Curse

Inner Salbat · Sep 26, 2008, 06:27 PM // 18:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

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.

Could I please have some of what your smoking ?

Bryant Again · Sep 26, 2008, 06:38 PM // 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

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.

The multiplayer aspect was always bound to run into large trouble. Don't blame the heroes or the henchies, blame the fact that unless in a guild or a whisper, the entire Guild Wars population is chopped into millions of pieces.

While the instanced gameplay is fun, there's literally no way to make contact once you're in the game. With an entirely limited party search, all it does is save you from spamming "LFG". With *such* a huge game world, all of these problems are multiplayed ten fold, not to mention the numerous amounts of districts for each and every outpost. Top all of this off with a massive 8 person requirement for a large majority of the game.

Heroes don't harm, they help. They allow people to play the game who would otherwise stop, enjoy it when previously they weren't. While the idea sounds great on paper, having to have a party with you in every area was always going to have problems from the start.

trankle · Sep 26, 2008, 06:39 PM // 18:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

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.

Please read post #1898. It is particularly relevant as to why Zahr posted that picture.

Also, I admire the logical gymnastics it must have required to follow "the back of the box has long since been invalidated as solid evidence for anything" with "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".

Yikes.

Look, the game advertises itself as suitable for solo or multi play. That's certainly not a justification for seven heroes, but it's justification enough for solo players to buy the game. I'm sorry you don't like it, but there's more than one playstyle, and GW has catered to both from day one. After this many years, it may be time to come to terms with that.

DreamWind · Sep 27, 2008, 08:24 AM // 08:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Could I please have some of what your smoking ?

Sure. Here's a skill>time joint for ya.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

The multiplayer aspect was always bound to run into large trouble. Don't blame the heroes or the henchies, blame the fact that unless in a guild or a whisper, the entire Guild Wars population is chopped into millions of pieces.

While the instanced gameplay is fun, there's literally no way to make contact once you're in the game. With an entirely limited party search, all it does is save you from spamming "LFG". With *such* a huge game world, all of these problems are multiplayed ten fold, not to mention the numerous amounts of districts for each and every outpost. Top all of this off with a massive 8 person requirement for a large majority of the game.

All the problems you mentioned are developments of Anet. These problems could have been fixed years ago and still aren't. Instead, heroes were essentially a patch to the problems that have yet to be solved and may not even be solved for GW2 since Anet hasn't acknowledged them in GW1 as far as I know.

Now again I'm not saying heroes are bad or that being able to play solo are bad (they aren't), I'm just saying the CULTURE it created is bad (solo farmers). People who bought this game as a multiplayer competitive game with RPG elements and Guilds being promenent part of the gaming experience (both stated on the box that some people keep ridiculously posting), these people have watched it turn into a single player RPG with competitive elements. Do you see the problem there?

And none of your arguments deal with why 7 heroes would be better than 3. Solo play is neccessary which I agree with! But I see very few good reasons to add 7 heroes other than "people want it" or "why not" which are both pretty bad reasons. I could say that I want anything in the game or say why not add everything to the game? You have to give good reasons "WHY", that are not "because I want them" and "why not", particularly towards Anet who wouldn't get much out of implementing it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trankle

Also, I admire the logical gymnastics it must have required to follow "the back of the box has long since been invalidated as solid evidence for anything" with "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".

It required none. Anybody with any intelligence knows that the boxes have no relevence on what is or isn't in the game today.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trankle

Look, the game advertises itself as suitable for solo or multi play. That's certainly not a justification for seven heroes, but it's justification enough for solo players to buy the game. I'm sorry you don't like it, but there's more than one playstyle, and GW has catered to both from day one. After this many years, it may be time to come to terms with that.

As I said (again), solo play should of course be in the game. And yes there is many playstyles. The idea that GW has catered to both from day one is not true though. It allowed for solo play, it didn't cater to it until Nightfall. GW was always meant to be a multiplayer game with the option to play single player. It is now a single player game with the option to play multiplayer. Do you see what I am getting at yet? Therein lies the problem, and it is one of the reasons (among many) that 95% of the players I know have quit the game.

Inner Salbat · Sep 27, 2008, 09:24 AM // 09:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Now again I'm not saying heroes are bad or that being able to play solo are bad (they aren't), I'm just saying the CULTURE it created is bad (solo farmers). People who bought this game as a multiplayer competitive game with RPG elements and Guilds being promenent part of the gaming experience (both stated on the box that some people keep ridiculously posting), these people have watched it turn into a single player RPG with competitive elements. Do you see the problem there?

The only thing I see is a game that is decaying and a bunch of die hards that refuse to entertain the idea that one day and soon there will be no one for you to play with either, for those of in other parts of the world we are seeing the end before others because of time zones, should I stay up all night just to play a game?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

And none of your arguments deal with why 7 heroes would be better than 3. Solo play is neccessary which I agree with! But I see very few good reasons to add 7 heroes other than "people want it" or "why not" which are both pretty bad reasons. I could say that I want anything in the game or say why not add everything to the game? You have to give good reasons "WHY", that are not "because I want them" and "why not", particularly towards Anet who wouldn't get much out of implementing it.

We've given good reasons why, there for why are you cycling back to an old argument that isn't going to win you the argument at all? and they will likely get a lot out of it if you have to pay to have the cap lifted, that in it self is enough incentive to implement it if cost of development is going to be paid for by income and plus some, I'd have it in the shop tomorrow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

It required none. Anybody with any intelligence knows that the boxes have no relevence on what is or isn't in the game today.

Alright you can stop right there, are you trying to tell me if I buy a box of "Maggi Super Noodles (Beef Flavor)" I should not expect Noodles at all, I should get "(Bluebird) Burger Rings" instead what kind of messed up logic is that?

I'd be careful with that because there are laws ageist false advertising and no slapping a online experience may differ on the box doesn't buy you a get out of jail free card either.

pumpkin pie · Sep 27, 2008, 09:30 AM // 09:30

"All the problems you mentioned are developments of Anet. These problems could have been fixed years ago and still aren't. Instead, heroes were essentially a patch to the problems that have yet to be solved and may not even be solved for GW2 since Anet hasn't acknowledged them in GW1 as far as I know."

Number 1: theres no problem where hench/heros/solo playing is concern they are merely preferences. (in the context if heros exist or non-exist [hope that's clear])

Number 2: Arena Net has already acknowledge "the situation". I think, when they say players will be able to solo the whole of GW2 or team up with their friends (other players), including the ability for each player to bring along a "companion without taking up a players slot" is them acknowledging the "situtaion" that arise from players preference regarding heros/hench

Number 3: Didn't anyone think that adding heros in Nightfall by Arena Net is somekind of "we see our players' play style and their "situation/preference", so here you go, we give you Heros" and hence you'll never fight alone?

Number 4: Arena Net is keeping true to their promise as to what is on the box (otherwise lawsuits, lol), on that note, i like to direct you to see the box picture, picture number 1, I cropped and posted it below, please ignore the word solo, beside solo, there are also these words "play with your friends or ours." and "skillfull henchmen". Arena Net is developing their game as they have intended it to from the very beginning.

Why I think 7 heros are good:

Number 1: go to any mission outposts, from today onwards, try to form a group to complete the mission. by the time you got a group going, the next thing you know, people are shouthing at each other (typing) blah blah, you know the drama. 7 heros will eliminate all those frustrations.

Number 2: The fun of trying to make up skill bars for a team of heros has kept me interested in the game until today. I've come up with all necros team, all ele team, all ranger team. now when i have the time to jump into my warrior character, i'll make an all warrior team. lets see how many professions are there, 10, this is keeping my game alive longer then anyone else's here, I suspect. think of what 7 heros will bring, the joy!

Number 3: Heros help save times: eliminating wait time: no more "looking for group", not that I need to rush through the game, but I like to spend most of my time in Guild Wars actually playing the game instead of standing in mission outpost waiting for a group to form. If i want to wait for group to form, I'd spend it doing HA.

Lastly:

picture 2, what is that? Took from the box picture, looks like Quasimodo dancing or hanging from his bell to me.

second lastly: didn't someone sometime ago say that GW isn't a MMORPG, its, CORPG or something?

DreamWind · Sep 27, 2008, 10:53 AM // 10:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

The only thing I see is a game that is decaying and a bunch of die hards that refuse to entertain the idea that one day and soon there will be no one for you to play with either, for those of in other parts of the world we are seeing the end before others because of time zones, should I stay up all night just to play a game?

Have you stopped to ask yourself why it is dying? Perhaps the reasons I gave earlier are a big part of it? Multiplayer games tend to last a lot longer than single player games. This discussion could go largely off topic, so just think about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

We've given good reasons why, there for why are you cycling back to an old argument that isn't going to win you the argument at all? and they will likely get a lot out of it if you have to pay to have the cap lifted, that in it self is enough incentive to implement it if cost of development is going to be paid for by income and plus some, I'd have it in the shop tomorrow.

You are one of the very few in this thread talking about putting heroes in the online store. Trust me when I say that would be an extremely unpopular move by Anet and the masses would hate it. I am 100% positive on that. If they are going to do it at all (which looks unlikely given everything they have said in the past), it will certainly be free.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Alright you can stop right there, are you trying to tell me if I buy a box of "Maggi Super Noodles (Beef Flavor)" I should not expect Noodles at all, I should get "(Bluebird) Burger Rings" instead what kind of messed up logic is that?

I'd be careful with that because there are laws ageist false advertising and no slapping a online experience may differ on the box doesn't buy you a get out of jail free card either.

What do you think the skill>time people are saying right now? You know that was the most prominent feature on the Prophecies box right? It was far more prominent than the small part about playing solo. False advertising perhaps?? I suppose they can hide behind online experience may differ!

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

Number 1: theres no problem where hench/heros/solo playing is concern they are merely preferences. (in the context if heros exist or non-exist [hope that's clear])

No, but there is a problem with how hard it is to connect with other players that people would enjoy playing with. Between weak party formation, no in game way to find guilds, a spread out population, etc etc. Anet hasn't legitimately dealt with any of these. They added heroes so people could bypass problems with the game, yet the problems still remain.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

Number 2: Arena Net has already acknowledge "the situation". I think, when they say players will be able to solo the whole of GW2 or team up with their friends (other players), including the ability for each player to bring along a "companion without taking up a players slot" is them acknowledging the "situtaion" that arise from players preference regarding heros/hench

They acknowledge the situation, yet refuse to add 7 heroes. You ever wonder why? Perhaps they know something we don't? Perhaps it wouldn't benefit them in the slightest?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

Number 4: Arena Net is keeping true to their promise as to what is on the box (otherwise lawsuits, lol), on that note, i like to direct you to see the box picture, picture number 1, I cropped and posted it below, please ignore the word solo, beside solo, there are also these words "play with your friends or ours." and "skillfull henchmen". Arena Net is developing their game as they have intended it to from the very beginning.

I already answered this point. Box=terrible argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

Number 1: go to any mission outposts, from today onwards, try to form a group to complete the mission. by the time you got a group going, the next thing you know, people are shouthing at each other (typing) blah blah, you know the drama. 7 heros will eliminate all those frustrations.

3 heroes+4 hench eliminated those frustrations. Hell 7 hench eliminates it.

tmr819 · Sep 27, 2008, 11:00 AM // 11:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

Number 3: Didn't anyone think that adding heros in Nightfall by Arena Net is somekind of "we see our players' play style and their "situation/preference", so here you go, we give you Heros" and hence you'll never fight alone? …

Now, this is a very good point. I guess it's all a matter of perspective as to whether the introduction of Heroes (in Nightfall) made or broke the game. I think they are a great addition myself.

They are proof positive, imo, of ANet's recognition of what they felt the player base generally wanted, and I think they were right. If you like PUGs and enforced grouping to complete objectives, there are so many MMOs out there to choose from... GW chose to go a different route, with heroes/henches, and they are one of the primary reasons I like this game so much better than other online games.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

second lastly: didn't someone sometime ago say that GW isn't a MMORPG, its, CORPG or something?

Well, I always think of GW as an MMORPG, i.e., a "moderately multiplayer online RPG".

Avarre · Sep 27, 2008, 11:16 AM // 11:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

Arena Net is developing their game as they have intended it to from the very beginning.

...

The 'intention' of development has changed over time. Bring me evidence that at the point of GWWC, ANet intended to cut off PvP support in favor of PvE grind development.

Inner Salbat · Sep 27, 2008, 11:36 AM // 11:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Have you stopped to ask yourself why it is dying? Perhaps the reasons I gave earlier are a big part of it? Multiplayer games tend to last a lot longer than single player games. This discussion could go largely off topic, so just think about it.

You are one of the very few in this thread talking about putting heroes in the online store. Trust me when I say that would be an extremely unpopular move by Anet and the masses would hate it. I am 100% positive on that. If they are going to do it at all (which looks unlikely given everything they have said in the past), it will certainly be free.

Then maybe the better request to ask for is the server software so we can play the game off-line, at any rate let them uproar and gnash there teeth it's just content just like anything else, they would be completely retarded not to put in the online store.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

What do you think the skill>time people are saying right now? You know that was the most prominent feature on the Prophecies box right? It was far more prominent than the small part about playing solo. False advertising perhaps?? I suppose they can hide behind online experience may differ!

I don't think that statement is quite correct to encumbrance everyone for one odd as this might sound, I never even heard of this "skill>time" advertising I only started hearing about it on forums and then in game, at any rate a more correct statement we brought the game because certain aspects of either on the box or around the web made it appeal to us, those things may or may not appeal to you as well, you just going to have to deal with the fact that 'solo' exists.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

No, but there is a problem with how hard it is to connect with other players that people would enjoy playing with. Between weak party formation, no in game way to find guilds, a spread out population, etc etc. Anet hasn't legitimately dealt with any of these. They added heroes so people could bypass problems with the game, yet the problems still remain.

I already answered this point. Box=terrible argument.

What a global partying system? that isn't going to inspire me to party with people anymore than it does now, partly because I don't want to wait to have fun, I want to get on with having fun.

It's only terrible to you because you cannot argue ageist it, it's right there in black and white for all the world to see, you can wiggle and worm all you like and try and twist everything around until your siblings from the 100th generation from you turn blue, it isn't going to change what was written on the box.

I'm wondering if you think this way because your embraced that you missed this on the box and realize now that you didn't want a game like this.

Red Sonya · Sep 27, 2008, 11:46 AM // 11:46

#1 Skilled Heroes were never promised. The box reads skilled HENCHMEN. Welp you got your skilled henchmen an Anet doesn't have to give you a single new henchmen or hero. They've already said NO 7 HEROES so why do a couple of you keep beating a dead horse. When your mother told you NO when you were growing up did you continue to say WHY? WHY? WHY? or did you accept her response and go on about your business. Back in my day if you disputed mothers word you got a backhand in the mouth.

Inner Salbat · Sep 27, 2008, 12:26 PM // 12:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Sonya

#1 Skilled Heroes were never promised. The box reads skilled HENCHMEN. Welp you got your skilled henchmen an Anet doesn't have to give you a single new henchmen or hero. They've already said NO 7 HEROES so why do a couple of you keep beating a dead horse. When your mother told you NO when you were growing up did you continue to say WHY? WHY? WHY? or did you accept her response and go on about your business. Back in my day if you disputed mothers word you got a backhand in the mouth.

Actually all I want it is clarification on if it ever is or never is, if it never is I have 2 options available to me, firstly stop playing and never buy anything to do with them in the future (and discourage anyone else from doing so as well), or lastly hack the living snot out of the client and get done playing and having some fun.

upier · Sep 27, 2008, 12:55 PM // 12:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Sonya

#1 Skilled Heroes were never promised. The box reads skilled HENCHMEN. Well you got your skilled henchmen an Anet doesn't have to give you a single new henchmen or hero. They've already said NO 7 HEROES so why do a couple of you keep beating a dead horse. When your mother told you NO when you were growing up did you continue to say WHY? WHY? WHY? or did you accept her response and go on about your business. Back in my day if you disputed mothers word you got a backhand in the mouth.

1.
The hench aren't skilled.
They work - but considering how the AI sucks at e-management, at positioning, protting, ... - there is very little about their actions that could be considered a sign of skill.
2.
The box says NOTHING about being able to play only PARTS of the game without people - for example you can't enter FoW/UW with hench.
(This of course excludes PvP because of the nature of the mode!)

The box is a lie.

Ohhh and of course I didn't question my mother when being told that I am not allowed to do something.
I just went out and got myself a new mother!
Didn't you?

Avarre · Sep 27, 2008, 01:47 PM // 13:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

It's only terrible to you because you cannot argue ageist it, it's right there in black and white for all the world to see, you can wiggle and worm all you like and try and twist everything around until your siblings from the 100th generation from you turn blue, it isn't going to change what was written on the box.

Stop talking nonsense.

The box also highlighted that skill would determine your success rather than time, but grind-influenced PvE skills are in direct opposition of this. ANet design is in no way linked to vague statements on the box, and none of it can be taken as fact.

My Factions box talks about 'exclusive elite missions', and we know how that ended.

Oh, but while we're playing box wars, my disc box for Nightfall says 'Heroes allow you and a friend to control a party of champions', clearly showing 3 heroes is the divine intention of our Developer Masters. And of course, we 'cannot argue ageist it'.

In conclusion, stop using bad points.

Inner Salbat · Sep 27, 2008, 02:04 PM // 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Stop talking nonsense.

Here is some nonsense for you, if I was excessively rich I'd drag them to court and hopefully with enough bribes and enough lying (well if it's okay for them), I'd put them where they belong, the unemployment line.

upier · Sep 27, 2008, 02:06 PM // 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Oh, but while we're playing box wars, my disc box for Nightfall says 'Heroes allow you and a friend to control a party of champions', clearly showing 3 heroes is the divine intention of our Developer Masters. And of course, we 'cannot argue ageist it'.
In conclusion, stop using bad points.

New ammo!
It doesn't say 3 heroes!
It might as well be 6 heroes on a single player and one additional player!11!11!11

Inner Salbat · Sep 27, 2008, 02:17 PM // 14:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

New ammo!
It doesn't say 3 heroes!
It might as well be 6 heroes on a single player and one additional player!11!11!11

Doesn't mean anything apparently because the whole box is printed lies I wonder if the game is even called Guild Wars.

Numa Pompilius · Sep 27, 2008, 04:16 PM // 16:16

It's really pointless to try to second-guess what ArenaNet intended, especially based on blurbs on boxes (which their designers are guaranteed to NOT have written).

It seems it all boils down to this:

You're in favor of 7 heroes if you don't pug OR if you think having 7 heroes is still inferior to a pug; if you pug you're against it IF you think that having 7 heroes will make it harder to get together a pug.

My suggestion: ANet holds a "7 heroes" weekend so we can test it and see the effect.

weemanpow3 · Sep 27, 2008, 04:41 PM // 16:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

My suggestion: ANet holds a "7 heroes" weekend so we can test it and see the effect.

Agreed. Anet should just at least let us try. This would get me playing like I used to.

trankle · Sep 27, 2008, 06:21 PM // 18:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

My suggestion: ANet holds a "7 heroes" weekend so we can test it and see the effect.

The problem with that is that everybody would be trying it because of the limited nature of the event. You would see a vast reduction of PUGs over the weekend, and the anti-FHP folks would say "see, it kills PUGs".

The real effect FHP would have on the game would need to be ascertained after a much longer period of time, to eliminate the novelty factor.

Let's have a one-year trial run.