Mar 15th 2012 12:52PM @Jef
Sub *AND* a cash shop?
I'm going to say that won't fly for long. If I'm subbing @ $15/mo, pretty much I better have access to EVERYTHING.
Funcom is going to run head-on into Arenanet - who's selling only a game, and then supporting it with a cash-shop. If GW2 is successful, it's going to murder these sorts of "we'll take your subscription but also make you pay for shinies" model completely.
Mar 15th 2012 12:45PM @tk421242 - sounds like you're trolling a private argument you had with someone?
It's clearly a sandbox game, which is a "world" in which you can pretty much build whatever you like. Full PVP drops has utterly nothing to do with it.
Would someone assert that Minecraft isn't a sandbox, seriously?
Re the OP, though: I've never really "gotten" Second Life. It had (when I tried it) hideous graphics, an absurdly clunky interface, clumsy controls, lag of staggering proportions, and pretty much wasn't fun beyond "look, I can fly" (which by itself got old for computer gamers what, in 1992?) or "look, I can build a giant penis!" (which apparently never grows old, right Spore?) Certainly, if that header screenshot is a measure, it's gotten much prettier, but as much as I personally LIKE sandbox worlds, I don't see the point of this one.
As far as the use of it as a storefront (or chatroom, like for Science Friday) that's like taking all the BAD bits of virtuality and real life and combining them - the awkwardness of geographical location, times the lag of server-based architecture, to the power of the resolution of your 15" LCD screen. I can't see the slightest advantage to 'going to a store in virtual space' that's even the slightest bit quicker/easier/more intuitive than just browsing to their website.
Hey, I'd love to live in the Snow Crash virtual space as much as anyone, but we're not there yet.
Mar 13th 2012 10:22AM @GW2waiting I just copied it from the article above....
Mar 13th 2012 9:26AM "...Digital Deluxe pre-purchase is only going to run you $79.99, and the Standard Edition will be $59.99 -- again, any three of those will secure you the Hero's Band, a place in beta events, and a three-day head start. Pre-ordering Guild Wars 2 from select retailers will reserve you a copy of the game at launch and entitle you to a one-day head start..."
OK so let me understand the plusses and minuses here:
- Digital download $80, the advantage is that you can d/l ASAP when available and never leave your house, and be sure to have it on release day. Hero's band, beta, 3 day headstart.
- Standard edition $60 - they ship to you? Hero's band, beta, 3 day headstart.
- 'select retailers' preorder $60, 1 day headstart.
I've found pre-orders to be sketchy at best, and often just gone to Gamestop the midnight of release to physically pick up the game. Often this means I've been playing before friends that pre-ordered even GET their copies (or manage to get the multi-gig game downloaded with the other million people also downloading...).
So what's the best option here? Standard pre-order seems the best option, no?
Mar 12th 2012 12:04PM Frankly, I'm finding this guild attrition thing awesome!
I have roughly 50 alts on each account, perhaps 10 on each end-game leveled. As I get my "please try WoW again" free week offers, I log in, jump around my alts, and it seems that at least one of them belongs to a guild that has totally evaporated, and due to no activity I'm offered GM status.
I kick any other toons on the account, and revel in my inheritance of (in at least one case) a completely full guildbank of loots, and several thousand gold.
Hee hee hee.
(Lest you think I'm just a complete ass, I did get an ingame mail from someone who did happen to pop on and notice I was the gm and that he'd been kicked. He'd needed some mats from the gb, so emptied the bank items into his mail, plus sent him all the guild gold along with a note that he won the guild lottery - about 3k I think.)
Mar 12th 2012 11:50AM Wait, since Battlecruiser 3000AD was "the last game I'll ever buy" does that mean that Dr. Smart is giving this one away? No?
Mar 12th 2012 10:06AM I think the playsystems have to synch, or the game is at risk of feeling utterly disjointed. If spell "X" is absolutely brutal in PvE, it doesn't make coherent sense to nerf it to the point of no utility in PvP.
I don't understand why level-based games persist in maintaining the level-imbalance for PVP. There's absolutely no need, because computers are far more capable of number juggling on the fly than humans.
Sure, in face to face rpg's, if your character (6th level) is fighting my character (3rd level), it's unreasonable to recalculate everything. But in a computer, you can "look like" (and more importantly, PERFORM like) 3rd level to me, while I look/perform like 6th level to you. And there's no limit to the variability - maybe my spell that does 100 damage to another 3rd level, is doubled to 200 when it hits you (because 6th lvl guys have 2x the hp). Your 300 point spell only does 150 to me. When your 12th lvl friend shows up, her 500 point heal on you only lands for 250 from the same mechanism.
There is no reason that PVP content cannot always be scaled. The advantage from leveling is that you gain more abilities, more procs, more alternatives, more cooldowns, more flexibility. But anyone who insists that higher levels should have an otherwise inherent advantage to lower levels is secretly just someone who wants to gank, not someone who wants to measure their ability against another human.
Mar 9th 2012 12:23PM You'd think there would be some fairly simple tech way to keep them sorted, presumably characters have unique identifier ID's within Blizz's systems anyway.
So you get a tell from Thunderspank (invisibly, his ID is 12345), and you /r, it auto-assumes you mean Thunderspank 12345.
Later you see a comment in /world from Thunderspank but her ID is 98765. You click on their name to open chat tell them to stop being a n00b, it might even offer you a selection between the two Thunderspanks you're aware of.
Mar 7th 2012 2:13PM WW2OL...nothing can come close to comparing the frequent massive (in the actual sense of the word) battles.
A half-dozen organized regiments (akin to guilds) organizing an attack on a well-defended town is insane.
You might typically have 30-50 people in tanks, another 20-30 planes above, and 100+ infantry on each side, all fighting house to house to clear the town.
I remember one battle for Antwerp in which our single regiment was responsible for armor support and we had an armor column of 200 tanks rolling into town, and there were at least 2 other organizations as large as ours coming from other directions. Say 1000+ people fighting at once.
Mar 1st 2012 4:01PM Except I'm not sure you're seeing my point.
I'm not talking about the 'trinity' - I'm talking about the paradigm of "the only way to win an instance is to kill the boss"...and "to get to the boss the only way is to kill all the guys in front of him/her".
Because as long as the goal is killing, whatever class kills best (alone or in concert) is the one everyone's going to play. Whatever skills best support that goal will be the favored skills. In fact, the 'trinity' only exists because that's the only model out there.
Imagine an instance in which not a single mob dies - or even, what if the instance run was a fail if ANY mob dies?
- an instance with an unkillable boss, requiring people to kite him back and forth around a room, grabbing and trading and dropping aggro before he reaches anyone, he has a one-shot kill on anyone he gets close to.
- an instance event in which waves of trivial but innumerable enemy mobs are swarming toward the perimeter, and your job is to keep the guards alive at all costs?
- an instance in which every mob flees at top speed when they've taken any damage, calling for help? Cause any damage to anyone, and you will be quickly overwhelmed.