Curse

Avarre · Sep 26, 2008, 08:22 AM // 08:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

Besides, "who cares" isn't the point, its telling you there are lots of players still don't find the game easy. You ask for example and there i gave you. Do you really think a warrior who try to cast meteor shower is finding the game easy?

If someone finds the game difficult because they suck, their opinion regarding the difficulty is irrelevant. If a player fully understands and practices good play, and it is still difficult, then it may be that the game is actually hard.

I hate to sound harsh, but only decent players are capable of having an objective opinion about the difficulty of a game, since they're not shackled by their own incompetence.

Games are designed and balanced towards the upper end of player ability. If someone has trouble below that, it's not the job of the developer to compensate.

Sjeng · Sep 26, 2008, 08:31 AM // 08:31

Quote:

Quote: Originally Posted by Bryant Again
This isn't saying that H/H is hard. It's not saying that H/H is easy. It's saying that playing in a group with guildees is easer than playing with yourself.

JDRyder: How?

I can answer that for you:
In a group with guildmates you literally OWN all missions and vanquishes. That's because guildmates know you, your playing style, and you know theirs. You can discuss builds before entering any mission, and fill up remaining spots with heroes with the appropriate build.

In a H/H group you can only use 3 heroes which you can set up yourself, using only YOUR knowledge of the mission/area/whatever. Of course there is wiki and guru etc, but not everyone is as acquainted[sp?] with those as you are. So you're stuck with in most cases limited knowledge, 3 heroes, and 4 henchmen that can't be customized.

Furthermore, guildmates can use PvE skills. Big point there. Makes PvE much much easier.

I'd say that makes it pretty clear how playing with guildmates can be a LOT more easy than playing with H/H. And I can concur from personal experience. I absolutely hate missions like Dzagonur Bastion, Moddok Crevice, Grand Court of Sebelkeh, Jennur's Horde, simply because I simply can't seem to master them with H/H. Hell, sometimes I can't even finish them at all. Sure, that might mean I'm not the greatest GW player around, but I'm a casual gamer. I have a full-time job, a busy social life, and whatnot. GW fills my spare hours of free time, so I'm your average Joe playing GW. It's pretty obvious how playing with H/H can be pretty frustrating to people like myself sometimes.

Don't argue from your single point of view JDRyder. YOU might be as efficient with H/H as a full guild-team, but not everyone is. So 7 heroes would make things easier, but still not ruin the game. Even with 7 heroes, most people need guildies or friends to help out.

Another reason why I'd like 7 heroes: The game is slowly dying. Outposts are empty nowadays. If not for the 3 heroes you can bring now, the game would be dead and buried long ago. So why not allow 7 heroes now?

oh and btw: I have NO idea wtf you're talking about in that last guild-discussion bit. Try using words next time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

I hate to sound harsh, but only decent players are capable of having an objective opinion about the difficulty of a game, since they're not shackled by their own incompetence.

Games are designed and balanced towards the upper end of player ability. If someone has trouble below that, it's not the job of the developer to compensate.

I don't agree. I do agree that decent players are the ones capable of giving a relevant opinion. Everyone can have an objective opinion.
And I think the developers created HM for the upper end players. NM is for the masses. So the masses are allowed to have an opinion.

Numa Pompilius · Sep 26, 2008, 08:32 AM // 08:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

so play a SP game

I am.

Quote:

So do you play CSS or CoD4 online to not play with other players?

Do you play bioshock for the socializing? We're talking GW here.

Quote:

Guild was IS a multiplayer game, that you can solo in but its still a multiplayer game

No, it's a multiplayer game to you.
To me it's a single player game with the added advantages of being continuously updated and having multiplayer areas where I can socialize if I feel the need to.

Quote:

thats only 1 game, have you played any of Biowears? KoToR 1-2 "and 3 soon i think" Mass effect "and will have a 2nd soon" all good SP games that you can get 200-1000hrs out of.

Yes, I have played through all of them except Mass Effect. They're all at least a year old, and none of them had content for anywhere near 100 hours.
By contrast, I've probably spent 300-400 hours in the prophecies campaign alone.
Standard cRPG's are short, and the good ones are few and far between. So thank god for GW.

Quote:

Not a reason to add 7heros.

What? I'm suggesting a simple way to greatly improve the single-player experience by adding depth & variation to it. Why would that need justification?

Quote:

Its AB who cares?

You really should get to grips with the concep that other people play the game differently, and for other reasons, and enjoy different aspects of it, than you.

DreamWind · Sep 26, 2008, 01:27 PM // 13:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

A.Net feels that Soul Reaping should be in GW PvE.
A.Net feels that SY! should be in GW PvE.
A.Net feels that one-shot kills should be in GW PvE.
A.Net feels that perma-SF should be in GW PvE.
...

What's your point? You act as if Anet hasn't screwed up about 8908098 times over the years. Not to mention you missed my point. I am simply saying that these forums can't judge what is good for the game, and pre nerf soul reaping is a perfect example of that.

Also not to mention Anet feels that 7 heroes shouldn't be in the game...GG?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

No, it's a multiplayer game to you.
To me it's a single player game with the added advantages of being continuously updated and having multiplayer areas where I can socialize if I feel the need to.

This right here is why I think the whole situation is laughable. If anybody bought a game called GUILD Wars that promoted competition and socializing and they expected to play a single player RPG, than they are clearly the worst shoppers in the history of mankind. The direction this game has gone is pitiful. To me Guild Wars has always been a multiplayer game, and the fact that people want it to be completely single player ruins it for me. I'd rather load up a single player console RPG.

upier · Sep 26, 2008, 01:49 PM // 13:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

What's your point? You act as if Anet hasn't screwed up about 8908098 times over the years. Not to mention you missed my point. I am simply saying that these forums can't judge what is good for the game, and pre nerf soul reaping is a perfect example of that.

Also not to mention Anet feels that 7 heroes shouldn't be in the game...GG

Simple.
The people that supposedly aren't qualified to state what should be in this game obviously work for A.Net.
Your standards on who has something relevant to say are way to high.

Numa Pompilius · Sep 26, 2008, 01:57 PM // 13:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

This right here is why I think the whole situation is laughable. If anybody bought a game called GUILD Wars that promoted competition and socializing and they expected to play a single player RPG, than they are clearly the worst shoppers in the history of mankind.

Yeah, I'm such an uninformed shopper I bought Half Life without realizing it'd cut my life in half!

Hint: they're NAMES, not a INSTRUCTIONS. The "guild wars" is a historical event which takes place prior to Prophecies, much like the "clone wars" in Star Wars.

Quote:

To me Guild Wars has always been a multiplayer game, and the fact that people want it to be completely single player ruins it for me.

This does not make sense. No one wants to make it single-player only.

Quote:

I'd rather load up a single player console RPG.

Jap crap? You have bad taste in games, but at least you'll get 10-20 hours of entertainment.

zwei2stein · Sep 26, 2008, 02:07 PM // 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

This right here is why I think the whole situation is laughable. If anybody bought a game called GUILD Wars that promoted competition and socializing and they expected to play a single player RPG, than they are clearly the worst shoppers in the history of mankind. The direction this game has gone is pitiful. To me Guild Wars has always been a multiplayer game, and the fact that people want it to be completely single player ruins it for me. I'd rather load up a single player console RPG.

Maybe you need to think out of box a bit? Being Online != Required Multiplayer. Being Able to socialize != Socialize or GTFO.

Since begining, GW was part single player game (try to deny that), and it was one of its major strength and it did get it sales from lots of people (especially diablo 2 crowd which already knew that you can play online game as single player if they wish and that there is nothing wrong with that.)

For lots of reasons, GW makes excellent single player RPG. One, for example would be that your "savegame" is stored somewhere else, you can reinstall or switch computers with ease and you can come back year later to continue where you left off. Try do do that without game being online.

Also, i would like to know how exactly are people soloing ruining it for you. You know, noone suggests that 7 heroes would also come with ban on human parties.

Inner Salbat · Sep 26, 2008, 02:24 PM // 14:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

This right here is why I think the whole situation is laughable. If anybody bought a game called GUILD Wars that promoted competition and socializing and they expected to play a single player RPG, than they are clearly the worst shoppers in the history of mankind. The direction this game has gone is pitiful. To me Guild Wars has always been a multiplayer game, and the fact that people want it to be completely single player ruins it for me. I'd rather load up a single player console RPG.

So we're reading that solo on the box should mean multi-player game? it doesn't matter that it's developed into something else later in life, if you brought the game when it first came out you wouldn't be wrong for thinking you could solo by yourself the game.

Guild Wars was supposed to be about PvP, you was supposed to do the PvE content for Unlocks / armor (if you wanted too), your supposed to immigrate from PvE after finishing the campaign with some idea of how the mechanics work in PvP by examples given in PvE, when they found that Prophecies was a more popular game as PvE they tried very hard to get those players to shift to PvP al'a Factions, that didn't work either so they gave up and just made a PvE game Nightfall & Eye Of The North.

At the time and still today to some extent Guild Wars is one hell of a PvE game for your money, although with Perfect World some of that gloss is being rubbed off.

It's not that they are bad shoppers that is wrong, it's that we gave attention to different advertising on the same box, I skipped the PvP part and said what else? solo yay!.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

This does not make sense. No one wants to make it single-player only.

I would love it as a single player off-line game, but it isn't it's an online game and while it is such I expect certain demans from it like being able to do *all* things with or without people, so I can get on with what I want to do, not wait around hoping to do what I'd like to do.

Larcen · Sep 26, 2008, 03:19 PM // 15:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

I would love it as a single player off-line game, but it isn't it's an online game and while it is such I expect certain demans from it like being able to do *all* things with or without people, so I can get on with what I want to do, not wait around hoping to do what I'd like to do.

Precisely the point I was trying to make. Waiting around for a group that is even half decent discourages play, finally getting a group together only to suck is even worse. Where is the fun in that. Half your play time is wasted just trying to organize a group, it then becomes not worth the headache to attempt to continue.

Furthermore, I believe myself to be a decent player, though I agree there are far better. I also know there are younger kids, and even adults who don't have the human skills needed to be good at this game. When they play, they play for fun, and like someone else said, they just may not have access to heroes. Therefore, when trying to help them, or if they are just playing by themselves (with heroes mind you) why should they be limited easy areas that are henchman capable.

Just cause I can't play (Not me, just generalizing) an Imbagon, or Terra Tank, or HB Monk, or Permasin, or anything else popular at the times, why shouldn't I be able to do the UW, or FoW, or DoA, or Urgozz, or The Deep? Why should those of us without the time or skill, who have spent the same amount of money on all the games etc, be limited to not be able to circumvent -all- the available areas of the game. NM, and/or HM.

It just makes sense.

Inner Salbat · Sep 26, 2008, 03:40 PM // 15:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larcen

Just cause I can't play (Not me, just generalizing) an Imbagon, or Terra Tank, or HB Monk, or Permasin, or anything else popular at the times, why shouldn't I be able to do the UW, or FoW, or DoA, or Urgozz, or The Deep? Why should those of us without the time or skill, who have spent the same amount of money on all the games etc, be limited to not be able to circumvent -all- the available areas of the game. NM, and/or HM.

Don't you know those areas are just for farming ? people don't actually play those areas to finish them or experience them in there entirety there just wealth fields, this was if only the 1 benefit of Usran people where compelled to complete them because it was within there time limits to be done, classes didn't matter groups of people gathered, now the farmers got there wish now we must pay the price.

You add 7 heroes that's what you get people experiencing them in there entirety.

Bryant Again · Sep 26, 2008, 03:51 PM // 15:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

which will get old fast.

Because the game sure got old "fast" with only 3 heroes, right?

Wait, you don't know? You say you don't know every single person who uses or has used them? You have no idea or opinion about how much people enjoyed 3 heroes and how many people will enjoy 7?

Good to know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

No, I said if they are so shitty and you hate playing with them so much, YOU remove them. The need to rely on henchmen keeps it some what balanced, cause you can only make 3 builds that heros are OP with other that 7.

LOL heroes are OP guys. I assume a full human group loaded with PvE skills, consumables, and max titles are totally okay though? Not to mention you are now fully and outright contradicting yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

Not really

Wow. Seriously? Wow. I really can't joke about this. Let's try a *very* simple hypothetical here.

Let's say you have 4 differently colored blocks, and you're setting them up in a row. How many row combinations can you come up with?

Now let's say you have 8 differently colored blocks, and you're setting them up in a row. How many row combinations can you come up with then?

The exact same will happen with going from 3 to 7 heroes. If you try to refute this then you're just going to look really silly.

...on second thought, try to refute this : D

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

not for long you'll get bored with it before you know it, and how is not helping people who do not know about GW a good thing

lol. Okay first part: Read above. Second part: lolwut? Now you *want* heroes to be accessible? You're saying that adding 7 heroes is going to kill the game, are going to be op, are going to have everyone migrating from LFG's to soloing.

It's not that "it's not helping them" rather than it's not putting "INSTA-WIN" in their hands. If heroes were so op and easy to set up you could just give them any old build - like most players would, due to a lack of knowledge of the game - and they'll pwn face. As is, they won't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

Yes it will, there will be OP team builds out the 1st few days for 7heros, and as always people will use them cause its the easier way, does not matter how good they are really cause the heros are playing for them.

Hurray and congrats you completely, once again, ignored every single thing I said about how inaccessible heroes are. Keep posting, you're providing everyone a good opportunity to hound your ignorance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

How?

Wow. Fortunately, someone already helped me on this one and saved me quite a load of trouble and of repeating myself. Thanks Sjeng!

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

what points? you said that people dont like to put their numbers on the internet, but millions of people still do it every day

Haha, so just because "millions of people do it every day" means most people do it everyday? The majority of the world prefers to give private information over the unsafe world of the internet? Honestly? Seriously?

And "what points"? How 'bout the ones you just keep saying "nuh-uh" too? For the casual player - which is who we're concerned with here, as they're the majority of the playerbase - capping all of those skills and other tools required to have all of those "op hero builds" is not any easy task. It takes quite a while to get used to the (as you said) "suicidal AI". It takes some practice to flag that same stupid AI out of ridiculous AoE attacks and other things that most people would just move out of the way from.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

you dont need a guild like TAM to know hero builds from pvx, any 1 can know them if you were to go up to a random player and asked for a hero team build 50%+ of the time they are going to give you subway or discord.

You seem to have an incredibly skewed view of the playerbase. "50% of the time they're going to give you subway or discord?" Where do you pull these numbers - and logic - out of???

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

If anybody bought a game called GUILD Wars that promoted competition and socializing and they expected to play a single player RPG, than they are clearly the worst shoppers in the history of mankind.

Morrowind had guilds. Neverwinter Nights had guilds. Baldur's Gate had guilds. Oblivion had guilds.

The only thing that's as bad as assuming the game to have single-player content is assuming it's only multiplayer.

(I'll also say that the only promotion I saw about it, not to mention what was listed mostly on the other boxes, was all about the PvE content. But that's just me.)

Zahr Dalsk · Sep 26, 2008, 03:56 PM // 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

This right here is why I think the whole situation is laughable. If anybody bought a game called GUILD Wars that promoted competition and socializing and they expected to play a single player RPG, than they are clearly the worst shoppers in the history of mankind.

You FAIL at reading. Look at the back of the box.

GG, tool.

(EDIT: The Guild Wars, by the way, were a period of time before the game's actual story took place. History of the setting.)

Bryant Again · Sep 26, 2008, 04:07 PM // 16:07

Granted, it only says "with henchmen"...but why would you advertise a rather hazardous and very limited mode of play?

Avarre · Sep 26, 2008, 04:21 PM // 16:21

Back of the box has long since been invalidated as solid evidence for, well, anything. How's that 'skill over time' working for us?

Vamis Threen · Sep 26, 2008, 04:21 PM // 16:21

I've been following this thread for a while now, despite never having posted. It's been worthwhile mostly, although I'd caution you it's got a bit flamey recently.

My background is that I've got GWAMM with mostly using hero/hench teams, including in daft places like Dzagonur Bastion mission. So I think I know what I'm doing.

Anyway, last week, inspired by Inner Salbat's avatar, I decided to "raise the hero cap" artificially so I could take all hero teams to elite areas. I got a second account, raised a bunch of decent heroes by going through NF, and off we (me and my second account) went. I was of the opinion if only I had a bunch of heroes it could get me through these areas.

I have a lot of experience in FOW so that fell pretty easy to my ele and six heroes (logged out the secondary). So did city of Torc'qa. I failed on Stygian Veil, but due to my stupidity and if I could be bothered spending another 5 hours I'd have a go again (there's a major disadvantage of all hero teams - it takes a lot longer).

And ..... that's it.

I've had a little tour of UW, very nice, but I couldn't complete the quests because I can't get a hero build to tank one side in "The Four Horsemen" succesfully (Signet of humility, anyone? If you have a build please let me know) and anyway a bunch of the other quests look as hero-impossible.

As for the rest of DoA, I failed on the second room of the Foundary because it requires positioning that is difficult to set up in advance. There probably is a way around this but then you've got the problem of keeping the prisoners alive which again seems to be as much a hero-movement problem. Ravenheart Gloom I had a go at but by then I figured DOA was a non-starter.

The Deep and Urgoz I can't get to as yet but my memory is you'll need at least 4 people for the former (initially you are split into four rooms) and in both the cap would need to be raise to twelve, so my 2 account method won't work there.

Anyway, my attempts with Elite areas left me feeling that I was playing a RTS rather than an RPG, and I was doing a lot more moving and macroing of heroes than I'd ever had to do, which I found pretty unpleasant. (I remember someone saying here once, "I don't macro, I only give heroes builds they can use", which I think is good advice) Also it occured to me that some groups could do 9 (!) speed-clears of the UW in the time it was taking me to fail "Four Horsemen". That kinda left a sour taste in my mouth.

Anyway, my conclusion is raise the cap by all means, but don't expect it will mean you can clear, rather than merely visit, all the areas.

doudou_steve · Sep 26, 2008, 04:33 PM // 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

You FAIL at reading. Look at the back of the box.

GG, tool.

(EDIT: The Guild Wars, by the way, were a period of time before the game's actual story took place. History of the setting.)

And you FAIL at reading the rest of the box. It says you can play solo, with henchmen, they didnt promote anything. it never says with 7 heroes.
C'Mon, you can solo in WoW, do they need to write it on the box to let you think it's a singleplayer game?

Inner Salbat · Sep 26, 2008, 05:04 PM // 17:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vamis Threen

I've been following this thread for a while now, despite never having posted. It's been worthwhile mostly, although I'd caution you it's got a bit flamey recently.

My background is that I've got GWAMM with mostly using hero/hench teams, including in daft places like Dzagonur Bastion mission. So I think I know what I'm doing.

Anyway, last week, inspired by Inner Salbat's avatar, I decided to "raise the hero cap" artificially so I could take all hero teams to elite areas. I got a second account, raised a bunch of decent heroes by going through NF, and off we (me and my second account) went. I was of the opinion if only I had a bunch of heroes it could get me through these areas.

It's gotten flamey because people are starting to buy bait from the troll, they should be treating the troll like a "Bridge Troll".

Dzagnour !wow congratulations that might have been pretty tough going.

Don't forget you was missing 1 hero/henchman or human, which could have tip the scales more in your favor.

trankle · Sep 26, 2008, 05:18 PM // 17:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by doudou_steve

And you FAIL at reading the rest of the box. It says you can play solo, with henchmen, they didnt promote anything. it never says with 7 heroes.
C'Mon, you can solo in WoW, do they need to write it on the box to let you think it's a singleplayer game?

I can't believe I have to say this, but a large part of not failing at reading is understanding context.

In Zahr's post, he is responding to a very specific opinion put forth by Dreamwind. He even helped out other readers by providing a quote of that opinion. I'll re-post it here to get you up to speed:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamwind

This right here is why I think the whole situation is laughable. If anybody bought a game called GUILD Wars that promoted competition and socializing and they expected to play a single player RPG, than they are clearly the worst shoppers in the history of mankind.

As you see, the opinion of Dreamwind calls into question the judgment of shoppers at the point of purchase. Zahr responded by providing a concrete example of the information a shopper would have available at that very moment. This information, as it turns out, would seem to suggest that a shopper looking to play a single-player RPG would in fact find their needs met by Guild Wars. This would seem to refute the position that such a shopper would be classified as one of the "worst shoppers in the history of mankind".

You see, when you understand the context of what you are reading, you can not only comprehend what you are reading, but you can also participate meaningfully in the subsequent discussion.

Vamis Threen · Sep 26, 2008, 05:20 PM // 17:20

That's true, but I think basically sometimes you need second-to-second responses (esp regarding positioning - which hero/hench's just don't do well) in some of these quests that you're never going to get from heroes. It's true that lot of humans sit in meteor shower too, but then you know not to go with them the next time. But all in all, I'm still for being able to choose 7 hero skill bars, even if you can only macro/move 3.

DreamWind · Sep 26, 2008, 06:19 PM // 18:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

You FAIL at reading. Look at the back of the box.

GG, tool.

(EDIT: The Guild Wars, by the way, were a period of time before the game's actual story took place. History of the setting.)

LOL. You posted this a million pages back and it was as stupid then as it is now. Since when do henchmen=heroes? Not to mention as Avarre brilliantly stated, back of the box has long since been invalidated as solid evidence for anything.

A lot of people misinterpret my previous post. I don't mind that single player exists. I just dislike todays culture of player in this game. I did some investigating myself and looked at all collector edition boxes, and NONE OF THEM MENTION SOLO PLAY! So how's that for ya?! In fact, the Prophecies box mostly mentions various voice chat options for playing with humans. Not to mention, reading the rest of the normal Prophecies box sure makes the game sound multiplayer to me.

I'm just saying, I think Guild Wars was always meant to be a multiplayer game. Heroes to me were always a blessing and a curse for this game.