[QUOTE="Multigun31"]

, because the game scales you up to 80 with equivalent gear and all skills unlocked. I

xWoW_Rougex

That makes me weep. God that ruined the game so much for me when you said that. I wonder if I am even gonna try out PvP at all now, man this makes me sad. This completely kills the rpg aspect and ruins any sense of accomplishment?

Why should I be level 50 when I can be 10 and still have the same benefits?
And is there anything worse than going back to being  a level 10 doing 80 damage when you 10 minutes earlier experienced thousand of damage? Is there any reason to improve one's gear or craft at all (except getting stronger pve wise)?

That really do make me sad because this is one mechanic I truly despise. The evil of all rpging. 

This is a short-sighted view of the game.  I can never understand how people think just because a game has a feature, that they are forced to use it.  The example here is you are complaining that the game allows you the ability to jump right into PVP / WVW and such at max level, max gear and max abilities, that this will cause you to lose the "RPG" feel.  You also mention that it will take away from the acomplishment of leveling a toon, that it will diminish the over all feel of the game.

This is ridiculous, you can play the game however you choose, example... Don't PVP until level 80!  Thats right, you can play the PVE all the way to 80 and enjoy the progression without feeling like you missed out!  And then you can join PVP and enjoy a game that doesn't punish you for not "investing" your life into grinding gear just to be competitive... Like WOW, TOR and every other game with subscription based model...

The point is this, while I can see your argument... I disagree with your assessment.  I think ArenaNet did the right thing and implemented a system where its all about enjoying the game they way you want!  Want to PVP, fine guess what, no NEED to grind to 80 to feel like you can finally compete in PVP!  Wanna PVE with hero progression? It is there too!  You see because ArenaNet doesn't make money from subscriptions, they don't need the ridiculous Gear Grind like WOW or TOR to keep you paying month in and month out... It is a philosphy that I have wanted from the MMO market for some time now.  Nothing turns me off from a game faster than not being able to compete in PVP because I have tier one crap against tier three gear... I mean Why do that, simple answer, to force you to keep investing time...

Guild Wars 2 allows you the freedom to play your way.  Is it the best thing since sliced bread, or the invention of the wheel, depends on your taste.  It won't appeal to everyone, that is the only real truth.

There has been an ever growing hate towards cash shops since they have started. All the new MMO's that have a shop right off the bat have been getting hit with a lot of criticsm. It seems nobody is willing to direct their attention at all the long running MMO's that have been doing it for years. They have been making a killing of them long before any of these other MMO's came out with one. I'd be willing to bet that half the people that complain about the new ones have spent money on the already existing ones for some stupid pet or mount.

So much negitivity around games these days. You don't like it, then let them know that by not spending the money. They will never change untill we as gamers show them that there is no profit in these tactics. I never use the cash shops personally. Many people do though and the companies profit from them sadly.

Cash shops are going to be around for a good while I believe. Is that bad? Quite frankly I dont give a **** because I don't use them and being a "stand out" from a visual sense in a virtual world to me is probably at the bottom of my list and character creation has never been a selling point in my mind. I just want to have fun while playing. If I'm not......guess what....I talk with my wallet and cancel my sub. Been pretty simple and stress free for me.

I don't know why so many people get angry about how so many things are missing and they just don't shut up about it either. Say it once and move on, burn up your free month, then stop payment. SIMPLE and most effective. They will notice a sharp decline in subs.

I personally feel that in the first free month it is pretty easy to see a companies devotion to the game. If they don't try to listen and make some sort of good on their comitment to make the game better in that first month. 9 times out of 10 that game will begin a slow digression and ultimately become F2P in the end. Many are giving this game 3-6 months before that happens. Guess its time to wait and see isn't it?

Right now, me personally, I can easily see myself playing this 2-3 months. If they jump in and put forth a good effort to improve, that figure could reach out way further. Too bad I'm no fortune teller.

 

Sorry if I was jumping around on topics :P

 

 

Dizzy1976

Awesome comments, and spot on.  But here is my point, because you don't use it, does that makes it acceptable business practice?

My point was that developer obviously attempted to limit customization to create the "market" for item shop use.  Why?  Why not go the Valve route and break a game down into episodes so as the gamer has to purchace "multiple" games to get the whole story.

Todays gaming has taking a turn into the direction of what I call the "Planned obsolescence" direction.  Look it up and tell me if you don't think gaming is turning into a nickle and dime sham now.

You forgot about the cash shop, you start with crap options but you can buy better items there.

Moegitto

Ok so your telling us that, not only do you buy the game, pay a monthly subscription, you also have to purchace items from a cash shop?  Are you friggin kidding me?

WTF is wrong with Funcom?... The company is just Trash, PERIOD.

It wouldn't be a problem, but honestly with games like CHampions Online, a benchmark of customization.  You got pretty much everything out the gate.  And then if you wanted the "vanity" crap you could pay extra.  It sounds to me that Funcom made the game so generic as to force its players to rely on the cash shop.

I hear eHarmony.com is a wonderful place to meet someone...

Or you could try Russianbrides.com, for the quick fix...

As for the murder simulator, well I would contact your local law enforcement agency, speak to them about your needs.

[QUOTE="Skullheart"]

[QUOTE="bob9999999999"]I've been keeping very up to date on Starcraft II and it looks awesome. Being a hard-core Starcraft fan, though, I'm not sure its gonna live up to the original. Something about the graphics in the first one made it look darker, more realistic than what ive seen from the new one. Maybe this is just because it used 2D sprites that tend to be less cartoony? I want to hear what everyone else thinks.kyrieee

I think that Starcraft was made nearly 10 years ago, and just about any game made in 2007 will live up to it.

Oh really? How come no game has outdone it yet then?

And who says there hasn't been a game that has outdone Starcraft? Come on this is completely Opinion based. Just looking at a game's fanatical following is not enough to label it the greatest of all time.

Age of Empires 2 is a vastly superior game to SC, in almost everyway. More depth, More strategies. But again this is my opinion. And Opinions don't decide what is considered the greatest.

What does it matter anyway? Really. Will the original SC save you from paying taxes or avoiding death? NO, it is a game so keep it in perspective please.

All of this "This game is better than this, better than that!" sounds an awful lot like the playground kids screaming "My daddy can beat up your daddy."

While I agree that the original Starcraft displayed a very dark, grim and desolate universe. Just about every Blizzard game has carried it's tademark style, cartoonish overly exagerated features. It takes one glance at the concept art to realize this.

It's my opinion that because the first game was sprite based it severly limited them from achieving this look, but then as technology advanced, they (Blizz Dev's) were able to return to their original vision of the game. And if you look at WC3 it is quite evident what direction the Dev's wanted to build.

Or it could be a simple truth, it was easier to use WC3's game engine than redesign a whole new game? Can someone say that SC2 is using a different engine than WC3?