@DragonRift @Sky_Stifler For my part, I understand that WoW is a good game and that people pay because they enjoy it. I just get irked when folks slag GW2 and not realize that this subscription free model is really good for consumers (I know that some can afford 15$/month) and, taking into personal tastes, I do really think that GW2 *cannot* be called a "bad" game where the developer did not put effort, thought and polish into their work, where the developer rushed the game out before it was ready in the name of profits, advocate a pay-to-win mentality, etc, etc.

A huge reason why I support GW2 over WoW is that ArenaNet WANTS to promote a business model with no subscription fees. I don't see why anyone would want to pay 15$/month to play over having no fees at all. Blizzard is milking all its players and many seem to like it.

ArenaNet WANTS to deliver a high quality product and has invested 5 years in making it so. None of this annual business cycle like other mega-grossing franchises such as CoD. Sort of like CD Projekt Red (Witcher 1 & 2) who want to provide DLC-like content for free.

I don't see why gamers wouldn't be in favour of such philosophies and instead feel the need to defend companies that charge them a steady stream of money beyond the original purchase price to continue to play.

@grail63 It's easy to reiterate a trend and say it will happen again. If you've played the game for a decent amount of time and that's how you feel then that's fine, but if you haven't played then what you wrote doesn't mean a whole lot.

@poster012 I think with the lack of healer/dps/tank roles has definitely changed a lot. Sure, some professions can perform one role better than another, but I don't think you will see dedicated roles as in most other MMOs.

It's an amazing game, and I enjoy it a lot precisely because it's different from the traditional MMOs. Events make things seem so much more fluid than NPC quest givers. I'm also glad that you don't need a skill and item bar that has 30 slots - though more skills like in GW1 would be nice and hopefully forthcoming! And I'm really hoping that power lvling and serious grinding have minimal impact on the game.

There aren't many games out there where you can tell the developers really like what they were creating, and I think GW2 is one of them. They definitely did not follow the conventional WoW path, and the world they created is amazing. Definitely worth the purchase - esp. since there is no monthly subscription fee. So much content. I'd say The Witcher 2 developers is another studio that really puts their heart into their games. And BioWare (more so in the past).

Photorealistic graphics needed to portray emotions? Heck, many real life actors out there fail at portraying emotions and complex feelings.

In any case, does that mean that animated characters aren't effective at portraying emotions? I would wholeheartedly disagree. In fact, because traditional animation involves extracting the essential facial or corporal features associated with given emotions, it is much clearer and usually more effective. And yet, skilled animators can also communicate the most subtle of things.

The more complex a medium becomes, the harder it is to portray even simple emotions without it looking bizarre.

@cephas90 Yeah, I hope so as well. I loved the original GW and played it for all 7 years since it was released.

I hope that they boost melee dmg to offset the extra damage that melee chars will obviously have to take (I don't think the best player in the world could "kite" auto-attack damage or all AOE damage), i.e., so that they can kill faster. Or I hope that they get more stamina for things like dodging and rolling. In some YouTube vids, I've watched, good players can kite to good effect IF they have a partner to pull aggro away from them after dodging. Solo-ing is another matter though. I often saw lower lvl ranged characters/spellcasters owning mobs that were a higher level than themselves, but melee warriors cannot do the same (unless using only bow and rifle).

@Franko_3 I'm not sure how melee will be used in the game, to be honest. Sure, people will say that *good* players can kite and dodge... except that, by virtue of having to be within melee range, it's MUCH more difficult to do... especially when you don't have a class advantage of having that much more armor or health or endurance to dodge and roll than other classes that are comparable in every regard and are just as mobile as you... except they can target you at range and keep moving and jumping around at the same time.

This is what armored knights must have felt when English longbowmen came into play and just shot them and their horses down as they were charging, lol.

@AryanRO I'm not "complaining" about taking dmg, don't get me wrong. I'm saying that the developers in designing the classes were trying to get rid of the "holy trinity" of tank, dps and healer. Well, what I've found is that melee characters still take the brunt of the damage unlike casters, BUT because each class is supposed to be more self-sustaining, now the warrior doesn't really have a significant armor or health advantage over other classes as everyone progresses in very similar fashion, i.e., a warrior has comparable survivability to casters, but are in close to the mobs and so take much more dmg because you can't avoid it as easily or maintain any distance. Also, the warrior cannot roll or dodge any more than any other class except the warrior needs to be in close so if he's trying to solo something he will probably take more damage than someone who can roll just as much, but can maintain a good distance away and use spells or skills.