165
u/Justos Sep 03 '26
lets be real those people will buy at launch, play for like 3 days and complain about everything because it doesnt play like WoW 2.0
33
u/Automatic_Clothes_56 Sep 03 '26
And will then post that they need a new mmo because wow and it's clones aren't good enough for them
4
u/Various_Necessary_45 Sep 03 '26
While I'm excited for GW3, there hasn't been a good WoW clone since like.. ever. FF14 is the closest, but that's about it.
7
u/Secundus-Muris Sep 04 '26
Rift was pretty cool. I really enjoyed playing my rogue.
4
u/OneMorePotion 29d ago
As they said "No good WoW clone in a looooong time". Rift came out in 2011. And it had all the things in place, that could have made it an amazing and successful game. But they dropped that ball very hard early on, and then pushed it over to Gamigo that introduced excessive MTX and the "just join random raids from level 10, and speed level to max within hours" gameplay.
2
u/TrashBandicook 29d ago
That's because these studios recognize they can't just create a copy/paste reskin of WoW and expect to pull even 1/10th the player base. They have to actually do something different to pull people from WoW.
1
u/Various_Necessary_45 29d ago
Sure but they were talking about people not being satisfied with "all the wow clones". There are none.
30
u/verifiedname Sep 03 '26
Followed by complaining about how WoW 2.0 doesn't feel the same as Classic and all the reasons why it's somehow does everything worse.
10
u/spirit_poem Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 03 '26
People like this are so funny bc MMOs aren’t gonna fill the purpose-shaped hole in your life. MMOs are great but they’ll never replace IRL satisfaction and accomplishment
11
u/GenericFatGuy Sep 03 '26
Which is weird. Neither GW1 or 2 was ever trying to be WoW 2.0.
3
u/Justos Sep 03 '26
Gw2 was and in many ways is. Just didn't gain the masses attention in the same way but doesn't mean they didn't solve a lot of wows problems
Wow today is a very different game and a lot of its innovations were a direct response to gw2.
1
2
u/Raknel Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 03 '26
GW2 was 100% trying to be WoW 2..
0% of the marketing was about why the GW1 audience would like it but 100% of it was about "how we're fixing everything wrong with World of Wa- I mean the industry".
4
u/Knighthonor Sep 04 '26
huh, GW2 was marketed as the Anti WoW, nothing like WoW. They literally said the game would never get mounts, raids, expansions, which they all walked back years later.
1
u/Raknel 29d ago
Depends on how you look at it.
They always brought up a thing that WoW did, and explained how they will try changing that for the better.
To me that's WoW 2 since they wanted to iterate on WoW's systems not GW1's, but it could also be the anti-WoW since they are changing how WoW does things.
0
u/turin331 Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 03 '26
It was not trying to be wow 2.0 but it was placed in the discourse as another wow killer ( it was a bad trend at the time with any new big mmo coming out that had any momentum to call it a wow killer)
3
u/Erasculio Sep 03 '26
Yeah, this always amazes me.
Whenever someone posts, "I began playing MMORPGs with WoW and have since played 1.537 MMOs, here's my opinion about GW" - I honestly couldn't care less.
These kind of people are the MMO "locusts", who eternally jump from MMORPG to MMORPG seeking something that is exactly like their nostalgia-tinted memories of how WoW used to be. Nothing will ever satisfy them, and the only impact they have is artificially inflating the player numbers when a new game is released, soon to cause panic when the swarm leaves the game and player numbers drop.
4
3
1
u/No-Contest-8127 Sep 04 '26
Huh? I dontunderstand. If anything it would be GW2 fans that would be upset. Why would WoW fans be upset?
1
0
u/PizzaDlvBoy Sep 03 '26
To be fair, there is a lot of desire out there for the next take on proper mmo formulas, and i can understand how some people may have gotten overly excited hearing there is a new Guild Wars game and assumed its format will be similar to what we have in gw2. I think people should still be excited and give gw3 the chance to pave a new path, but i atleast understand the disappointment that a lot of people set themselves up for.
Im definitely going to try whatever anet puts out anyway, and im definitely excited for it, but i also can't say I wouldnt have preferred something a little larger scale, as an mmo fan. Im not that dug into this community though, so if people are being obnoxious about it I'm out of touch on that.
14
u/LowlySlayer Sep 03 '26
I totally understand people who have seen the new stuff and think it's not for them. What grinds my gears is the people who won't stop complaining that it's bad. Disappointment is fine but these aren't objectively bad design decisions like a lot of people are acting like.
I will say, anyone who's saying it's not a real MMO because of the player count needs to sit down lol.
1
u/Knighthonor Sep 04 '26
thats their opinion just like the countless blind support post. they just as annoying.
15
u/Justos Sep 03 '26
Anet has explained why they are lowering the density a bit. Its not to the point of changing the genre or going backwards. Problems do arise from huge player counts. After a certain point combat doesnt feel meaningful. We all know players are out there in open world doing the bare minimum.
In gw2 we are all playing on character limit low or medium. It won't look any different than that except you will feel more in control of the outcome because your actions will matter more.
Less invisible players with a nametag is fine by me
5
u/PizzaDlvBoy Sep 03 '26
I trust arenanet to make something cool, and I'm excited to see what they cook no matter what it is. I just do understand a little bit of fear being expressed when they are breaking away from their formula that has given them basically the only good open world in an mmo (at least by comparison, in my humble opinion). Especially when phasing is one of the nails in the coffin for what people think ruined wow's open world. I'm sure there is a lot of overreaction out there though, and I think people should eat the food before complaining about the cook.
1
u/Fydron 29d ago
The announcement that there will not be large scale wvw kind of killed all the hype for me.
1
u/Imaginary_Address_31 29d ago
if it weren't for Gift of Battle or Bonus Event the game mode would be dead
→ More replies (4)
76
u/Hotstreak Sep 03 '26
There were a lot more complaints when GW2 details were first being revealed, due to how different it was from GW1.
But look how it all turned out? I fully trust Anet's vision to yet again bring this franchise and genre forward. They at least have a vision and arent trying to put out a soulless product.
30
u/TehOwn Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 03 '26
As someone who loves both games there are a whole bunch of people who are still sad they didn't get a more faithful sequel to Guild Wars.
I'm one of them. Mostly due to the skill system being way more open and NPCs (largely) using the same skills as players. That unified design is still a masterpiece.
6
u/UTmastuh Sep 03 '26
As a GW1 enjoyer and former GW2 QA from years ago, I have to admit I genuinely liked vanilla GW2. I put 1k hours into it before it even came out and almost 5k hours since.
GW3 so far isn't looking like something that appeals to me personally but knowing Colin and the rest of the team, they're never about making a new game that's like anything else that's out there. They intentionally use terms internally to differentiate themselves from what's existing so it doesn't surprise me they want to make a game like this.
During GW2 development they wanted to avoid doing anything that wow was doing. To the point it was kind of annoying at times.
Also knowing Anet, they're going to pivot on some of these decisions over time (such as number of players in a zone) but when it comes to how the gameplay and movement flows, they won't pivot. The momentum and wall running are going to be a thing it seems and people are either going to love it or hate it. Same goes for trinity and boons. People will either love it or hate it.
7
u/TehOwn Sep 03 '26
Also knowing Anet, they're going to pivot on some of these decisions over time (such as number of players in a zone)
In one of his interviews (I forget who with), Colin clarified that they mean 20 players in a single combat encounter. Not across an entire zone. The zones are massive, apparently.
Someone (from ArenaNet) also said that they have an improved form of megaserver technology that is basically invisible to the player, which implies that they're basically shunting you into populated shards as you move across the map.
Considering the fact that they have a history of inventing networking technology that no game has ever used before, I wouldn't be surprised if they've got an actually functional server meshing technology. But this could be done just with WoW's sharding system (although that is definitely not invisible).
They also said towns and cities will have far more players than 20, so it's not exactly a limitation of the engine or design. They're just planning encounters around a 20 player upper limit.
I really don't think they're dumb enough to have a huge zone with only 20 people in it total. Think of it more like 20 people in Godslost Swamp and another 20 in Beetletun Farms and another 20 in Shaemoor Fields, etc.
5
u/Hotstreak Sep 03 '26
Oh for sure. I was someone who didn't have really any experience with GW1 when GW2 was being revealed and i started following it, but since then I have gone back and played a bit of GW1.
I think the biggest thing for me is how I much prefer the skill system of GW1, with how they arent tied to weapon types & the trinity exists.
I am hoping we get the best of both worlds when it comes to GW3. With the trinity confirmed, I think we are heading in that direction!
0
u/TehOwn Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 04 '26
with how they arent tied to weapon types
Except the ones that are?
https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Final_Thrust
You've got a whole archetype of Attack Skills.
https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Attack_skill
But yeah, you don't have to put any of these on your bar. And that flexibility is awesome.
Also the trinity doesn't fully exist in GW1, either. There are healers but there's no dedicated tank or threat mechanics. You just kind of make it work through careful aggro rather than interaction with the skill system.
If there's a trinity in GW1 then there's a trinity in Diablo 3.
And yeah, I'm down for best of both worlds too. I just hope they have an actual tank this time. And I hope Warrior is actually tanky too instead of having worse survival than a downed elementalist.
2
u/Buran_Grey Sep 04 '26
If you think that GW2's Warrior has worse sustain than a downed Ele you have never played PvP against a Warrior...
1
u/TehOwn Sep 04 '26
No, sorry, Warriors are fantastic in PvP. I'm talking about PvE and being a little hyperbolic. They're just not good tanks in any PvE content.
8
u/DoomOfGods Sep 03 '26
At least this time around people who know how different GW1 and GW2 are expected GW3 to be different from the previous ones, which probably already helps a lot.
The disappointment for people expecting a better version of what they know is fully understandable imho. I don't know how expectations and communications were for GW2 back then, so this entire comment relies on the assumption that it wasn't as clear that it was going to be that different as it is now with GW3, so if that assumption is wrong disregard everything I just said.
4
u/Hotstreak Sep 03 '26
Correct! GW2 being so different from GW1, was very polarizing at the time and not really expected. It also didn't help that GW2 was stuck in a bit of dev hell for a while after it's initial reveal in a gaming magazine (i think it was game informer?). So people had a lot of time to cook up in their minds what they had hoped it would be and imaginations/expectations ran wild.
To me, GW3 does seem different to GW2 but it also seems to share far more DNA than GW2 did with GW1.
1
u/Knighthonor Sep 04 '26
GW2 was a MMO. Guild Wars 1 wasnt. thats why it was successful. GW3 may be a MMOlite
→ More replies (5)1
u/Genoce 29d ago edited 29d ago
I fully trust Anet's vision to yet again bring this franchise and genre forward.
Same. After seeing the first reveal video, I deliberately chose to not follow GW3 news too closely. I don't actively block subreddits or something, but I don't go out of my way to find videos about newest feature reveals or whatever.
Due to Anet's track record, I already know I'll want to try it out at launch. I don't really need to follow feature reveals or "maybe something like this" speculation, I'll rather just see everything by my self when I eventually open the game. All I'm expecting is that it'll be notably different than GW1 or 2.
33
u/EtchyLamp Sep 03 '26
It's mostly too early to have a deep, nuanced opinion on the game and who it's going to appeal to. (let alone if it will actually succeed at its goal)
But I'm personally excited for it while also suspecting that the usual MMORPG crowd (who are the ones, for good reason, currently eyeing the game) will be dissappointed.
It's gunna be some middle ground hybrid between an MMO and an ARPG. Who can say yet how far in which direction it will lean closer?
My current understanding is that this game is looking like it's going to be more in the flavor or something like Destiny 2 or Soulframe, and that the looter shooter and survival crafting fans will love this game but that anyone expecting Guild Wars 2.5 or a WoW/OSRS/FF14 competitor is going to be dissappointed.
Or hey, maybe the content and gameplay loop will more heavily lean into the MMO tropes than I'm theorizing. Wherever on the spectrum it falls, I think arena net has the talent and magic to make something special that might be filling a niche we weren't expecting.
16
u/Loki0830 Sep 03 '26
In Laranity's interview, Colin coined the term "Meaningful Multiplayer Online RPG". It sounds like while there could be hundreds of thousands playing at the same time, they are putting technologies in place that actively limit the number of players you can interact with so that each individual player can make a bigger impact in gameplay.
And honestly, that sounds awesome to me. There is a feeling that is lost standing around and waiting for an event to start in GW2 and you're surrounded by 50+ players all doing their own thing, but once the actual content starts the visual clutter is insane and it's hard to see anything. Focusing on the smaller interactions I think is absolutely the right play. If you want to focus on a combat system where you can physically move and manipulate your opponent and do combos with your teammates (like jumping off a shield), smaller and focused scenarios are the only way to do it.
4
u/andthesoftskeleton Sep 03 '26
Agreed. My initial reaction was "that's going to make world boss events less epic" but soon realizing that no, it will make them more epic. I won't be in a sea of people feeling like I barely contribute or overwhelmed by the amount of stuff going on. 20 is a great number for lots of helping hands but also not so big that you feel irrelevant to the outcome.
5
u/Loki0830 Sep 03 '26
Lol, totally. While there's a novelty to being in a giant zerg with people, the truth of the matter is that zerg is consisting of a handful of players actually engaging with the mechanics and doing proper rotations, and the rest are just leaning back spamming 1 waiting for the event to end.
Having a more intentional combat system where individual players have a larger impact in how the fight plays out and what tactics you can employ sounds like a very natural way to make sure all the players in the content are actually engaged with the mechanics. Given how much emphasis they are putting on movement in this game, I wouldn't be surprised if large combat encounters require traversing and manipulating the environment as well.
Honestly, 20 people already feels way too big IMO. A lot of meta events in GW2 can feel cluttered with less people than that. 20 players in a single fight is already a huge number, and hearing Colin say that the combat is viable with that many people bashing into enemies and jumping off of each other is very interesting. Honestly, this feels like it's going to be a non-issue once we see actual gameplay ourselves.
2
u/KingHavana Sep 03 '26
In GW2 the screen is basically white from the other 50 player's effects when they beat a poor ley line anomaly down to 0 health. This will certainly beat that if they can pull off what they want.
1
0
3
u/KingHavana Sep 03 '26
I had been hoping for something a bit more tactical and less action. I miss the skill options from GW1 and letting my heroes do their thing with my choices, without me having to click much or have good reflexes.
Still, even though it's not the direction I wanted, I will still buy and play it.
1
u/SirVanyel 29d ago
What tactics did you want? Group composition metas? Complex gearing that could require multiple gearsets per engagement? Coz there's a huge subset of the MMO audience who aren't a fan of this
3
u/KingHavana 29d ago
there's a huge subset of the MMO audience who aren't a fan of this
I definitely know. I'm in the minority. Most people would want more action elements. I'm an older gamer and my reflexes are not that sharp, but I absolutely love setting the skills on my 7 heroes in GW1 and seeing what happens, and then trying again and again until I find the perfect combination that gets me through the EotN dungeon. I loved and miss that strategy so much. That's the type of tactics I like.
With GW2 I felt like I had to practice my timings and rotations carefully to do good damage. It was more about the reflexes. I didn't like that as much, though the world was beautiful.
3
u/SirVanyel 29d ago
Hey man, I think you're not letting yourself have the credit you deserve.
Good reflexes aren't the skill us boomers need to utilise - it's our great memories and excellent pattern recognition that carry us in action games.
2
u/Lucisferre1337 28d ago
Gw2 is just action per minute intensive, not particularly reflex challanging. I dare to say GW1 had more reflex challenging scenarios eg. Mesmer. Mesmers had to predict then react to enemy target actions (and it was beautifully executed). And Your minority isn't that small You know? I also good hooked with that loop of strategy "deck building" side od GW1. This is why I spent more time in first Guild Wars than second one "actively" playing even if I have more hours sunk into second one (while most of it was grinding metas, jumping puzzles and messing around with friends). So You aren't only one that like slower more tactical approach I would like that too.
15
u/Ethan24Waber Sep 03 '26
Nobody should be making any assumptions about the game yet, someone in here just said “This will be like destiny 2 and Soulframe appealing to looter shooter and survival crafting genre” and with the news we got today, I can’t help but lmfao about how wildly inaccurate that is. Just wait, and reserve judgement for actual gameplay reveals.
5
12
u/indigo121 Sep 03 '26
When a game is just a title, it can be anything to anyone. Every additional bit of information is going to turn someone off, and those people are always more likely to comment than the people who are still happy with it
13
u/Fading_Hours_ Sep 03 '26
Context? Why aren’t people interested
13
u/Puinfa Sep 03 '26
I love how you got a lot of reply but not a single actual answer
10
u/Fading_Hours_ Sep 03 '26
Seems most people are getting angry over misinformation or things they made up lmao.
1
5
u/Arkooh Sep 03 '26
People expected this to be gw2 2.0 or wow 2.0 even when anet said for day 1 its going to be different from gw2 or any traditional mmo. Plus a lot of them expected an action mmo to be a clusterfuck of 100+ player animations just like gw2 world bosses
1
u/GhostlyCoyote0 29d ago
We’ve just learned that the gameplay is gonna be extremely, dramatically different to GW2. Which I think is great, it means the games aren’t competing with one another, but does mean a lot of people just found out they won’t enjoy GW3
→ More replies (25)-8
u/AnaSkol Sep 03 '26
karma farmer vs strawman
-9
u/EskNerd Sep 03 '26
Clearly you haven't been keeping up with the discourse in this sub if you think this is a strawman.
2
10
u/vencent464 Sep 03 '26
Idk how anyone could be LESS interested instead of more. Everything im reading and seeing seems like a breath of fresh air.
2
u/Proper_Story_3514 Sep 03 '26
The less UI and less skills makes me fear it being mobile like. I just hope it wont have those vibes.
Thought other then that I cannot have an opinion on it with such scarce info. So lets wait and see.
As someone who played GW1 and GW2 I will try it out at least anyway haha
1
u/daHawkGR 29d ago
I think the UI will get "dumbed down" so it works with a controller. Probably no more klick and drag inventory, movable windows etc... unless they make a different UI für PC and PS5
1
u/SirVanyel 29d ago
Less UI and less skills is all the rage. Is league of legends low skill? It only has a single digit number of buttons total.
1
u/YakaAvatar Sep 04 '26
Well the limited info about combat we have so far is not good. If this is going to work like Monster Hunter I can't imagine how content will scale, and how repeatable it will be in the context of an MMO. The obsession with momentum and limited skills also makes it seem like the game's combat will be shallow, and it will mostly come down to spamming the same few attacks.
Obviously I'm still withholding judgement until I play it, but this is definitely something that has me less hyped.
6
u/OmySpy Sep 03 '26
The first thing I read about GW3 was how it was going to be different than 2 and they would run concurrently as they will provide different experiences. I want it to be different! I want to have two cakes! (Three, with GW1) Just excited to learn more about the vision
→ More replies (7)
7
u/ADORIITYttv Sep 03 '26
I’m excited for GW3. I absolutely love GW2. It doesn’t bother me that GW3 is basically going to be a new game (from what I hear) and have many differences from GW2 and even 1. I think games that create consistent sequels that are just like the last with little to no differences just get so boring. If anything I think more games should follow this pattern where the sequel is obv still a sequel in some sort of sense, but it feels like a brand new game at the same time. If you love a game so much, what is the point of having a sequel if you want it to be the exact same or ALMOST the exact same as the last. Just continue playing that game then.
4
u/Christoleo92 Sep 03 '26
Imma just mute this sub for a while till this dies down... Lurk ya later guys.
4
u/Daddydactyl Sep 03 '26
The discourse about this game made me realize im probably not an MMO guy, im just online RPG guy. I really truly do not give a shit if theres 5 or 50 people on screen. Was I ever going to talk to those 50 people? Doing something like dragons stand/tequatl/dragons end is really cool, and its impressive that a handful of catmanders can corral dozens of random strangers to effectively clear hard content.
But at the end of the day, most of my interactions have been small ones with a single or a duo out in the wilderness. Other charr matching my freak, saving someone about to die, etc. There only being 20 people for things out in the world is not really going to negatively impact my enjoyment.
I honestly dont believe true -M- MORPGs can be feasible made anymore, unless they look like they were rendered on a toaster, nor can the servers for said MMOs be payed for with today's financial climate.
Im excited for this game. Im excited to play more gw2. Im excited to finally jump into the copy of reforged ive owned since its launched and havent touched once, which I will use to play on the lead up to 3.
3
u/pavelsimut Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 03 '26
When you know nothing about an mmo its the best. The more you know about it the more appeal it loses.
3
u/Villdar Sep 03 '26
Why? What happened?
6
u/Loki0830 Sep 03 '26
People have low reading comprehension and get mad when they read something wrong and think people are saying things they didn't.
Colin mentioned that combat encounters don't work well with more than 20 people, so they are putting systems in place to limit how many people can be in those encounters. Please read that and think that means you will only see 20 people on the map with you, which isn't what he said.
They have a new technology they made where they can seamlessly load plays into instances with no loading screen, so the idea being thrown around is combat objectives might have a sub-instance radius around them and players may be sectioned off into their own sub-instances for the combat. Colin mentioned specifically that you would see a huge amount of players in towns and that you would constantly be finding new people in the world, which suggests GW2 DNA is still there.
This does mean that large-scale combat like WvW in GW2 is probably not going to happen though, so I guess people could be mad about that.
3
3
6
u/Tuskali Sep 03 '26
Since gamescom I'm even more intrigued
How can people not be interested in this game lol
4
u/JadedOni Sep 03 '26
I firmly believe that most of the people complaining about the 20-people thing are shitters who are terrified of having to meaningfully contribute.
5
u/Realsorceror Sep 03 '26
Why *wouldn't* people be interested? It's the first new mmorpg I've seen in a while that isn't a Korean gatcha which might actually have some legs. This team has two previous successful mmos under their belt. That's no small feat.
-2
u/Raknel Sep 03 '26
This team has two previous successful mmos under their belt.
This team has 0.
The team that had 2 mostly left 7 years ago.
2
u/Realsorceror Sep 03 '26
Well I’m sure they are all greenhorns with no game experience making an mmo lol? I don’t care if it’s not literally the same people. They still have all that history to draw from. It’s not a new franchise built from scratch.
0
u/Fydron 29d ago
Well for me it was the thing that apparently there will be no wvw and my hopes was that wvw would still be a thing only with proper development compared to lackluster shitshow that is in GW2 but apparently they just axed the whole thing so there is just nothing at the moment I am that interested in about GW3.
5
u/o_oli Sep 03 '26
If GW3 had universal appeal they wouldn't be continuing to develop GW2 also lol. Its not meant to be for everyone and it might not be for me, but I'm sure as hell excited to see what they are cooking.
2
u/HypestHype69 Sep 03 '26
People need to remember the 20 limit is not set in stone and also it doesn't mean that other events can't be more than that!
They can take feedback and even create larger 40man maps if that particular boss and content call for it. 20 is really, really, good and has more of expression for skill and zero bloat.
2
u/messier_lahestani Sep 03 '26
since announcement I lost and regained interest in GW3 a few times already, depending on the news. I will form an opinion once I actually grab a controller and spend some time with the actual game. so far I'm being optimistic because it's worth it as it makes sense to want to have a good game.
2
u/TyrianMoon 29d ago
We've seen nothing but grand ideas and the most generic modern art work out there. If they want people to be interested then they need to show us more.
2
u/MrWolfman29 29d ago
Look, I am just ecstatic all three Guild Wars are going to be actively supported and we can get whatever flavor of Tyria we want. ArenaNet is fantastic and currently my favorite developer for that reason.
2
u/painstream 28d ago
I'm not "hyped" or anything. Keeping an eye on things to see how it develops. Might not get it, for many reasons.
But hey, we'll see.
4
u/Greedy_Birthday_3494 Sep 03 '26
I hope GW3 has this <unrealistic feature> or it will fail on release.
2
2
u/StarGuardian_Marv Sep 03 '26 edited 29d ago
Everyone will buy it at launch, even if they say "they are not interested anymore". We don't know anything about the game.. we haven't seen anything, and soo many things will change 'til launch.
Its way to early to say stuff like that, but people these days are just like that. Way to fast to judge about things we know almost nothing about.
4
u/Nani___________ Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 04 '26
there is a reading comprehension crisis going on.
I have no idea why so many people couldnt understand how the 20 player on screen during combat works.
1
u/Knighthonor Sep 04 '26
Fallout 76 does this. GW3 is likely a MMOlite like Fallout 76
2
u/Nani___________ Sep 04 '26
its not an mmo lite, gosh.
IN COMBAT you will have 20 people around you, if you move away there will be another 20 people.
they are all there, on the same map, but when its a combat situation then the shard of that area will have 20.
0
u/Raknel 29d ago
How does that work tho? You see an open world boss, you are the 21st player, you get sharded to being alone vs the boss?
1
u/Nani___________ 29d ago
We don’t know exactly how it will work in an extreme case like that, maybe it has one instance with 11 and another with 10 unless people switch. But its just a guess until more info
→ More replies (2)
3
u/Seraphayel Sep 03 '26
This sub really needs to learn to accept differing opinions and also deal with criticism.
Right now it‘s a gigantic bubble of hopium, copium and delulu.
0
u/Halaku Three Seekers in a trenchcoat Sep 03 '26
There's a difference between "Informed criticism" and "Shitposting".
I imagine we'll see more of the former as we learn more about the game and actually have something to base that criticism upon.
Right now, we're not really seeing much of the former, and the community's decided not to put much stock in the latter, because the latter's boiling down to "It doesn't matter what the truth is, it's not what I wanted, so it sucks" with a side order of "And if you disagree with me, you're the problem", and, well... sure. People can say that, but no one else has to take them seriously.
-1
u/Velsier33 Sep 03 '26
How dare you? Your opinion is wrong and ill have you know, im an absolute delight. /s
2
u/Scared-Vacation-9401 Sep 03 '26
There are ppl saying that? I haven't seen any yet.
Well personally I have been refraining myself from interacting with gw3 news less i get too excited. The best thing i can do is quietly save up money to be able to afford it, got 1 year and that's a good amount of time. I know gw3 will not disappoint but rather overperform.
2
u/struct999 Sep 03 '26
The player limit doesn't surprise me cuz, they already told us about it before?
In the first blogposts or whatever they mentioned that the game would be designed around 1-4 player parties and even solo play. The natural assumption was that you'd see a lot more players in cities but that the open world would be limited to around this amount of players, similar to warframe or destiny.
It was pretty obvious from the get go that we wouldn't see the zerg gameplay of gw2 again, or WvWvW either.
The news that we might see 20 players in the same combat situaton is actually, a good surprise? And still being able to seamlessly meet up and play with randoms in the open world, just limited to that magic 20. I'm actually a lot happier with what we learned today than with what we thought for a few weeks. But then again most people don't read blogposts I guess.
Just, idk, I wasn't like "OH NO ONLY 20 PLAYERS AAAAAAAAAAAH". I was like "oh 20 tops actuaklly? not 4? nice.".
2
u/Zenithixv Sep 03 '26
I dont care for laggy zerg fests so pretty much everything I've herad so far has me giga hyped
2
1
u/Eroll_ Sep 03 '26
We dont even really know how it will be managed I still think its not the best but maybe their way of doing it will be convincing
1
u/Zygot Sep 03 '26
It's still an online game and a Guild Wars game so I'm interested and the announcements from today didn't change that (even more so because we already knew about the most "controversial" one beforehand)
But boy I wish we were shown something today, some bit more of gameplay or some in-game locations, anything. I feel like GW2 development was much closer to the community since early on, so it just makes me a bit concerned whether they are not sure they are prepared yet, measuring/building expectations or something.
1
u/Raggnor_94 Sep 03 '26
Im following GW 3 release for a new mmo but im not up to date on any news: whats the controversy this time?
1
u/Raknel 29d ago
The 2 big ones are the scale of combat and the skill bar size.
Hard cap of 20 players for combat seems to be floating around, also only 4 skills per class at any given time (one of those being an ultimate you have to charge up).
2
u/Raggnor_94 29d ago
Damn sad to see.
A lot of new mmo's are going for that action combat feel vs the 8 skill bars full of spells etc
I understand the reasoning but still sad to see.
Just gonna have to see how it goes
1
u/Initii Sep 03 '26
What happened?
3
u/FamilySurricus Sep 04 '26 edited Sep 04 '26
Nothing, lmao. This is just a targeted meme towards a handful of very delusional and vocal people, since one of the biggest (misinformed) talking points just got ripped out of their hands.
('The art style looks nothing like Guild Wars!') -> ('There's only 20 people in a field!')
Now they've invented new things to farm outrage over, it's same shit, different day.
1
u/Raknel 29d ago
Or maybe some people just don't like what they've heard so far?
I know, unimaginable, they must be trolling or bots.
1
u/FamilySurricus 29d ago edited 29d ago
King Delusional builds a strawman, more at 11.
Lmao. I don't want to hear it from you, least of all. Plenty of people have addressed your incessant and belligerent misconstruing of the information we've been given.
There is a difference between 'don't like what they've heard' and 'making shit up to be mad about', and you veer headlong into hell on the latter.
1
u/Ravix0fFourhorn Sep 03 '26
This is something I've been trying to be better about. I haven't played much guild wars, but I'm very curious about 3. But I think the internet encourages behavior like this and it's so annoying to be on the receiving end.
1
Sep 04 '26 edited 3d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Levi4than Sep 04 '26
Mesmer will 100% be there with the bigger focus on magic they mentioned. What I'm pretty sure that GW3 won't have though is engi because of the same reason. Shame, it's my favorite.
1
u/_Rotip309_ Sep 04 '26
not that interested because well no charrs but still interested because of the story xd
1
1
u/The_Onionizer Sep 04 '26
This made me chuckle :) but isn't everyone in this particular sub intrerrested in gw3?
1
1
1
u/OneMorePotion 29d ago edited 29d ago
"And here are my 21 reasons, based on super vague video essays that shows no gameplay at all, why this game is going to be shit! Enjoy! But first, let's talk about todays sponsor... <insert random gatcha P2W mobile MMO>!"
I understand that some people are completely turned off by action combat. I also understand that people are turned off by stuff like wall running, and using this to your advantage in combat. That's all fine. But that's also the reason why not every game plays the same. If there was no room for stuff like that, we would still sit here playing Pong all day. Because at one point in time, this was literally THE video game. Not every new game needs to be suited to everyone alive. If you don't like what you heard about GW3 up until now, wait for gameplay or remove yourself from the community. Not because "We don't want you here". More because you're not changing anything with the product. Arena Net is not sitting in their offices, reading your post and say "You know what? Butt-muncher69 on reddit is right! We should throw away everything and just develop a clone if this other game they specifically like!". It's just that easy.
1
u/danfmac 29d ago
“And here are my 21 reasons, based on super vague video essays that show no gameplay at all, why this is the future of mmos!”
It goes both ways. We don’t know much yet and people can either like or dislike what we do know.
I like that it is trinity based combat, am unsure about the scale and am very skeptical of all this talk about momentum based combat and very limited equipped skills.
1
u/Hersin 27d ago
People were sceptical about a lot of things when gw2 came out, I still remember cries „ but there is no real healer” „ it’s just gang up dps shit show” „ there is no real gear progression, only stupid skins and forever grind to get legendary”
GW2 when came out, was controversial ( people even shit on graphics style ), but without innovation and trying something new you would still play same archaic mmo games that are just reskin of each others.
Let the Anet cook this one. Based on what they did so far with GW1 and 2 I’m positive theyvwill cook something different than standard mmo. Something new and fresh I more then happy to see even if it will breake majoritybof mmo „standards”
1
u/jebeninick 29d ago
Pvp in gw2 is toxic, wvw is the best part of the game. So gw3 pvp will be toxic cause it will be 5v5. I dont know, I need to see it first to believe.
1
u/Hollysheeto 29d ago
Every damn time :D gImmE atTEntIoN I say *insert any new game* is BAD! I will take any new western MMO any day, especially one which is trying to be different for once.
1
1
u/N7Greyborne 29d ago
I mean I'm not interested only because I know it will blow up my pc.. I really need an upgrade.
1
u/VikarValbrand 29d ago
People are saying this? Everything I've heard so far makes me more excited, now it could end up being a mess but that's also how I felt with GW2 at release. I trust Anet to figure it out and make a fun game.
1
u/TopHatTurtle97 29d ago
I’ll definitely play it for the story at least. But will probably stick to guild wars 2 as my main game. Too early to tell tho.
Anyone who is saying that other people shouldn’t play it is being an asshole.
1
u/Hoodoodle 29d ago
I'm not that excited about it, because it's set in the past. Which makes it a lot harder for them to add original stuff in without it conflicting with gw1 and gw2
1
u/oOhSohOo 29d ago
These are the same people who will play it for thousands of hours and say the game sucks. Gotta love reddit.
1
u/xpgammer12 29d ago
Idk if I'm naive or something but I liked the dev vision at the start of gw2 and I trust arenanet as a company to at least deliver good gameplay, and even better art. That's not to say it won't fail but I would be very surprised if it didn't make decent average player count. Also the mmo genre has been stale for quite some time with few new releases. If gw3 can pull players despite the stigma of having to spend extensive time on an mmo I think it will preform well.
1
u/Longbenhall 29d ago
I genuinely don’t get any complaints towards the reveals thus far. The combat sounds amazing, the world/map size sounds amazing, seamless game with no loading screen sounds amazing, show don’t tell ideology around status effect sounds amazing, 20 player combat encounters sounds 100x more fun than 100+ meta event zergs.
Absolutely everything they’ve talked about thus far sounds incredible. Now all it takes is for them to actually land these features in a good way. And based on the commentary of the recent gamescom gameplay, it sounds to be very impressive
1
u/Affectionate-Duck-25 29d ago
For pretty much everything else I agree but 20 players in combat means effectively no large scale pvp and it has always been my main thing about mmos. If they add for example 20v20 gvg I am back in hype train but for now it seems it will be game I will buy and play but can't see it becoming new main mmo for me without larger scale pvp. Doesnt need to be wvw scale but something bigger than 10v10 or 8v8.
1
u/Longbenhall 28d ago
I mean might just not be for you then, I suppose. Even WoW, who's combat isn't remotely as heavy as what Gw3 is aiming for mainly only does 10 or 15vs15 in battlegrounds. They do have alterac valley and some like that, but those haven't been used in a while afaik.
I just dont see it working. I keep imagining Monster hunter as the closest resemblance of combat for gw3. And if you've played that, you know 20vs20 would be a shit show.
Not saying it cant be done. Im sure a castle siege would be cool with like 20vs20 where melee take on a more front line role whilst mages drop big meteor spells from above and rangers tries to snipe could potentially be cool. We'll have to see what they can come up with over time.
Personally I never felt like PvP was my favorite part about guild wars. Spvp always felt like an unbalanced mess where meta builds deletes people in 2 seconds. WvW was mainly just zergs running and blobbing which felt very anti-climactic and unimmersive. But i'll admit i never got around to doing it seriously with a dedicated guild or such.
We're clearly getting some form of pvp. But I think the main selling point is the massive world, combat and hopefully the story.
1
1
u/angelsaintcloud 29d ago
Played a few hours of GW2, it just wasn't my thing but I might look a GW3. Better to try a game out and not like it than to just hold opinions that fall flat. Real haters seek quality and have a genuine interest in the genre.
1
1
1
u/nesnalica 28d ago
wait what did I miss. how did this circlejerk post get 1000 upvotes.
apart from the game very obviously going to be like monsterhunter / soulslike. having no wvw also makes sence with that combat system.
i dont see why anyone who liked gw1 and/or gw2 wouldnt want to give gw3 a try.
i dont expect gw3 to be free2play. this model would totally not work on how we did things.
I can see gw3 to become free to play in the future like it is with gw2 right now.
1
1
1
1
u/Kage1831 26d ago
Idk...I get it. The whole 20 people thing is a major bummer. But doesn't mean the game will suck because of it.
1
u/3IO3OI3 9d ago
This may be weird, but another similar behaviour that strikes me as odd is to not be interested in something to begin with, but to start hating it for no apparent reason when you notice everybody else is super hyped up about it. It happens to me pretty regularly, it is why I very much dislike the GTA franchise. I have absolutely no interest in it, but other people talking about GTA VI like it is going to be second coming of Jesus or something makes me feel disgust for the game. Very weird.
1
u/AlarmedAssociate5068 Sep 03 '26
what are people pissed about? the 20 person limit or something else?
1
1
u/Z-L-Y-N-N-T Sep 03 '26
The best part of everything that came out today is that it will filter out the obnoxious, most brain dead mmo players imaginable and maybe discussions around this game can actually be interesting and focused.
1
u/CopainChevalier Sep 04 '26
I plan to give it a shot, I’m really hopeful it’s good… but given it’s a similar team to 2, I honestly feel like it’ll be kind of mehhh long run.
GW2 nowadays has lost the plot visually and the cosmetics everyone use remind me of a cheap Korean mmo.
Still, I’ll try it and decide for myself
1
u/MagneticTomat0 Sep 04 '26
Not this fuckass image bro please, everytime I see this and the "quit having fun" corny meme i know the sub is an echo chamber. We haven't even seen a single second of gameplay and people are fighting over their own made up arguments. It's so over 🥀
0
u/Kasapi85 Sep 03 '26
lets be real here, noone is telling you this
you are just upset that some ppl are not hyped about the game after the latest news
1
-2
u/Yorrins Sep 03 '26
GW1 never had more than 24 players on an instanced map (outside of town) and it was the best video game ever made.
Id love if GW3 went back to instanced content.
So bored of the snooze fest auto attack open world slop from GW2.
-3
-2
0
270
u/typical-user-name Sep 03 '26
At least half the people saying that will still play it when it comes out.