Diablo® III

Guild Wars 2 is way better then wow and D3

Posts: 211
You like WoW more than Guild Wars 2. That doesn't mean that it's better.

I could just as easily take the opposing position, saying that Guild Wars 2 is better than WoW and talk about Guild Wars 2's strengths and WoW's weaknesses. Both games have their share of positives and negatives. Each game offers more to different kinds of players.

On a side note, I'm always fascinated when people talk about something like PvP and complain that it's a "zerg fest". Isn't overwhelming an enemy's position with superior numbers a sound strategy?


Its better. Even if its still just my opinion vs. your opinion, it will be validated by MoP and the fact most pvpers will stick with arenas and wow. They are simply a better system at this time.

I mentioned GW2's strength: 1v1 battles. However team fights are bad, and quickly turn into zerg fests and spam fests, esp with no dedicated healers. It turns into Tab spam or assist target spam.

For the record, rated BGs in wow sucks for the same reason, and is precisely why they have never caught on with most pvpers. Hell look at 5v5 arena participation. Its horrible and generally looked down upon for similar reasons.

Zerg fests are not fun, and they get old very quick. Something like Alterac Valley or WvWvW sounds fun and is cool for a bit. The glamour wears off soon and ppl get tired of it.

Not only that, zerg-fests in Rpgs is way different then say point zergs in FPS's. They just are. Getting tab targetted down by spells/abilities is far different then ppl firing at you, etc.

It provides no long lasting fun, and people like competition. Getting rolled by 2-3 guys simply gets old.

You played wow im guessing. Did you actually like things like Wintersgrasp or whatever the other one is(forgot) more then a couple times? I didnt. It was a neat concept for a few maps, then its just stupid.

Did you ever play Warhammer? It is VERY similar to GW2, even in PvE. It was cool as a fan for a month or 2, then it wasnt. The one saving grace for GW2 is the 1v1 battles are more engaging then Warhammer.

Im not trying to demonize the game, just if you are gonna point out that its better then WoW give an example. The PvE isnt, but the story-line is ok. The PvP sure as hell isnt, and this kinda surprises me. I would have figured it would put wow arenas in the dust, but it simply doesnt.

An opinion is just an opinion. It doesn't matter if a ton of people share the same opinion. American Idol is consistently one of the most watched shows in America. Does that mean it's better than shows with lower ratings? No.

Zerg fests definitely aren't fun when your team is getting housed in PvP. But it's still good strategy to overwhelm the opponent when possible. I find it strange that you're complaining that people get killed when they're outnumbered, whether it's large groups or small skirmishes (2v1 or 3v1).

If you honestly believe that Guild Wars 2 only has one strength (1v1), then this is going to be a really short discussion.

I liked Wintergrasp. And Alterac Valley. My server was horribly biased towards the Alliance and, being on the Horde side, I rarely got to be on the winning time. But I still had fun. I haven't touched a ton of the sPvP or WvWvW in Guild Wars 2, but I've had fun in my limited experience.

I played Warhammer too. I really liked it. The problem I had was that the game got way too buggy and it didn't run all that well. I was also discouraged by how horribly grindy the game became. I never actually reached the level cap.

I'm not going to point out that it's better than WoW. I can point out why I like it better than WoW. But there is no way to empirically determine that one game is better than the other. It's a matter of taste. I prefer PvE in Guild Wars 2. I prefer the art style. It never really feels like it's a big grind. I like the dynamic events system. I like little things like nodes and monsters not getting "tagged" by a single player. No backtracking, no busy work. I don't feel like I'm on rails. I prefer the combat system.

Your preference leans toward WoW. Mine leans toward Guild Wars 2. Don't pretend that one game or the other is empirically better. That's simply not true. If Guild Wars 2 were a broken game, then I might agree that it's inferior. But it's not.

The final nail in the coffin for me, regarding WoW? $15 per month. I'm embarrassed that it took me roughly 6 years to figure it out, but I decided that the monthly subscription just wasn't justifiable.
Reply Quote
Their opinion seems to be that players do not like being stunned or sapped etc. So you get skills like "next attack turns your opponent to stone for 1 second" and that is a top tier skill. But I suppose you are giving damage and not recieving it for one second. It depends on your taste whether its better or not.
Reply Quote
Posts: 4,350


Im not saying GW2 is a bad game. I simply said it isnt as good as WoW, and subs will prove it again. It just didnt add anything that makes it worth playing over WoW. And for the record I dont play WoW atm. I quit over a year ago.

Its not a knock on GW2, nothing has came close to beating WoW all these years.


That's kind of a dumb way to rate quality. The Transformers movies made more money than Citizen Kane, or The day the earth stood still, or the man who would be king so it's better. Umm no. I am trying to fine a way to think of a way to say this without sounding pretentious, but how popular something is has nothing to do with it's quality.

You can have your flow charts your ideal Kinaesthetics, your debates on skill needed. You can debate the story or the art style. But more people like it so it's better is not an argument. At least not one that will hold any water.
Reply Quote
Posts: 211
Your arguement is akin to, "So and so won the fight, but there was no loser here today."

And that is a false arguement. One guy moves on, one doesnt. Sugar coating it doesnt make it right.

Games come and go all the time. Warhammer was obviously a bad game, same as Hellgate London, same as any mmo that "failed". If they werent bad, or worse, they wouldnt have failed.

LoL was a far sight different then Dota. HoN was a straight up port same animation times and all. LoL beat HoN because its a better game. LoL is still trumping Dota 2.

You can choose to believe that there is no "loser," like some parent trying to calm a child, but the truth is there is always something worse.

Im not saying GW2 is a bad game. I simply said it isnt as good as WoW, and subs will prove it again. It just didnt add anything that makes it worth playing over WoW. And for the record I dont play WoW atm. I quit over a year ago.

Its not a knock on GW2, nothing has came close to beating WoW all these years.

No. My argument is simply a matter of understanding the difference between subjective and objective. I'm not saying that "there is no loser". I'm saying that before we could agree on a winner and a loser, we'd have to agree on objective criteria to establish what makes one game better than another.

And if your objective criteria is the amount of subscriptions that a game holds - which seems to be the case - then all I have to say is that popularity =/= quality. American Idol usually pulls in 15-20 million viewers. The Wire, widely considered the best TV show ever, averaged approximately 2 million. Popularity isn't a measure of a game's quality. It's a measure of how broad its appeal is. Diablo 3 broke sales records. Is it a pantheon game? Hell no. It's not even the best game of this year.

WoW will continue to have a massive amount of subs. Not because it's a great game, but because it successfully appeals to the largest audience. That doesn't make it better than Guild Wars 2. It only makes it more popular.
Reply Quote
Posts: 211
This isnt a TV show. Games arent movies.

If its better, it will garner more popularity. Look at LoL. It trumped Dota 1, HoN, and Dota 2.

WoW trumped EQ1, and EQ2, which released a few weeks before WoW.

You cant always use the popularity cop-out. Sometimes, wait for it, wait for it, the most popular thing is the best! I know its a stretch.

When GW2 loses chunks of its population, like they all do, you will realize it wasnt that amazing of a game. Its an ok game, not a great game.

D3 lost most of its population because its a bad game. It happens to bad games.

So because some snooty critics calls the wire the best show ever, people watching Idol doesnt know good entertainment when they see it? You keep harking that Idol isnt a good show, but guess what? You are probably in the minority, which means your opinion means less.

Just because 1 voter out of 10 didnt agree doesnt mean 9 is wrong. There is a much stronger possibility that the 1 guy is wrong before the other 9.

Anyways, I think Im the only unbiased one here. I dont play either game. I havent played wow since the beginning of cata, and I dont play GW2 anymore either. Im making an unbiased opinion, one you cannot make atm.

Months down the road when you arent playing either, and dont have a clouded judgement, maybe you can see it too.

Let's boil down your argument. You think that popular means better. You think that people in the minority don't matter. There are some ugly implications in those, but I'll focus on the matter at hand.

I could use the popularity analogy in television, movies, music, literature, etc. Don't pretend like games are somehow unique. Games are affected by things like hype and popularity too. Just because a game sells well or retains a high volume of subscribers doesn't mean that it's an inherently great game. Diablo 3 is a perfect example of this.

Me being in the minority doesn't somehow devalue my opinion. It just means that I don't agree with everyone else. Remember, the only empirical fact we're discussing here is WoW's volume of subscribers. That is the only factual basis for declaring it to be a better game. But that's faulty reasoning.

Do you really believe in the idea of "Well, if everyone else likes it then I have to like it"? That sounds suspiciously like a particular kind of farm animal.

That's almost as laughable as you claiming that you're the only unbiased person here. I've got news for you: you're biased. You're every bit as biased as anyone else on this subject. I'm biased in favor of Guild Wars 2. You're biased in favor of WoW. That's why you're talking about your opinion and not concrete facts. Opinions, by their nature, are biased.

In a few months, I'll still be playing Guild Wars 2. I don't need you to agree with me for me to feel confident about how much I like the game. I also don't need to quit Guild Wars 2 to magically fit your criteria of "unclouded judgment". I'm able to think critically and not cave to the weight of popular opinion.

I know that you think that the anti-popularity argument is a "cop-out", so how many things can you name that are both the most popular and the best?
Edited by ballsohard#1432 on 9/9/2012 1:42 AM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 211

Let's boil down your argument. You think that popular means better. You think that people in the minority don't matter. There are some ugly implications in those, but I'll focus on the matter at hand.

I could use the popularity analogy in television, movies, music, literature, etc. Don't pretend like games are somehow unique. Games are affected by things like hype and popularity too. Just because a game sells well or retains a high volume of subscribers doesn't mean that it's an inherently great game. Diablo 3 is a perfect example of this.

Me being in the minority doesn't somehow devalue my opinion. It just means that I don't agree with everyone else. Remember, the only empirical fact we're discussing here is WoW's volume of subscribers. That is the only factual basis for declaring it to be a better game. But that's faulty reasoning.

Do you really believe in the idea of "Well, if everyone else likes it then I have to like it"? That sounds suspiciously like a particular kind of farm animal.

That's almost as laughable as you claiming that you're the only unbiased person here. I've got news for you: you're biased. You're every bit as biased as anyone else on this subject. I'm biased in favor of Guild Wars 2. You're biased in favor of WoW. That's why you're talking about your opinion and not concrete facts. Opinions, by their nature, are biased.

In a few months, I'll still be playing Guild Wars 2. I don't need you to agree with me for me to feel confident about how much I like the game. I also don't need to quit Guild Wars 2 to magically fit your criteria of "unclouded judgment". I'm able to think critically and not cave to the weight of popular opinion.

I know that you think that the anti-popularity argument is a "cop-out", so how many things can you name that are both the most popular and the best?


A lot of the times, the popularity thing is a cop-out. Not always, but you keep rattling off that wow simply isnt a good game, only popular, and you and me both know thats a load of BS.

WoW is and will always be a great game. It defined a genre. Even after its gotten convoluted and old, its still a great game, even if you and I got burnt out years ago.

There are times when popularity wins out. This usually happens with console games, though. Like Modern Warfare. Halo. Games that have limited competition on their game systems.

At this time, GW2 simply isnt better then wow. It does have a few saving graces, like no sub fees, which was number 1 reason I bought it (i like gw1 too). I just dont see it being more then GW1 was. I would argue to say the pvp got worse, and the PvE got better. Problem is I really think that was a wrong turn. GW1 pvp was its claim to fame, I doubt GW2 pve will make any sort of waves with most ppl once the novelty of dynamic events and story mode wears off.

The PvE getting better was good. The PvP getting worse is the main culprit to me thats gonna hurt the game in the long run. Maybe this is a sacrifice they wanted to make. I just dont see the PvE being able to hold ppl to the game like GW1 pvp did. I just cant see jumping around spamming every key you got till you died in pvp as a lasting mechanic.

You can keep pretending Im some wow fanboy all you want. The proof will be in the pudding as always. Ive did the same thing you are doing now with multiple "wow killers" and they all fail.

The real question is why get so defensive about GW2? I stated lots of valid concerns that are shared by most Ive talked to that dont love the game. GW2 does do some things better then WoW. It does. However, so have alot of other games too.

WoW got to where its at by being a great game first. Just because your opinion changed (seems everyone's opinion after they burn out of a game is that it's just popular), doesnt mean the other 9 million, which you were at one point, are morons.

Again, Im not saying GW2 is horrible. Its ok. I just dont see ppl quitting wow for what it offers, which is mostly an Updated Warhammer system. It really doesnt live up to the hype. GW1 was neat because you thought, hey this game is actually good. GW2 is more like, hey this game isnt as good as it could have been.

Heres one: Intel is better then AMD.

I've never really argued that Guild Wars 2 will steal a bunch of subscriptions. I'm not interested in that argument. People will always play WoW because, more than anything else, it does a great job of appealing to a very broad base.

I'm not even arguing that WoW is a bad game. I'm arguing that it simply isn't a pantheon game. I think WoW was somewhere between good and very good when it was at it's peak. But it's more significant for its cultural impact than for its quality. If I were to use yet another example, think of James Cameron's Avatar. That was a pretty bad movie, but it has been a defining example of 3D and special effects greatness in modern films.

I'm not denying that WoW hasn't been important or insanely popular. It brought the MMO into the mainstream. You can't really tell the story of videogaming without talking about WoW. It wasn't a bad game, it wasn't a great game. It's somewhere in the middle. But WoW as a cultural phenomenon cannot be denied. But that doesn't automatically make it a great game.

So where does Guild Wars 2 come into this? Good question. I don't think that the two games are mutually exclusive. The only barrier for a WoW player to buy and experience Guild Wars 2 is $60. They don't have to worry about hemorrhaging money through subscription fees. But people are setting up this false dichotomy that you can play WoW, or you can play Guild Wars 2. Why? Probably because nonsense like that is practically an American obsession; it's more psychologically satisfying to argue about one thing being better than allowing for multiple conclusions.

I think that Guild Wars 2 is a good game. That's as far as I'm willing to go in assessing the game right now. I've only scratched the surface so far, and we're barely two weeks in. You don't like some of the mechanics, so you downgrade it to "okay". One of my favorite things about the game is how it has taken some old MMO mechanics and improved upon them. But that won't matter as much if the game doesn't sustain itself. Time will tell. Could Guild Wars 2 go the way of Warhammer and SW:TOR, et al? Sure. But my first impression is that it probably won't.

On that note, I want to address your comparison between Warhammer and Guild Wars 2. You almost talk about the latter like it's Warhammer 2.0 (likely as a way to try to downgrade it as something inferior), but that's simply false. Both games are MMOs. Both games have a lot of PvP content. Both games have variations of the public quest system. That's about it. That doesn't make Guild Wars 2 into Warhammer 2.0. They're fundamentally different games on several levels.

Back to the most important point here: popularity and quality. Really, it's become the crux of this thread. You say that, essentially, popularity = quality and to argue otherwise is "bs". However, your argument breaks down the more you talk about it. Did you notice that you said "A lot of the time, the popularity thing is a cop-out" and then followed it with "There are times when popularity wins out"? I did. "There are times"? Not exactly a confident statement.

Here's the thing: you're right to a certain extent. In some cases things that are popular also happen to be good. So, I thank you for giving a few limited examples. However, there are a lot of things that buck that trend. There are a lot of things that are lousy (or just average) but insanely popular. There are things that are incredibly good, but never quite get popular. There are enough examples of both cases to make the relationship between popular and good (or correlation, to use a statistics term) flimsy at best.

You like WoW better. I like Guild Wars 2 better. We're both biased in different directions. With no true empirical method of determining which is "better", there's really not much to add to this conversation.
Reply Quote
Many MMOs got released after WoW and honestly GW2 was / is the best and its even better and more fun than WoW ever was. I seriously could never go back again to a MMO with normal quest hubs, no waypoints and with low graphics T_T. GW2 even exceeded all expectations at least for me and Iam really not easy to please when it comes to games.

I wouldnt be suprised if GW2 gets more and more players, maybe even more than WoW. I can just imagine how good the game will be after 1-2 addons.

This is the first MMO where I dont feel a pressure to lvl up. I just go farm here, explore there, craft a bit and then look wtf made 10 lvl today ^^, its great. Animations are great, graphics are superb, combat is alot of fun if you understand it and you can jump in PvP with whatever lvl you are (dont need to be 19, 29, 39).

Then there are these little things which are really well done like the AH, its so much better to sell on it. Or the extra gathering tab where you can put all your crafting mats in and it doesnt fill up your regular inventory. You can even put it in there while in the wild with a right click on an item.

You just feel this game is just made for pure fun and no work or greed. Funny enough Iam playing it more than the "job" MMOs just because its so much fun. And I for sure will buy some stuff from the shop just to support the devs.

For D3 and their greed, I didnt even spend 1c and never will.

Oh wow **** I sound like a fanboy ^^ but yea GW2 is really that good. Funny that the game gets better and better the more you play. Most MMOs start great and then gets worse and worse and with GW2 its the total opposite, love it.

That all said, its fine if ppls dont like GW2 but I see so many ppls always bashing on games when they didnt even play it. Dont know whats up with that BS, arent we all gamers ? For me it would be nice if all games would be superb not just one.
Reply Quote
Posts: 4,350


That's kind of a dumb way to rate quality. The Transformers movies made more money than Citizen Kane, or The day the earth stood still, or the man who would be king so it's better. Umm no. I am trying to fine a way to think of a way to say this without sounding pretentious, but how popular something is has nothing to do with it's quality.

You can have your flow charts your ideal Kinaesthetics, your debates on skill needed. You can debate the story or the art style. But more people like it so it's better is not an argument. At least not one that will hold any water.


I already stated why its better, but its really easy to simply say "no". Which is refutable by the fact the majority will probably agree with the points for the more "popular" game.

WoW's combat is more fluid. WoW's pvp is far better, and will be easily realized by the fact Top/most pvpers will stay with arenas instead of GW2's pvp. The combat is incredibly zergy and spammy. You are better off spamming every single skill you got on CD besides your heal. Even dodges.

Skill animations are bland. Its hard to really tell what ppl are doing. Combat is incredibly clunky with cast bars that cant be cancelled, or autoattacks that cant be. Seems unresponsive.

BG pvp is really zergy and generally not fun for most. This is why Rated BGs get low participation, and 5v5 arenas also.

GW2's pvp is even more zergy then that because there are no dedicated healers. Which means pain-training someone town with assist or Tab target is far easier.

The fights play more like a MOBA. But this is not a good thing. This isnt a moba.

I cant comment as much on the PvE, but for the most part no raids means less to do in the long run. Guilds feel empty/boring. I joined one, but similar to Warhammer, with dynamic events and no need for parties I had no real reason to ask anyone to play with me.

Ill say GW2 is better then any of the other MMO's Ive played before, and D3, etc. Its just got some glaring issues, that'll show up in a dwindling playerbase, like all the others before it.


Umm ok, don't care. I don't play MMO's any more so I don't much care why you dislike it, but half of what you said was a subjective opinion. Sure you can have the majority agree with you on that opinion. But it's a logical fallacy to say just because the majority think it's true it its. Say you dislike it for stated subjective reasons just because the majority may or may not agree with you on it. Dose not mean that it's objective truth.

Just because the majority agree with you dose not make you right. Inversely just because you disagree with the majority dose not make you right. Look the majority of people may agree with you, like the majority agreed with me on the ending of Mass Effect 3. But I never used the "majority agree with me" as the end all be all of my argument.
Reply Quote
Posts: 211
Petyr if WoW isnt a great game, what constitutes a great game to you? Give me some examples.

I honestly need to hear what these magical games are and what they entail to be great in your eyes. They better not be old games like zelda or mario because WoW at its peak/time was miles better then any game out, and any mmo out. By far. Taking into context the time released.

So if you go reaching for old games, because they defined a genre or did this or that, Im gonna be puzzled.

Seriously? I'm not allowed to use old games for some obscure reason? Strange, but unnecessary.

I'll try to present a short list of some games that I'd throw into my pantheon. Baldur's Gate 2. Uncharted 2. Mass Effect 2. Dark Souls. No, it really wasn't intentional that I started with a list of four sequels. Dragon Age: Origins. There are games in the Mario series and the Zelda series that hold a similar position to WoW because of their "importance" in the videogame world. But I don't quite think I'd include them in the pantheon. Same goes for a game like Civilization. There are plenty of others that I consider to be borderline. These include certain iterations of sports game, and possibly even Heavy Rain.

So what makes a great game for me? For one thing, it needs to bring a lot to the table. It can't be great at one thing and mediocre at others. The main things that I look at, for a game, are: presentation (sound, visuals, interface), gameplay, story, and replay value. However, something like presentation is judged on a contextual basis. I wouldn't try to compare the visuals in Baldur's Gate to what you see in Mass Effect. Production value in gaming has taken massive leaps forward.

Which brings me to WoW, and why it's not a "great" game. Does it have spectacular presentation? No. Does it have a great story? No. It's average in both of those cases. It has very good replay value and decent gameplay. If you include all the expansions and subscription fees, then a year of WoW (not including MoP) costs somewhere in the neighborhood of $360. That's a negative, not a positive. That hasn't stopped it from being better than just about every other MMO out there. I tried AoC. I tried Warhammer. I tried SW:TOR. I tried Rift. I tried Tabula Rasa. WoW beat all of them.

But I enjoy Guild Wars 2 more than I enjoyed WoW. Do I think that Guild Wars 2 is a great game? No. I don't believe that it's quite on that level.
Reply Quote
Cigarettes and alcohol have a lot of "subscribers" in the world - that does not make them good, since they rely on creating addiction. You "must" smoke that next cigarette just like you "must" farm A3 once more - and you feel like....for having done it again.

ANet did not target to replace WoW in popularity - would be stupid since they have no subscription fee. They stopped selling new game codes online because they don't want their servers to become overcrowded. They know that in a few months some of the people who played will stop playing, maybe move to some other game, and then other people will experience the game - which is OK. When I'll stop playing GW2 (in 3 months 1 year or 4 years) I will not regret one hour of the time I spent in Tyria. I regret about 300 of my 350 hours in D3. This makes it a great game in my book. See, someone who has a life, a job and family, wants to get the most effective fun/hour and not feel like he has wasted his time on endless grind.

AN only wanted to offer me and other players a few months of very entertaining gameplaying. I did not grind one second in GW2 - I'm 80 and I've done a bit of everything from killing dragons and jump puzzles to capturing keeps in WvW and crafting exotic weapons that sold for 5 gold on the awesome Trading Post.

I seriously doubt you played it - your comments seem to come from someone who only watched streams and Youtube. Anyway - this guy (Angry Joe) tells it the best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ax-_06Acj8Y
Anyone who wants to know what GW2 is about should watch it.

So - to quote you - when discussing which game is better, everything is subjective. I never played WoW so I cannot comment but the way I understand it it survived by creating addiction - that does not make it a "good" game in my list just like McDonalds is not "good" food, regardless of how many "subscribers" they have. I like my food to have real taste and variety not chemical taste enhancers and antiemetics that lure me into thinking I like it.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]