Quantcast
Destructoid Japanator Tomopop Flixist
Dtoid Forums now support TapATalk and ForumRunner on your iOS/Android devices. Whoot.


Guild Wars 2 PvP to set worlds against each other photo

I'm always a big fan of when game developers share philosophies and general development methodologies behind the games that they are working on. This week, Mike Ferguson -- of the Guild Wars 2 development team at ArenaNet -- took a lofty chunk of time to discuss the large-scale Player vs. Player that will be seen in Guild Wars 2.

When I say "large scale," I mean it. One of the first things mentioned is the size of the encounters. Instead of the usual setup of pretty much every other game, Guild Wars 2 will have a three-sided conflict. The three teams are promised to be massive in scale, with each team referred to as being "composed of an entire server full of players." Because of this, Ferguson mentions that they call it "World vs. World" as opposed to merely "Player vs. Player."

Those are just the basics. There was a lot of information shared, such as decisions behind including a third team, accommodating three servers' worth of players, the PvP affecting a player's progression, objectives within the mode, as well as other unique aspects. It sounds even RTS inspired at times; resources are spread about that can be used to hire NPCs to help players attack or defend objectives. There are even massive siege weapons that can further be built to swing a conflict to one team's favor.

It all sounds like something that will be really amazing if it works as intended. Our very own Jonathan Ross has gotten a chance to play in the closed beta for Guild Wars 2, and will be back on Monday with his own impressions.








More gaming stories around the web. Got news? Submit yours to tips@destructoid.com



Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

23 comments | showing # 1 to 23
prev next

Max-'s Avatar - Comment posted on 02/18/2012 22:24
Max-
I got a boner.
Rorek's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/18/2012 22:55
Rorek
While my comment itself has nothing to really do, with the topic at hand (I.E. Player Vs. Player servers) It is relevent to "Guild Wars2." This may sound "guilded" (see what I did there?) however, I honestly hope that it is just rumor that "Guild Wars2" is also coming to "consoles" such as the PlayStation3, and Xbox360. While I support porting in general; I do not support porting when it is beyond the means of the generalized product at hand. It's not the systems fault. We just know that it is starting to become some really antiquated technology and builds for both systems (the Wii unfortunetly was never designed to attempt trying anyway.) Nonetheless I saw how horrible DC Unviverse ran on the PlayStation3 and just how generally bad it was.

Anyway. I could honestly afford to expend the time to delve further into this, but I just hope that they do not port, or waste time trying to port "Guild Wars2" over to the consoles. Even if it means more sales - all it will mean in the end if more griping, and complaining from all ends. I'm not some PC elitist. I'm a realist. It's just too much effort in trying to port a title like that, and expect it to run as it should (then again. I doubt I'll be heard even. I mean publishers, and developers have been porting, and avoiding responsibility for years now.)
Gorescream's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/18/2012 23:06
Gorescream
Wow...that is.....pretty awesome.
Squirrel Pope's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/18/2012 23:09
Squirrel Pope
Man I am so hoping to relive my old DAoC days. I miss the giant lag inducing battles of 2002/2003 on Tristan. Guild Wars 2 is officially on my radar :)
Max-'s Avatar - Comment posted on 02/18/2012 23:36
Max-
@Rorek - They did go on to state that the proposed console version of Guild Wars 2 would be developed as a separate product, so that'd mean it would have its own servers and gameplay changes to suit gamepads and the systems they'll be running on.
MechaMonkey's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/18/2012 23:54
MechaMonkey
I played a free-to-play MMO called Aika that did server vs. server style combat, and it was absolutely awesome. Hundreds of players on each side, all duking it out at once is an amazing experience. Guild Wars 2 just sold another copy if I get to do that with the polish of a AAA title.
Aronsky's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/18/2012 23:56
Aronsky
I am definitely getting this game. Have not played a good mmo in years.
BeardedVillain's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 00:21
BeardedVillain
For some reason when I picture server vs server I imagine 100's of people without armor/weapon spamming the dance animation, while the rest of the people act serious . I myself am one to take it seriously, I hope they don't allow player animations while in battle. We do not need cheerleaders in a war... Or do we...?
Sterling Aiayla Lyons's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 01:01
Sterling Aiayla Lyons
@beardedvillain

Need all the cheerleaders =D
doomknight66's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 02:31
doomknight66
cant freakin wait, this game is MADE to pvp in
AncientPsychicTandemWarElephant's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 07:38
AncientPsychicTandemWarElephant
I've heard this all before, in WAR they promised it and SWTOR has it as well (somewhat broken). And the thing is, these kind of "World vs World" grand ideas are not possible if you don't have enough players. So it could work but if players don't show up.....well.
AceFlibble's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 08:33
AceFlibble
@AncientPsychicTandemWarElephant The original Guild Wars was, for a long time, the #2 MMO (behind WoW, obviously) and most of the player base was heavy on PvP play. One of the most common requests was for larger-scale PvP. Guild Wars 2 is set to be even bigger and PvP is, again, pretty much the largest focus of most returning players. You don't need to worry about there being enough people interested.

I'm all for this. GW1 did some great things with PvP. If there is any RPG I trust to do large-scale PvP well, it's Guild Wars 2.
Sergio Sanchez1's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 09:15
Sergio Sanchez1
@Squirrel Pope Likewise - if I can relive some of the RvR of old school Bedevere/Tristan/Merlin I'm in. *sighs* Those were the days.

@AncientPsychicTandemWarElephant Dark Age of Camelot did it for a long time before WoW. Forget WoW - they never did PvP right.
zell's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 09:25
zell
@Squirrel Pope Tristan you say? :)


Hasn't someone from the team say this will be an evolution of DAoC? If it's true..it makes me moist.
Darryl Parr's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 09:46
Darryl Parr
Laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaag
Achromatis's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 11:49
Achromatis
@AncientPsychicTandemWarElephant

SWTOR never promised anything like that, and WAR "RvR" was just normal Faction vs Faction PvP but zones were tied together(I guess the idea was that the whole realm participated) - which is somewhat similar to GW2 concept. The problem with WAR is they tried to appeal to a crowd of WoW players who were never going to be sticking around anyway, lol.

And what AceFlibble said, its the GW players who will make the community. Therell be a bunch of WoWers come over and then leave after the first month sure, but nobody in the GW community will give a shit.
Party Clown's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 11:54
Party Clown
As I read this memories of Daoc bounced in my head. Then I got a boner. Let his game's pvp be half as good as classic Daoc (no TOA)
Raul Capatina's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 13:06
Raul Capatina
I see a big problem with this, players will always roll on the server with the highest ranking so it will be pretty unbalanced but i'm sure Anet has figured out a way to prevent this
Squirrel Pope's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 15:49
Squirrel Pope
@zell yes... Tristan I say. I was a dirty zerghappy alb. Heh.
caderrabeth's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 16:47
caderrabeth
@APTWE - These other games that try "realm v realm" open field combat failed, imo, because they only put in two sides. Once one side gains the upper hand, the failing side demoralizes, resulting in long-term losses as people move to someplace they feel they have better opportunity for victory (or just leave the game due to perceived imbalance). DAoC did it right (where my Merlinites at?) with three sides. Regardless of population of the individual side, they are almost always outnumbered by the combination of the other two. On smaller scale, as a realm focuses on a single front, they expose their flank to attack by opportunists.
flintmech's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/19/2012 18:49
flintmech
WvWvW is going to be sweet as hell. Can't wait.
Arttemis's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/20/2012 07:20
Arttemis
RvR for life! DAoC its still the supreme large-scale faction warfare experience. Merlin server was such an amazing place to be when battlegroups from each realm laid siege upon each other. Pre-New Frontiers ftw.
prev next

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

Comments policy

Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?

Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!