Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

GW2 esport viability


  • Please log in to reply
272 replies to this topic

#141 Maim

Maim
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Arthas
  • Ruin
  • Posts: 52
  • Talents: Arms 0/1/2/1/1/2
  • 2v2: 1625
  • 3v3: 2166
  • RBG: 1151

Posted 10 August 2012 - 05:27 AM

WoW's 5v5 was pretty awesome in seasons 2-4. As long as its done well, 10 players isn't too many.
Maims
Against
Illegal
Mexicans

#142 ToonVendor

ToonVendor
  • Premium Junkies
  • Curse Premium
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • US-Lightbringer
  • Whirlwind
  • Posts: 385
  • Talents: Retribution
  • LocationSacramento, CA

Posted 10 August 2012 - 06:05 AM

View PostCtuhlu, on 10 August 2012 - 04:56 AM, said:

The main reason WoW PVP is "hard to watch" or a clusterfuck or too confusing unless you are a high-rated player is simple, and it has to do with the way WoW PVP is both designed and played. Let's be honest, in WoW, you are basically playing the UI. You are watching for CC durations, buffs, debuffs, cooldowns, cast bars, focus frames, party frames, etc. Sometimes you actually have to look at the field -- and the best players do this more than the others -- but in general most of your "skill" is monitoring the multiple aspects of the UI while watching the field with your peripheral vision.

So then you have people trying to spectate 3v3 arenas, but the way the game is designed around the UI means that now you are watching 6 different people play the UI all at once. And so you have to try to keep track of the UI elements of all six players. This is why it's so common for shoutcasters to completely miss major cooldowns. It's not that they're stupid or anything; it's that they were more focused on the UI (cast bar / buffs / debuffs / cooldowns) of another player at that time. It IS a huge clusterfuck and to have even a slight chance at understanding what's going on you need to be familiar with every spell icon in the game, along with the metagame itself.

I'm not sure I buy that people who don't play WoW would watch it in the first place, even if it WAS a legit esport, but still. The barrier to entry is just too high due to the emphasis that is put on the UI.

Then you have GW2, which has a streamlined UI and places all of its emphasis on watching the field. DoTs are consolidated; bleeding/burning/poison has the same icon regardless of class, and it does the same thing. Unlike in WoW, where Insect Swarm and Shadow Word: Pain and Corruption all are basically the same thing yet have completely unique icons. The same goes for buffs. There are 8 or so buffs and they are available to multiple classes. Yet the icons are static.

What little UI-monitoring GW2 actually has is reduced as much as possible. ArenaNet is smart. They know what they're doing. They've made their game incredibly easy to watch. I still wish they would add 3v3 but you have to admit that 5v5 conquest is spectatable.

One last thing. You might have a negative bias against GW2's 5v5 PvP simply from your WoW experience. Again, 5v5 in WoW is awful because the UI-playing gets out of control with 10 players in a small map. GW2's 5v5 is a COMPLETELY different ballgame and I urge you doubters to give it a try with an open mind. It is NOTHING like WoW 5v5.

This was actually an incredibly insightful post, and I fully agree with the decisions Arena Net has made on simplifying the UI and making combat much more action oriented. The only thing I feel was wrong with this post was the last paragraph where you generalized WoW 5v5 as awful, espcecially doing so on a WoW fansite. Though I do feel that Guild Wars 5v5 is funner to both watch and play, plenty of us had a great time playing WoW 5v5 even though you may not have yourself, it is not anything close to "awful."

#143 Lillpappz

Lillpappz
  • Members
  • Posts: 119
  • LocationSweden

Posted 10 August 2012 - 11:07 AM

For me deathmatch also makes it more important to call out every stun and cc since you are looking for the first kill all the time.

In GW2 with conquest mode you can pretty much spectate more freely. You can jump between the bases and just do a general cast of what is going on in a fight without going in to specifics too much(call out big skills but not saying every skill move used all the time). This makes it a lot easier for viewers to watch since they dont have to know too much of the game. Ideally they dont have to watch health bars all the time but instead they watch the bases and who are tagging where and stuff like that.

A GW2 cast would probably look more like a DotA cast than a WoW cast. You highlight the big team fights and the key abilities like, "HUUUUUGE HUNDRED BLADES" and then continue scouting around the map and explaining the tactics side of the game instead of the mechanic side of it.

#144 Ctuhlu

Ctuhlu
  • Junkies
  • Draeneiclass_name
  • US-Sargeras
  • Shadowburn
  • Posts: 2730
  • Talents: Restoration

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:46 PM

View PostToonVendor, on 10 August 2012 - 06:05 AM, said:

This was actually an incredibly insightful post, and I fully agree with the decisions Arena Net has made on simplifying the UI and making combat much more action oriented. The only thing I feel was wrong with this post was the last paragraph where you generalized WoW 5v5 as awful, espcecially doing so on a WoW fansite. Though I do feel that Guild Wars 5v5 is funner to both watch and play, plenty of us had a great time playing WoW 5v5 even though you may not have yourself, it is not anything close to "awful."

Let me clarify. I was speaking strictly in regards to spectating WoW 5v5. I've seen a lot of posts along the lines of "WoW 3v3 was barely watchable, imagine what 5v5 would be like, there's no way GW2 can be an esport". People expect the viewing experience to be the exact same just because the group sizes are the same. But it's a completely different game.

Fourreur said:

we have to switch to them making the decision to pop reck or not to pop reck

#145 ClimacticGaming

ClimacticGaming
  • Members
  • Posts: 9
  • LocationVA

Posted 10 August 2012 - 04:14 PM

Glad a few beta tests and some stress tests allowed the writer to come to his conclusion.
I guess I am destined to be awesome since my first click on that bench test was 187ms ...whoopie?
I get your point on: there has to be something watchable or some sort of big moment to where people can talk about it.

Face it...the only people talking at the water cooler talking about a MMORPG (whether casual or competitively playing) are gonna be us players. That's it. This isn't gonna be on ESPN, anytime soon...

Overall I get what he's saying however, I can't take it serious due to the content and how early it is right now with GW2.

If you don't feel it's competitive enough for you, or you can't be coined with the catchphrase (deathcoil danny) or whatever 'moment' you are trying to be famous off of..then play something else.

Basically it seems you want to get famous and known for something, but in this game it's the entire TEAM that get's known and you're just not cool with that.
Posted Image

Climactic (aka Andre) of ClimacticGaming.tv

#146 ValorLotD

ValorLotD
  • GW2 Team
  • Posts: 79

Posted 10 August 2012 - 04:22 PM

tldr of my post: The OP doesn't have enough experience in GW2 and 90% of his remarks are unfounded due to inexperience.
=================================================================================

This thread has now made it to page 8 and so few things have yet to be discussed that probably would provide tons of insight, yet I will chime in from my experience.

Introduction:

GW2 can not be compared to WoW in its current form.  GW2 can not even be compared to any other MMO.  I say that because over the past 7 years of betas that I have played in, I have yet to see an MMO launch with as complete a SPvP, WvW, and PVE systems as GW2.

Reaction:
To address the concerns of the OP, I have to challenge that GW2 requires more time and practice than a few short weekends for a player to adequately at accomplish a level of skill that you find "hardcore".  You complain about reaction time and how things are too confusing, yet the more I played this game, the slower the combat became.  I learned the timing of when classes were more likely to use certain skills.  When a warrior was about to blow his spike on me, when a mesmer was about to try to blink away after losing X amount of health.  Have I played this game enough to be elite at these things? No, I've had as much time as anyone, but I evaluate where I was on day 1 and on the last day and I find that I've become better at reacting to what others are doing, even in big fights.  (Seems like most don't remember first learning PvP in WoW).

Teamwork:
OP's opinion on teamwork, well it is just wrong.  GW2 currently is less about direct damage and spiking and more about coordination, pressure damage and positioning.  I played my entire time while testing this game on a team.  We communicated and coordinated everything over voice.  We used a variety of builds and strategies and found what works.  It wasn't a collection of 5 people spamming attacks, but instead, debuffs, stuns, target calling, damage dealing, team preservation.  The teamwork is there, to be successful, it is essential.  Those who doubt this such as the OP, I would challenge you come release to attempt to roll against some of the coordinated teams who realized this and have planned around it.

Positioning:
I sadly am starting to feel like I am talking down to someone, but positioning can determine the results of a fight and can be used by the more skilled players to balance a fight when outnumbered.  If an Ele and a Warrior and a guardian are fighting against a 4 man team on a point, the ele takes some high ground and the warrior and guardian initiate in the middle, the ele is as close to invincible as he needs to be.  He can rain down damage and force the opposing team to run through all that damage before getting to the upper platform, at which point the ele can just hop down and run to another platform, all the while dealing damage.  Simply put, there are definitely front lines/mid lines/back lines in this game.  Utilizing the terrain can determine the outcome of fights.

Decision making:
I really wish I could go through the variety of reasons this is not a valid point on the OP's part.  Yes, I will admit that GW2 is more focused on dmg, which their development team admitted to.  That however does not mean there is risk vs reward in the utilization of skill.

Example: I am a warrior fighting another warrior.  I hold an axe/shield he a greatsword.  We are building our adrenaline and he pops a stun on me.  Greatswords are notorious for 100 blades (about 8k damage) which would at this point equate to around 40% of my hp.  So, I pop my endure pain and take no damage for 3 seconds and break his stun.  To this, I then switch to my hammer weapon and drop my knockdown on him and plink him a few times and as soon as he uses his stun breaker to get up, I bulls charge him to knock him down, then switch back to my axe and with full adrenaline and a crit sigil on my axe, I eviscerate him for max damage and he can't do a thing about it because he used his stun break and his stun already.  I chain off a few more skills and eventually take him down.

Now, fights are typically more complicated than that, but honestly... this game is not as simple as the OP seems to think.

#1 Rule of PvP: I really don't know what you are trying to say other than in GW2, a player with no skill can stop an experienced player.  That is just as ludicrous to say as it is to read.

Aspects of Watchability:  I will challenge again that with experience with GW2, you will learn what things are important to watch, and would be plainly obvious to someone with little to no experience with the game.

Battle of Kyhlo: Trebuche's.  With someone on that, it can and will change the outcome of a game.  Watching combat take place there, if that point is held, or the enemy Treb is destroyed, you will see a change in the tide of the game.  A solo capper on a point who kills an enemy only to have another enemy come and die as well, that could equate to 50-100 points +10 for the kills.  

Forest of Niffelheim:  If an enemy is killing one of the mobs and one of your team mates runs up, ganks him and k/s' the mob, that is a 30+ point swing, and allows your team to take the mob closer to you, creating a 60 point swing, just from a single kill.

Remnants of FoeFire:  I don't think I need to explain to anyone how this map has watchability as it is as close to GW1 arenas as any.  Killing the Guild Lord and the mobs, holding points, every death counts in this map and for every second your team is down 1-2 players, you are losing points.

Aspects of Watching/understanding:

You don't see people frozen, burning, stunned, knocked down?  Those are the reasons people die in this game.  Conditions currently rule the metagame and that is why this argument just baffles me.  Do you want to see a gigantic block of ice around someone when they are frozen?  How obvious does it need to be?  I challenge that as a person viewing the game, they will quite easily be able to tell when someone is frozen and gains a blue hue, and also moves at a vastly reduced speed.

What Matters in GW2:

I think this is going to be the point that detracts the most from your issues with GW2.  You complain that this game is too dilluted and that you want Kills and Deaths to matter more and simple mechanics like flag capping to be assigned.  To this, I must say "Ney, Sir".

GW2 SPVP is about points.  Every action you do, every choice you make, adds or takes away points in a match.  If you leave a point uncapped, if you don't kill the mob at respawn, if you feed deaths to the enemy team, if you are running around the map not accomplishing anything at all, you are affecting the team score.  GW2 SPvP is a complex system.  Kills give you some points and if a team dies 5 times each (25 deaths x 10 points= 250 points) that is half of a win.  But more likely, if you keep 2 points capped while keeping the third challenged, the other team is not gaining any points toward their total unless they are killing you.

This system is MORE dependent on skill/coordination/timing/teamwork than systems where you are just going 5v5 against each other in a bloodbath.

Your General Issues:

-Spells are key to what you are hoping to accomplish.  I use many spells FOR the secondary affect because it is actually what the skill was designed to do, they just happen to have some damage on them which is nice as well.
-Hardcore? This isn't an FPS game, nor has this game been on the market for almost a decade.  This is their first installment of SPVP and I hope from my post, you can see that it is much more challenging than you thought.
-Animations, sure.. I can give you that one.  I guess the only thing I can say is this game is new.
-Weapon swapping adds to tactics, not detracts from it.  A skilled player knows how to manage that cooldown.
-CC: It sounds like you want to be able to CC someone long enough to kill them before they can do anything.  There is actually more CC in this game than there is removals for it.  Again, you have to keep track of whether someone has already used their stun break or not.
-I don't know what your point is about multi-tasking.  Not every game is the same, that isn't a bad thing.  Elementalists have plenty of multi-tasking.... you know... with 4 attunements.  They heal, damage, cc.  Not sure what you want.
-Crisp/clunky spells and combat.  I think you are being far too critical of a game upon its launch.  You compare this game to WOW... which is older than some of the people playing it.  WoW wasn't perfect when it launched and they changed a lot.  GW2 takes some getting used to and does have a "slower" feel to it, but when you adjust to that and realize you aren't just spamming every ability, you start to see how timing and skill management make you a far better player.

Conclusion:

This game is obviously more complex than you realize or are willing to accept.  It requires teamwork on a different level.  Maybe you want more 1v1 1337ness so you can show off to your friends how you singlehandedly scored 20 kills and won a game.  I would challenge that even in games like LoL, as many should know by now, 20 kills doesn't win a game... and sometimes can cost you the win.  GW2 requires that you use your skill to work within the mechanics of the game to accomplish goals.  This becomes far more difficult as your competition's skill and teamwork rises.  Guild Wars 2 has the groundwork to become an esport supporting game.  They have in the works ladder rankings, spectator mode and the ability to create more forms of SPvP, just as they did with GW1.

I hope I have shown some light into the subject and I welcome questions, comments and any abusive remarks.
[LotD] Arena Leader
Lords of the Dead: 17 Years of PvP Excellence
Selective Recruitment: Currently Open

#147 ClimacticGaming

ClimacticGaming
  • Members
  • Posts: 9
  • LocationVA

Posted 10 August 2012 - 04:30 PM

View PostValorLotD, on 10 August 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

tldr of my post: The OP doesn't have enough experience in GW2 and 90% of his remarks are unfounded due to inexperience.
=================================================================================

Nice post Valor.

I didn't want to quote the entire thing and spam it again, so I just chopped it for the sake of quoting.
Posted Image

Climactic (aka Andre) of ClimacticGaming.tv

#148 Khhan

Khhan
  • Members
  • Humanclass_name
  • US-Altar of Storms
  • Nightfall
  • Posts: 5
  • Talents: Frost

Posted 10 August 2012 - 06:27 PM

WoW type CCs are unnecessary in a game with no designated healing classes.   Knockdowns-> successful executions require a level of awareness that is not really necessary in WoW type pvp, eliminating people dying in a global (because thats pretty fair and skill oriented, right?)
  The bottom line is this guy is mad that the good old WoW pvp days are over.  I don't care how many expansions come out for it, its the same old stale game.  All the hardcore PvPers are going to try and bash anything else that comes out to hold onto their MMO pride of being at the top 1% of a game...   Hard to predict whether a game will be good for esports, especially with so much bias out there like this entire article.   Time will tell!

#149 Philijongon

Philijongon
  • Members
  • Posts: 11
  • LocationDenmark

Posted 10 August 2012 - 07:10 PM

View PostValorLotD, on 10 August 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

tldr of my post: The OP doesn't have enough experience in GW2 and 90% of his remarks are unfounded due to inexperience.

You basically said the most of it, if now all.

This guy posted it out of pure rage and fanboyism it seems.

#150 ShakeGW2

ShakeGW2
  • Members
  • Posts: 10

Posted 10 August 2012 - 07:38 PM

I think GW2 has a lot of potential. It's fun, it takes a lot of teamwork, it takes good timing, skill, and synergy between players. There is a lot of room for skillful and smart plays, and there are a lot of mind games between teams. All of that stuff lends itself to the game becoming an esport.

#151 Wulgarra

Wulgarra
  • Members
  • Posts: 1

Posted 10 August 2012 - 08:12 PM

HECK YA!!

#152 Lufi

Lufi
  • Members
  • Posts: 18

Posted 11 August 2012 - 03:33 PM

Looks like WoW but has many moba mechanics. Definitely viable if they add spectacors mode.

#153 Sanaubia

Sanaubia
  • Members
  • Posts: 53

Posted 11 August 2012 - 03:49 PM

View PostLufi, on 11 August 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

Looks like WoW but has many moba mechanics. Definitely viable if they add spectacors mode.

and they will add spectator mode.

#154 Seacod

Seacod
  • Members
  • Posts: 8

Posted 11 August 2012 - 06:55 PM

View PostLufi, on 11 August 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

Looks like WoW but has many moba mechanics. Definitely viable if they add spectacors mode.

Moba mechanics?
wut.

#155 Lufi

Lufi
  • Members
  • Posts: 18

Posted 11 August 2012 - 08:02 PM

View PostSeacod, on 11 August 2012 - 06:55 PM, said:

Moba mechanics?
wut.

I would rather not get deeply into this conversation since it may be a poor comparasion but here is what I meant:

- position based
- base management (more or less)
- resource collection
- killing extra units to gain resources/buffs
- choosing a "hero" (w/o necessity to level it outside maps) with various abilities to fit teams strategy

#156 treeqt

treeqt
  • Members
  • Posts: 8414

Posted 12 August 2012 - 07:18 AM

View PostLufi, on 11 August 2012 - 08:02 PM, said:

I would rather not get deeply into this conversation since it may be a poor comparasion but here is what I meant:

- position based
- base management (more or less)
- resource collection
- killing extra units to gain resources/buffs
- choosing a "hero" (w/o necessity to level it outside maps) with various abilities to fit teams strategy

Ok, I'll go through these real quick:
1. So is every single eSports, ever, as well as every other team game (basketball, football, bla bla bla).
2. I don't really understand that point so I will have to skip that.
3. There is a huge difference between the Points in GW2 and Gold in Dota/LoL/Hon. Points in GW2 are a direct win condition. They are your primary goal no matter what you do. In Moba Games your win condition is destroying a certain building in your opponents base. Gold is only a means to achieve that and the extent to which you want to utilise it is completely up to you to the point that it is theoretically not even necessary to use your gold at all in order to win.
4. Getting buffs from killing units is exclusive to LoL and thus not a MOBA mechanic. You could argue that Roshan/Kongor work in a somewhat similar way and I will agree with that. But working somewhat similar doesn't validate your point.
5. Choosing Heros/Champions in MOBA games is part of a process called drafting. The way this plays out is completely different to how you build your team in GW2. The basic idea of building teams out of inherently different entities in order to pursue a gameplan/strategy is there though, I'll give you that.
[04:20:00] Dan: Just bang her
[20:05:48] ALEXIS JAGGER: I'd like to think
[20:05:51] ALEXIS JAGGER: I'm a modest person

#157 Lufi

Lufi
  • Members
  • Posts: 18

Posted 12 August 2012 - 07:57 AM

Thanks for explanation. Not calling it moba game (and my apology if i insulted any moba player), just these things remind me "more" of a moba than of wow. My point was that in "some" aspects GW2 is closer to moba than WoW and these aspects make it easier for this game to become an e-sport.

Regarding
1. I meant that game is more about controlling certain areas
2. It's rather associated with point 1 so yea lets skip that XD
3. I agree these are different things but still, if you consider buildings as part of some "other kind" of resources, deciding factor who will win is the resources not death of players in contrast to wow.

As I said maybe a poor comparasion, but since we are discussing e-sport viability, finding similarities to succesfull e-sport games is a big plus.

#158 treeqt

treeqt
  • Members
  • Posts: 8414

Posted 12 August 2012 - 08:21 AM

I think the main problem with your comparison is that you used it in order to show that GW2 is not like WoW. And for the most part this is true. But comparing it to MOBA games does not show this. I think GW2 is just as much different to MOBA games as it is to WoW. There are some similarities but it's mostly a new kind of game.
[04:20:00] Dan: Just bang her
[20:05:48] ALEXIS JAGGER: I'd like to think
[20:05:51] ALEXIS JAGGER: I'm a modest person

#159 Windwrath1

Windwrath1
  • Members
  • Dwarfclass_name
  • US-Daggerspine
  • Cyclone
  • Posts: 125
  • Talents: Protection

Posted 13 August 2012 - 04:48 AM

Eh, well it's not really a new kind of game. It's essentially the same kind of game as, say, playing Eye of the Storm in WoW. There's some additional mechanics (hello dodge) and it's better done... but even the secondary objectives have largely been done in MMOs, and most of them have been done in WoW.

What changes it from WoW is that you don't have a grind to get there. That's what makes it kind of like a MOBA, but that's really the only thing.

Dota: "You want to play Venomancer? Play Venomancer! No need to grind to level 80, just get in and play!"
GW2: "You want to play a Mesmer? Make a Mesmer! No need to grind to 80, just get in and play!"

#160 treeqt

treeqt
  • Members
  • Posts: 8414

Posted 13 August 2012 - 06:54 AM

View PostWindwrath1, on 13 August 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

Eh, well it's not really a new kind of game. It's essentially the same kind of game as, say, playing Eye of the Storm in WoW. There's some additional mechanics (hello dodge) and it's better done... but even the secondary objectives have largely been done in MMOs, and most of them have been done in WoW.

We're talking eSports though.



View PostWindwrath1, on 13 August 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

What changes it from WoW is that you don't have a grind to get there. That's what makes it kind of like a MOBA, but that's really the only thing.

Dota: "You want to play Venomancer? Play Venomancer! No need to grind to level 80, just get in and play!"
GW2: "You want to play a Mesmer? Make a Mesmer! No need to grind to 80, just get in and play!"

League of Legends: "You want to play Ashe? Farm this and that or spend $$$$!"
And HoN only recently dropped that. So this is definitely not something that makes it "kind of like a MOBA".
[04:20:00] Dan: Just bang her
[20:05:48] ALEXIS JAGGER: I'd like to think
[20:05:51] ALEXIS JAGGER: I'm a modest person




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

<