Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GW: Booooring

Tags:
  • PC gaming
  • Games
  • IBM
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 8:55:36 PM

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

More about : booooring

Anonymous
May 13, 2005 9:11:21 PM

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
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 9:11:22 PM

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
Related resources
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 10:21:38 PM

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

"Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
news:D 62n3p$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!
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 11:55:21 PM

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.
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 3:34:03 PM

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

"Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
news:D 62n3p$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.
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 3:58:36 PM

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
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 4:44:28 PM

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:D 62n3p$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.
>
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 8:12:10 PM

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
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 9:34:24 PM

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:D 62n3p$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.
May 15, 2005 11:38:05 AM

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.
May 15, 2005 9:45:26 PM

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?
Anonymous
May 15, 2005 10:16:23 PM

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
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 2:13:58 PM

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
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 4:13:18 PM

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
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 9:51:13 PM

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.
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 9:57:01 PM

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:D 62n3p$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/
May 16, 2005 10:09:35 PM

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.
Anonymous
May 17, 2005 1:17:06 AM

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.
Anonymous
May 17, 2005 1:43:28 PM

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
!