Fine, I'll bite. GW does have a few strong points.

Been playing GW (and its later chapters) since release, mostly PvP (Player vs Player) though I've finished each PvE (Player vs Environment) campaign at least once and completed all endgame PvE areas succesfully. My guild has been playing top-level PvP for well over a year now.

--- "Review" section ---

Guild Wars has a unique approach to team-based combat, and this is what the game really excels at. The skill system makes character "development" and team selection highly varied. Battles can get very hectic, and player statuses (health, afflictions etc) change wildly during combats. GW is one of the few games that has managed to make purely support classes interesting (and demanding) to play; indeed, skilled Monks are among the most respected players in GW.

Other strengths of the game are good art direction (though like Navaros said, from a technological standpoint the graphics are getting old) and a relatively large game world. A major problem with some recent CRPGs like KotORs, NWN2, Jade Empire et al is that they have no exploration to speak of - you'll eventually visit all of the areas the game has to offer just by following the story. GW doesn't suffer from this and feels expansive in comparison.

Character development differs dramatically from traditional RPGs. You'll collect XP, levels and attribute points, but the level cap is very low and attribute points can be reconfigured at will whenever visiting a town. Secondary class can also be changed at will, so only the primary class of the character is set permanently upon character creation. Perfect equipment is quite easy to attain, leveling the playing field.

Collecting skills is the primary means of character development. At any given time, you can have only 8 skills (out of hundreds) at your disposal. Skills can be changed freely in towns, but not during exploration or missions. The whole game revolves around this system, so it will make or break the character development and combat aspects for you. The system limits your power and encourages you to pick a specific role to complement other members of your team. Most of the time you'll need a team to succeed; soloing is quite limited in GW.

Monster AI (and, thanks to the skill system, diversity to a lesser extent) is far superior when compared to, well, pretty much anything else. (I still don't understand how they screwed this up in NWN2.) You can also clearly see what skills the targeted critter is using; a feature that would be most welcome in other recent RPG offerings.

The game is well balanced, with occasional rebalancing to shake things up, and there's a nice sense of danger in most fights. Endgame areas are challenging, and min-maxing doesn't result in stupidly overpowered characters like in Oblivion, KotoRs, NWN2, Gothic... well you get the idea.

GW interface is window-based (no digging through millions of menus) and fully customisable - all elements can be repositioned, hidden and resized. I honestly can't remember another game interface that could best GW.

The game runs flawlessly in windowed mode and is very solid and bug-free. Server downtime is practically non-existent, though European players have occasionally suffered from lag. Hardware requirements are low.

Even though GW is an online game, it can be played with computer-controlled henchmen and heroes. I wouldn't recommend GW to pure singleplayers though, unless they like action RPGs. Like others have said, GW has a rather poor story and cutscenes. GW is at its best for a group of buddies, preferably on voice chat, who enjoy action and exploration and don't take their entertainment too seriously - many of the cutscenes are so horrible that they actually have comedy value.

--- PvP-exclusive bits ---

I'd like to offer a few counterpoints to Navaros's gripes about PvP group forming, rewards and balance updates.

In team-based games, forming groups efficiently for high-level play is all about the social networks you've managed to build. (This probably holds true for all games, even Total War.) If people in the network are inefficient (or random), wait times will increase and/or performance will decrease. For example, my guild has an efficient system for arranging games; wait times before games are practically zero if enough players are present. Building a social network can be time-consuming of course, but for the hardcore it's the only option. You'll need playing skill, communication skills, organisation and social ability to succeed in high-end PvP play.

I think there are enough PvP modes and maps for both the casual and the hardcore. More is not necessarily better; other competitive games have already proven this. No one played Bombing Run or Double Domination in UT2004, which is why the next UT installment actually has less gametypes than the previous one. Same holds true for maps. Sure, it'd be nice to have new well made maps, but quality trumps quantity here as well. Ever played de_dust with real fanatics?

PvP rewards are a non-issue in my opinion. I'm not playing PvP for in-game rewards; I'm playing it because it's fun. The current rewards for PvP play (faction points, titles, rank, cape trims, recognition via observer mode etc.) are more than adequate.

Rebalancing is a heated issue in PvP circles. However, I believe the community is realising the impossibility of balancing 1000+ skills perfectly with the first try. What the game _really_ needs is more frequent rebalancing with less drastic adjustments, helped by player feedback.

--- Closing words ---

Guild Wars best suits action-oriented, social players. Interest in PvP is good, you'll get more value for your money, but the vast majority of GW community are mostly PvE players. A casual playthrough of each chapter should last anywhere between 40 and 100 hours. For a hardcore PvP player who wants a controlled, level playing field, GW is the only choice at the moment.

For most singleplayer RPG fans, Oblivion (even with its flaws) is probably the premier CRPG. It has a nice balance of story, action, character development and exploration, all wrapped in a good-looking package.