WoW / Guild Wars comparison?

[freelunch]

how similar is the core gameplay in World of WarCraft and Guild Wars?

specifically, does GW use a similar system for combat, with all actions requiring "charge time" or "down time" before they're re-used, or is it a click-fest like Diablo II?

I'm having a ball with WoW and expect to be playing it for quite some time. I don't need another similar game to play but I've seen GW cheap and the lack of monthly fees makes it tempting...

[quantum]

how similar is the core gameplay in World of WarCraft and Guild Wars?

Not similar at all. Every combat zone is a personal instance just for you and your party -- if you venture out of a meeting point alone, you will never see another player, simply because they don't exist in your private copy of the world.

Soloing is also next to impossible in Guild Wars, though very specific builds can go it alone in very specific areas. The closest thing to soloing is adding AI-controlled henchmen to your party instead of real players.

Itemization in GW and WoW are totally different. GW has very, very narrow item diversity, so everyone of a given primary class ends up looking very similar.

While WoW is more about building up one character and reaping the rewards of your increasing power in PvP and PvE, Guild Wars is more about 'unlocking' skills, runes (armor modifications) and weapon modifications for your account. In this respect, the endgame of Guild Wars is PvP. There is very little reason to keep playing the PvE game after you've completed all the missions.

If you're not interested in PvP, I would avoid Guild Wars like the plauge. There's a PvE game there, yes, and some people enjoy it, but it's pretty boring, and chances are you'll burn out on it fast, unless you have a very dedicated group of friends who stay at your same level.

If you're interested in PvP, though, there is a really deep game there, though you won't be able to appreciate it until you become intimately knowledgable about the skills in the game and how they interact with eachother. And there's also the matter of finding a good PvP guild -- it's hard, no question, but possible. There are islands of maturity in the game -- the guild I'm involved with requires that all its members be 17 or older, if you act less mature than that (on a consistant basis), you're kicked. And we don't suck, either -- we're around rank 100 in America (worst rank is 5,000, best is 1).

specifically, does GW use a similar system for combat, with all actions requiring "charge time" or "down time" before they're re-used, or is it a click-fest like Diablo II?

In this aspect, it's much more like WoW. Guild Wars is anything but a click-fest, though obviously certain builds will require faster fingers than others (ie, a Ranger or Mesmer that focuses on interrupting enemy skills will have to become very good at timing their interrupts to cancel the opponent's wind-up, while a healing Monk will have to become very good at rapidly targetting party members and applying healing, while a Warrior will have to develop and become proficient in chaining together special attacks to create nasty combos, etc).

[freelunch]

thanks quantum. I enjoy grouping in WoW (and years ago in EQ before it) but I play predominantly solo, so GW may not be for me.

[SuperHiro]

I think quantum is selling the PvE portion way too short. Way way way too short. It's true that techincally the endgame is PvP, but that's only partially true. For PvE people there's a few super hard zones you can head to, but you need a full party of real people to do it. I think PvE is great, but if you don't have a few friends it'll get really frustrating in the last 3rd of the game. The henchie AI is pretty decent but it sucks in the later levels. I was able to solo (with AI henchmen) all the way through until a certain set of missions. And after that theres a set of mobs that make henchmen completely useless. Plus ArenaNet just added some new zones that are PvE specific. The game isn't a big push to PvP.

The story missions are frankly, totally awesome. They are wonderful things. And the story is pretty good.

Random groups are a crapshoot... but there's a few "tells" as to whether it'll be a crappy group or not. But I've had more positive group experiences than negative ones. I've had a few astoundingly stupid experiences but those are the exception rather than the rule.

I've been playing this thing since early May, and I only seriously PvP'ed twice. I don't mind PvP-ing, but I'm definitely more of a PvE guy, and I'm having a grand ol time.

I also played WoW hardcore, the combat is similar in style but balance in GW is leaps and bounds better.

[Toe]

I also played WoW hardcore, the combat is similar in style but balance in GW is leaps and bounds better.

What exactly do you mean by this?

[SuperHiro]

As in, you sit there and click buttons to activate skills, recharge rates, etc. GW is NOT Diablo style with click click click.

The problem with WoW as I see it is that the combat system is built for PvE, and they're trying to rejigger it for PvP, which doesn't work. Warriors work great in PvE thanks to taunt... but taunting an Alliance Rogue isn't going to make him want to gank you instead of the priest.

[quantum]

I also played WoW hardcore, the combat is similar in style but balance in GW is leaps and bounds better.

I don't buy that at all.

World of Warcraft has 'soft counters.' Rogues/Hunters (Physical DPS) have an edge against Casters which have an edge on Tanks (Warrior/Paladin/Some Shamen) which have the edge of Rogues/Hunters. That being said, a well-played/experienced/prepared Caster can decimate a Rogue, despite the Rogue's natural advantage against the Caster. WoW is much more about preperation, equipment, and skill than it is about 'counters.'

Guild Wars has 'hard counters.' If you choose a given build, and you run up against an opponent who happens to be using a build that counters yours, you lose, and there's not much you can do about it. 'Skill' in Guild Wars is much less about situational awareness than it is about preperation, planning, and practice. GW is more like (American) Football -- you come up with a play, practice it til you're comfortable, then just run your routes. If your Offensive play is better than the opponent's Defensive play, (or vice versa), you beat them. Individual ingenuity can help, sometimes dramatically, but with only 8 skill slots, there's not much room for it.

[Glycerine]

Taunting an Alliance Rogue isn't going to make him want to gank you instead of the priest.

That skill isn't meant for PvP, it's meant for tanking in an instance. In your situation I hit them with a Disarm, Rend, and Hamstring. Guaranteed to confuse and destroy any rogue dumb enough to attack a priest grouped with a warrior.

So...how does that constitute PvP being "tacked on" as an afterthought? After playing the game for almost a year now I can safely say that any class can be effective in PvP if played correctly.

glyc

[SuperHiro]

That's fine and good, but I'm not Arms specced, in fact I went Defense with a few Fury points. I tried to mix it up a few times in the first week when PvP was activated and got worked. But then I stopped WoW in May so there may have been a few changes. IMO though, I think it's atrociously lame that the talent points I spend in beefing up my taunt are essentially wasted points in PvP.

I'm just about the worst guy to argue mechanics with. I like to keep my dork levels at a nice steady 6, so I'm going entirely on feel. On Windrunner, the Alliance:Horde ratio was 7:3, so my PvP experience there was... tainted. So if WoW is all balanced, fine wonderful. I still say GeeDub is better, if only for the fact that I can't get ganked.

I just wanted to answer this question:

specifically, does GW use a similar system for combat, with all actions requiring "charge time" or "down time" before they're re-used, or is it a click-fest like Diablo II?

And say that PvE in GeeDub is hella fun, you can stop playing once you've finished all the story missions and it'd be money well spent (although I'd rather you stayed and lose in PvP with me).

[gellar]

I enjoy grouping in WoW (and years ago in EQ before it) but I play predominantly solo, so GW may not be for me.

As a guy who plays that same style and mistakenly purchased Guild Wars... let me just say: it's totally not for you.

gellar

[CGMark]

I and my GF have been playing WoW for sometime now. She has two 60's and I have a 60 paladin myself. She raids frequently, and I dont, but group frequently. I solo'ed almost all the way to 60. She did a 60/40 solo mix really. She plays a warrior and a priest.

WoW, nor GW are like diablo, in that they are a click fest. I do find warrior and rogues in wow to be MUCH faster on the buttons that my pallie, but hes not a damage dealer. GW, I think was a bit more on the skills, and the timing. Not that I found it bad. Just more on the buttons.

I didnt play GW for long, I found the graphics VERY nice in a different way than WoW. WoW seems to me, to be a sort of 'drawn' style. Whereas GW seems to me to be a more 'realistic' sort of view.

From what you are saying, it doesnt seem to me that GW would be for you.

[Kraegor]

the GW vs WoW comparison is...well...I think Space Rangers is better than MOO3 but some might argue that i'm comparin apples to oranges...but they both involve ships in space! You fly ships around!

GW is more "self-contained" than WoW.
GW has a more "internet cafe" feel to it.

GW is useful if you have no spare time. Hop on... tinker around for a bit...log off. Simple. Hassle Free. Key word is simple.

Personally, I found GW derivative and boring, but that's me.

It can be argued WoW is also simple. But it's only simple in comparison to EQ2.

does GW use a similar system for combat, with all actions requiring "charge time" or "down time" before they're re-used, or is it a click-fest like Diablo II?

err well that's a bit of a narrow requirement. WoW feels like Diablo 3d to me.

The problem with WoW as I see it is that the combat system is built for PvE, and they're trying to rejigger it for PvP, which doesn't work. Warriors work great in PvE thanks to taunt... but taunting an Alliance Rogue isn't going to make him want to gank you instead of the priest.

huh? wait..HUH?

You imply that blizzard. Blizzard?!? built a multiplayer game with no thought to PvP?

Now I admit the "Battlegrounds" are half-assed. The "Ranking" system is half-assed.

but pure PVP combat is not tacked on. Rock, Paper, Scissors (re: Warcraft 3, Warcraft2, Starcraft) A Tank should be able to wipe the floor with a rogue regardless of his spec...unless said tank has crappy gear.

That's fine and good, but I'm not Arms specced, in fact I went Defense with a few Fury points. I tried to mix it up a few times in the first week when PvP was activated and got worked.

logic is a bit flawed there. Cuz ya got yer ass handed to you, does not imply the game isnt balanced...it implies something else

[quantum]

Hiro, if you're basing your opinion of WoW's PvP off the fact that you played a Defensive-specced Warrior at release, aka, the worst class in the history of the game, I can understand why your opinion might be a little... skewed.

And Andrew, just to echo everyone else here, and possibly to repeat myself, Guild Wars doesn't sound like a game for you.

[Toe]

That's fine and good, but I'm not Arms specced, in fact I went Defense with a few Fury points. I tried to mix it up a few times in the first week when PvP was activated and got worked. But then I stopped WoW in May so there may have been a few changes. IMO though, I think it's atrociously lame that the talent points I spend in beefing up my taunt are essentially wasted points in PvP.

First of all, spec does not a PvP warrior make. You need the right gear as well. You want +% to crit, +attack power, +stamina, and +agility (and thats the order I prefer). You want a slooooow 2-hander. Those, combined with Mortal Strike makes you one of the most feared classes in the game on the battlefield. My warrior is 31arms/20 fury, wields a reaper, and has a 28.5% chance to crit in berzerker stance (with no outside buffs). No single class really can "work me". Yeah, they might can kill me by kiting or some luck, but they know I can take them down in a few seconds at any given moment.

What's kind of funny is the protection-specced warriors with massive +stamina, +defense gear, and using a shield are some of my toughest battles.

And yes, there have been some changes since May, and mostly for the better in regards to warrior overall, but some have said protection tree is still inferior to the others. They do have a nice rage dump now that is somewhat useful in PvP from what I hear.

As for talent points spent for PvE not being useful in PvP, well, thats really the case across the board, so I do not feel warriors can complain too much. Look at priests for example, two entire talent trees are pretty much worthless in PvP. At least some protection talents are useful for PvP.

[quantum]

Look at priests for example, two entire talent trees are pretty much worthless in PvP. At least some protection talents are useful for PvP.

For Priests, it's more like two talent trees are pretty much worthless beyond 10 points deep. Across PvP and PvE, worthless.

Those two trees would be Discipline and Holy.

Discipline isn't all that bad if you judge it just by itself--it makes alot of spells more efficient and effective, and can save a Priest a ton of mana. Its 31-point skill, Divine Spirit, is pretty freakin' underwhelming, though. A single-target Spirit buff? I guess Blizzard didn't get the memo that Spirit is by far the worst stat in the game.

Holy, on the other hand, is just an atrocious line. Some of its early skills are decent, like Improved Renew, skills that shave mana cost off healing spells, skills that raise your critical chance with heals, etc. But then you get past 10 or 15 points, and it just gets ugly. Holy Fire or whatever that spell is called is just atrociously bad in every way imaginable. As is the skill that ups your Smite spell's effectiveness -- even with Holy's offensive skills specced to the max, it's still far more effective and efficient to use Shadow for damage.

And you think Divine Spirit is underwhelming? I present to you the cream of the Priest skill crap: Holy Nova. Such a broken, muddled, bafflingly useless spell... all for the low, low cost of 31 talent points in a tree that stops being average at 10.

Really, the only classes which have uniformly excellent skill trees are the Rogue, Shaman, and Mage. For every other class, there is a clear 'best' and 'worst.'

[freelunch]

does GW use a similar system for combat, with all actions requiring "charge time" or "down time" before they're re-used, or is it a click-fest like Diablo II?

err well that's a bit of a narrow requirement. WoW feels like Diablo 3d to me.

well part of what got me hooked on EQ, Asheron's Call and now WoW is this combat system which I see as quite distinct from the direct correlation between mouse-clicks and attacks in Diablo II. but maybe that's just me.

the more I read the more it sounds like GW is not for me.