience with mmorpgs, it's pretty much limited
    >to
    >> a little A Tale In The Desert and the first 6 levels of Everquest 2,
    >> but for what little it's worth the quests in GW are better and more
    >> varied than EQ2 at least. Actually I'd say they're better and more
    >> varied than Morrowinds too - I don't recall ever having to heard pigs
    >> in Morrowind, for instance, or use artillery, HL style, against mobs.
    >> Plus the world is much, much, bigger and more varied than Morrowinds
    >-
    >> although I guess many only do the missions to get to lvl 20 and the
    >> pvp ladder as fast as possible.
    >>
    >
    >Funny, I would have thought you never played a MMORPG if you think GW
    >is one. The world is huge, but still on rails, hardly explorable. The
    >maze of trails all lead to the next story arch.

    Actually no, they don't. I thought maybe you hadn't done any exploring
    and only followed the quests - try walking out in to the world, and
    you'll find that there are huge swaths you've not been to. Most of the
    gray areas on your map between the mission corridors are explorable.
    The maze of trails thing gets annoying, though. I suppose it's there
    to force you to take on the mobs - in the open areas it's easy to
    bypass mobs - but that should really be the players decision, and it's
    cheesy to have so many guarded choke-points.

    >Morrowind was pretty
    >open-ended, your level 1 character could walk over just about the whole
    >map.

    Although you'd get your ass handed to you by the higher-level monsters
    outside the noob area unless you flew.

    You can't go exploring the whole map until the tutorial ends in GW,
    and even after that you have to complete missions to open up new
    sections of the map. On the other hand, exploring just the pre-searing
    tutorial world takes a few days of gametime too, as that is comparable
    in size to Morrowind.

    >What time is it in GW? Oh thats right, time doesn't matter.

    True. Not relevant, as time matters in very few rpgs thank god, but
    true.

    >Morrowind had in-game time that other than giving you day/night cycles
    >(helps with that immersion thing you know) some quests required you to
    >be somewhere at a certain time and the NPCs played along too.

    Apart from a handful of 'meet me here again in three days time at
    dawn' quests, time in morrowind didn't matter either. It was just a
    way to cram in more combat, as the probability of random encounters
    rose dramatically during the night, but shops, npc's etc were all
    around just as through the day. And the "immersion enhancing" 'meet me
    at dawn' quests just meant you put your pc to sleep with his in-built
    alarm bell set to 6. The only really good thing about Morrowinds
    day/night cycle was the sky effects. Morrowinds sky is still unbeaten.

    > Gothic
    >did this best tho, NPCs actually went about daily chores.

    The Gothics did it best, yes. Irrelevant but true.

    >If you
    >recall Morrowind did something revolutionary, you actual got better at
    >skills by using them. In GW you can only improve skills when you
    >level. So how is GW a Morrowind clone?

    Because it's a pretty, open, gameworld, highly explorable and with
    tons of background material but with hardly any story and highly
    forgettable doorpost npc's. Combat is click on enemy, gameplay is
    similar although the default view is buttcam instead of first person,
    and it's true you don't have to bunnyhop everywhere to improve
    dexterity.

    >I don't even know how Morrowind came up.

    Because it looks and feels a lot more like morrowind than d2. When
    Morrowind was new, people kept saying it was like a one-person MMORPG;
    well, in my opinion GW is that MMORPG.

    >Did i say it was D2 clone? For those people who are still playing D2,
    >they might want to try GW because it is a natural progression of the
    >action/rpg/battle.net style of gaming. That's logical isn't? Combat
    >with waves of continuously respawning meaningless mobs, special "boss"
    >mobs that don't really mean anything, random loot drops that sometimes
    >are "unidentified" items with blue or purple lettering.

    You're describing Dung Lords. There are no waves of continuously
    respawning meaningless mobs in GW - you clear the map it stays cleared
    until you leave it. Maps are reset when you leave them, which is
    annoying but necessary as its a multi-player game (personally I wish
    they could've kept track of what you'd done or not, so the map was
    only reset if you had a new player with you).

    >All that
    >grinding for the next level.

    ? Are you talking about D2 or GW? I've not experienced much "grinding
    for the next level" in GW, whereas in D2 loot & level was the whole
    point. Then again I've explored the whole map, not just run missions,
    so I'm generally over-levelled when I do the missions.

    >So you're gonna recommend GW to
    >someone that liked Morrowind? Huh? I can see recommmending Gothic,
    >but GW?

    The Gothics are far better games than either GW or MW (or D2 for that
    matter), but someone who liked MW for the graphics, world or gameplay
    and not for the ability to decorate a house, is likely to like GW. By
    contrast, someone who liked D2 for the gameplay, world or graphics
    wont find more of the same in GW.

    >> >I find myself quiting and playing Dungeon Lords. Now thats sad.
    >>
    >> Perhaps it says something about what kind of rpg's you like.
    >
    >Perhaps you have a problem with reading for comprehension. Where in
    >that statement did I say I liked DL? The very next line I said the
    >shortage of non-MMORPGs is making me imagine some games are decent. Is
    >that too complex of a statement for you to comprehend?

    Hey, if you want to play Dung Lords, the current world heavyweight
    champion of the title 'worstest rpg evar', be my guest.

    My point was that if you like action RPG's, like Dungeon Lords is,
    like Dungeon Siege and D2 was, then GW may not be for you.

    IMO GW is an enormously big and fairly decent but not great rpg with
    outstanding graphics. IMO it has nothing in common with D2, and anyone
    looking for a D3 will be badly disappointed, while someone looking for
    a MW2 is likely to get a few weeks enjoyment out of it. It's nowhere
    near as good as Planescape Torment or the Gothics, but it beats pretty
    much all other rpg's released the last two years.
    Which admittedly isn't saying all that much, WoW fanbois
    notwithstanding.


    --
    A True Hero: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/03/magazine/03ALI.html
  14. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    "EMan" <supreme.evolutionary@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
    entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
    say:
    <snip>
    >If you
    >recall Morrowind did something revolutionary, you actual got better at
    >skills by using them.

    Minor quibble, but it wasn't revolutionary by the time Morrowind came
    out. Bethesda used exactly the same system in the previous two chapters
    of the Elder Scrolls.

    It's one of the things I like about the series, that you get better at
    things you 're actually practicing, not things totally unrelated that
    you've decided you want.

    Xocyll
    --
    I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
    a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
    Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
    FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
  15. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    On Mon, 16 May 2005 12:13:18 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> wrote:

    >"EMan" <supreme.evolutionary@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
    >entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
    >say:
    ><snip>
    >>If you
    >>recall Morrowind did something revolutionary, you actual got better at
    >>skills by using them.
    >
    >Minor quibble, but it wasn't revolutionary by the time Morrowind came
    >out. Bethesda used exactly the same system in the previous two chapters
    >of the Elder Scrolls.
    >
    >It's one of the things I like about the series, that you get better at
    >things you 're actually practicing, not things totally unrelated that
    >you've decided you want.

    Yeah, I mean it never makes sense to me that just because I killed a bunch of
    rats that I am now better at reading maps. The Elder Scrolls games are the
    only ones I can think of off the top of my head that a levelling system that
    made any sense.
  16. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    "ppppp" <oooo@iiiii.cog> wrote in news:%Lphe.13054$sV7.10156@fe02.lga:

    >
    > "Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    > news:d62n3p$38m$1@news3.bu.edu...
    >> Jonah Falcon <jonahnynla@mindspring.com> wrote:
    >>>(sigh) I tried my best. I did, really. But frankly, I've never been so
    >>>bored
    >>>in ANY game like this. Sorry, even MP is boring (to me).
    >>
    >> It's a shame you couldn't start playing the day you bought
    >> it. You missed all the good stuff.
    >
    > I don't get it.

    See the thread he started here:
    http://groups-
    beta.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg/browse_thread/thread/f8f3de
    a0f828c1cf/304c957cbc30ba35#304c957cbc30ba35

    or

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?I2BF3551B


    --
    Marcel
    http://mudbunny.blogspot.com/
  17. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    Per Abrahamsen wrote:

    > How far did you get? Guild Wars is really three games, a mmorpg-like
    > game with exploration and quests, a missions based game, and PvP.
    The
    > mmorpg-like game is all you see in the tutorial part.
    >
    > The mission based game isn't "kill the same monsters over and over".
    > It is a progressive storyline, like you know from single-player
    games.
    > Most of the missions involve getting from point A to point B alive.
    >
    > Nor is the exploration if you actually explore, rather than try to
    > optimize loot. The quests provide a nice backstory for missions, but
    > are rather boring in themselves.
    >
    > Optimizing loot is somewhat pointless, as the game isn't really based
    > on items but on skill, or at least, skills.

    I'm a level 15 Mo/Me just making it out to Lion's Arch. I've spent
    alot of time exploring Ascalon, Regent Valley, Kryta, Potmark Flats,
    the icy areas and all that. I've already restarted the game with a
    W/Necro to try out other skills and new gameplay. There is some
    breathtaking scenery in the game, but unfortnately most of it you can't
    go explore. There's alot of talk about "exploring" in GW. But the
    world (as big as it is) is just 100 loosely joined areas that can only
    be travelled to through portals. Most times there are only 2 portals
    in any area. Knowing this kinda ruins exploration for me. In a
    seamless rpg world there are paths off the trail between the cities
    where you don't know what you'll find. In GW you know the road is
    going to end in an outpost or a portal to the next area.

    The missions are fun and do require some thinking to beat in some cases
    and the bonus missions are usually tough to find and tough to beat. I
    haven't done a mission yet that I couldn't beat with henchmen. They
    can be more fun with real players, I was up 10pm to 7am doing missions
    with a good group, but those are hard to find. Also why make the
    missions replayable? You can do misssions 100 times if you like and
    you get the same cut scenes as if its happening the first time.

    If you play PvP optimizing loot is somewhat important as you surely
    will be competing against other players that have good eq. The whole
    based on skill idea is nice and carries to an extent. But there is
    some nice gear out there that people are farming areas for hours to
    get. I'm collecting my fair share of good stuff just playing through
    the game. But those serious about PvP take it to new levels. I'm
    still playing to finish the game as i'm probably not even 50% through
    it, but I don't expect any huge surprises.
  18. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    "EMan" <supreme.evolutionary@gmail.com> writes:

    > I gotta agree. It started out being all shiny and new but 2 weeks
    > later its the same thing over and over. Go here kill these monsters
    > return for reward. PvP is a fun distraction for like an hour, but then
    > that gets old too. If you don't mind fighting the same mobs over and
    > over and over and occassionally getting some decent loot drops, its
    > right up ur alley. Nice D2 replacement.

    How far did you get? Guild Wars is really three games, a mmorpg-like
    game with exploration and quests, a missions based game, and PvP. The
    mmorpg-like game is all you see in the tutorial part.

    The mission based game isn't "kill the same monsters over and over".
    It is a progressive storyline, like you know from single-player games.
    Most of the missions involve getting from point A to point B alive.

    Nor is the exploration if you actually explore, rather than try to
    optimize loot. The quests provide a nice backstory for missions, but
    are rather boring in themselves.

    Optimizing loot is somewhat pointless, as the game isn't really based
    on items but on skill, or at least, skills.
  19. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

    Memnoch <memnoch@nospampleaseimbritish.ntlworld.com> looked up from
    reading the entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good,
    the signs say:

    >On Mon, 16 May 2005 12:13:18 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> wrote:
    >
    >>"EMan" <supreme.evolutionary@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
    >>entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
    >>say:
    >><snip>
    >>>If you
    >>>recall Morrowind did something revolutionary, you actual got better at
    >>>skills by using them.
    >>
    >>Minor quibble, but it wasn't revolutionary by the time Morrowind came
    >>out. Bethesda used exactly the same system in the previous two chapters
    >>of the Elder Scrolls.
    >>
    >>It's one of the things I like about the series, that you get better at
    >>things you 're actually practicing, not things totally unrelated that
    >>you've decided you want.
    >
    >Yeah, I mean it never makes sense to me that just because I killed a bunch of
    >rats that I am now better at reading maps. The Elder Scrolls games are the
    >only ones I can think of off the top of my head that a levelling system that
    >made any sense.

    The only other ones that spring to mind are Dungeon Siege with its
    nature mage/combat mage/ranged/melee system and, if I remember
    correctly, Betrayal at Krondor.

    Generic "level up and pick whatever unrelated skill you want" systems
    feel so very WRONG after playing one that uses real skill development
    linked to actual skill usage.

    Xocyll
    --
    I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
    a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
    Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
    FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Ask a new question

Read More

PC gaming Games IBM Video Games