The majority of the community sucks (or does it?)

[Bryant Again]

Originally Posted by Improvavel

Like Burst Cancel is saying most are after recognition, not the challenge. In my opinion, those persons should be playing PvP and get their recognition, not wishing to FORCE challenge on other people when they can create the challenge to themselves.

But it's totally okay to force less challenge on other people when those experienced already could make it easier for themselves, via staying in normal mode?

???

[Burst Cancel]

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

*snip*

Whether cheat codes are "readily accessible" or "meant to be used" is irrelevant - the fact is that they are accessible. Would it make any difference if you could activate cheats by pressing a button instead of typing in a code? What if the code were longer, harder to remember, etc. "Less accessible" ... but irrelevant. What matters is that it's entirely up to the player to use them or not - just like any other tool.

You just know (maybe "feel" is a better term) that there's a difference between cheat codes and "legit" game mechanics, but you can't seem to point one out.

Making fights longer tests more than just patience; there's endurance, consistency, etc. In more complicated games, like DMC, limiting your weapon choice limits more than just your damage - your abilities (in-game abilities, not player skill), range, speed, etc. can all change. Taking away the grenade launcher deprives you of an safe ranged knockdown tool, and some fights are going to change as a result. Even damage alone can make a difference - in DMC DMD mode, for instance, enemies will DT after a certain amount of time. Killing those enemies before they DT may be much easier with normal weapons, and actually impossible with starting weapons.

To what degree these things apply will depend on the game. So, maybe you're right about Doom - maybe learning the shotgun really doesn't matter, because it doesn't change the game in a way that forces you to learn anything or do anything differently. How about GW? Is it closer to my DMC example, or your Doom example? Given what you and I think of PvE skills, I'd say it's closer to DMC: limitations make you better at the game.

As for Epic, yes, I think my idea is more likely because fewer people are good at the game. If enough people aren't good, even a small fraction of them caring about rewards will outnumber the hardcore players that care about rewards. How much more likely? Who knows? I don't think either is a "safe" assumption by any means.

[Improvavel]

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

But it's totally okay to force less challenge on other people when those experienced already could make it easier for themselves, via staying in normal mode?

???

Isn't HM harder than NM? Is Anet forcing you to use PvE-only skills and consumables?

I can see it - there you go out with ur character and then BAM - 3 PvE skills coming from nowhere and Essence of celerity just pop up - "NOOOOO DAMN YOU ANET YOU DID IT AGAIN!!!".

[snaek]

omg burst cancel...stop talkin bout cheat codes...

cheat codes serve 1 purpose...to break the rules of the game
wuts the point of playin a game if ur gonna break the rules?
yes, playin god can be fun for kicks...but its unrealistic to expect all the time

fact is, things like godmode prevent u from being able to lose at all
how is it a challenge if no matter wut u do, u win every single time???

plz...jus stop...

next i bet ur gonna get into hackers and how they r the best at every single game ever made because they can cheat at any game they want cuz they kno how to modify game code...

and wut after that...in a lan tournament, u get out of ur chair and kick over ur opponents pc causing a crash and instant lose?

oh i kno...lets take a gun and shoot ur opponent wit it...no way he can beat me in the game now if hes dead!!!!

[Bryant Again]

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

You just know (maybe "feel" is a better term) that there's a difference between cheat codes and "legit" game mechanics, but you can't seem to point one out.

Um, I'd assume it has something to do with the word "cheat" in it. They want you to have fun with the game but they also want you to understand that it's not a fully intended form of function.

More devs are also starting to make the lines more clear: In Rock Band 2 you don't earn achievements if you have things like "No Fail Mode" on, in Fallout 3 you earn less experience points the easier the settings at, in Mass Effect you won't get the Insanity achievement if you ever lower the difficulty from Insanity even once.

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

How about GW? Is it closer to my DMC example, or your Doom example? Given what you and I think of PvE skills, I'd say it's closer to DMC: limitations make you better at the game.

I'm not in much of a position to say this, I'll admit, but the only instance in which limitating myself has made me a better player has been for PvP. In PvE, team configurations are usually filled with too many quadruple shotguns too notice. It's also puts a huge emphasis of the skill in the build.

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

As for Epic, yes, I think my idea is more likely because fewer people are good at the game. If enough people aren't good, even a small fraction of them caring about rewards will outnumber the hardcore players that care about rewards. How much more likely? Who knows? I don't think either is a "safe" assumption by any means.

Correct, because we also don't know how many of those "bad players" say to themselves "ouch, I'm not good enough" as opposed to "ouch, this game is too hard". Beyond that the only thing that's going to fuel which side we believe is bigger is simply belief.

If you want to know my beliefs, part of it has been working in a LAN center for a numerous number of years and hearing customers often say "I'm not too good at this game." Most of it, though, has been seeing Blizz from the start constantly be going against those who "WANT IT NAO" and still be a raging success. Comment if you'd want more on that last bit.

Originally Posted by Improvavel

Isn't HM harder than NM? Is Anet forcing you to use PvE-only skills and consumables?

Yes, HM is harder than NM. No, ANet isn't forcing me to bring anything.

Now let me ask you this: Isn't NM easier than HM? Is ANet forcing you to go into HM?

I'll even answer it for you: Yes, NM is easier than HM. No, ANet isn't forcing anyone to play in HM.

Now what's gained in what we have now? What's lost? How have these changes helped the casual player base who were actually having trouble?

[noneedforclevernames]

You make a good point, but im going to have to say competitve fighting games require the most skill of any genre, simply because it requires both strategic thinking AND fast reflexes.

Actually to play starcraft anywhere near the competitive level requires between 10-18 hours of practice per day, 7 days a week.

http://www.scforall.com/sctv/sc_tv01...s03&movNum=248

And those guys are not even good enough to be B team professional players, and I can name multiple foreigners who can compete at there level.

Now give me a list of fighting fame players who have that much commitment and talent.

[Improvavel]

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Now what's gained in what we have now? What's lost? How have these changes helped the casual player base who were actually having trouble?

What we have gained:
- DoA NM can be done with 2ppl+heroes now;
- HM is more challenging than NM for parties with 1 or 2 players.

For the casual player:
- Revert of the AoE scatter (although some parts of prophecies are still all messed up).

A decent chunk of players out there aren't able to do missions like Jennur's Horde, Venta Cemetery, Aurora Glade, Hell's Precipice, Nahpui Quarter, desert missions, Boreas Seabed, Dzagonur Bastion, Ruins of Morah, etc in NM.

Most of them can't do them even with PvE only skills now that you can't take 6 ursans there.

Basically the game is quite broken for 8 player parties with PvE skills and/or consumables, but its nicely balanced for 2 player parties.

[snaek]

^sowrie noneedforclevernames, but that was a pretty ignorant post
first of all 10-18hrs a day is not a complete indication of the amount of skill level required

second of all, jus because the scene may be smaller
it doesnt mean that it doesnt exist

last of all lets not forget that korean gamers also play mmorpg's 10-18 hours a day, 7 days a week...non-competitively mind u...

wait...jus one more thing...

Originally Posted by http://www.guildwars.com/competitive/articles/interviews/returnofevil.php

The split between WM and EvIL created the first great PvP rivalry in Guild Wars: both teams practiced up to ten hours a day to keep their skills razor-sharp, and championship match showdowns between the two titans were commonplace.

oh look...koreans playing 10hrs a day in gw

[Burst Cancel]

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Um, I'd assume it has something to do with the word "cheat" in it.

Haha, touche. Don't take my comment the wrong way, I happen to share your sentiments.

Why does calling it a cheat matter? The examples you gave of, for instance, not being able to earn achievements with "no fail mode" (ironic name for that, by the way) actually removes it as an option for people who want to earn achievements. Since using PvE skills doesn't prevent you from getting any in-game rewards, the kinds of "anti-cheating" penalties that you're talking about aren't an analogous situation - i.e., irrelevant.

Originally Posted by noneedforclevernames

Now give me a list of fighting fame players who have that much commitment and talent.

You've never been to any of the big JP arcades, have you?

[snaek]

calling sumptin a "cheat" matters a lot
a game is defined by its rules

by a developer giving us a cheat readily available to use in-game does not make make it any less of a cheat than a user-created cheat
it is fun yes, but as long as the user knows that he is breaking the rules by cheating and only doing so for fun


now how that relates to anet
anet gave us skills with the characteristics of a cheat, however did not label them as "cheats"
this leaves us with is all the fun u get by breaking the rules without actually breaking the rules

bryant again used a good word earlier in this thread, "integrity"

by labelling these skills with cheat-like characteristics as "fair-play" instead of "cheats",
u break the integrity of the game

thats why hard-mode and all the supposed "impressive" titles r laughable in todays gw
how can u take a broken game seriously?

[snaek]

yesh, i admit to using them too

like i said in a previous post...some players r in a predicament
do they use these cheat-like skills and not have fun?
or do they not use them, thereby gimping themselves and not have fun?

i dun think there should be any shame at all in using pve skills
but on the other hand, it cannot be recognized as being a great challenge either

[Improvavel]

Originally Posted by snaek

calling sumptin a "cheat" matters a lot
a game is defined by its rules

by a developer giving us a cheat readily available to use in-game does not make make it any less of a cheat than a user-created cheat
it is fun yes, but as long as the user knows that he is breaking the rules by cheating and only doing so for fun


now how that relates to anet
anet gave us skills with the characteristics of a cheat, however did not label them as "cheats"
this leaves us with is all the fun u get by breaking the rules without actually breaking the rules

You talking about the cheat of mobs having one extra pipe of energy regen? Or you talking about the cheat of mobs having Monster only skills? Or are you talking about the cheat of mobs in HM having faster everything?

i dun think there should be any shame at all in using pve skills
but on the other hand, it cannot be recognized as being a great challenge either

I think the only thing wrong is people wanting PvE to be a place "for great deeds".

Until AI is adaptable, any game against AI is a joke game compared to Human vs Human.

[snaek]

i've already stated in a previous post that i dun think hard mode was implemented in the best way
and i've already stated in numerous threads that i dun think titles r good for the game

that said, theres nuthin wrong wit wanting pve to be challenging to the point where it requires great skill to be good at

r u saying that pve should -only- be looked at as a joke?
and that if one does want challenge, the -only- respectable place to find it should be in pvp?

[Bryant Again]

Originally Posted by Improvavel

...

Basically the game is quite broken for 8 player parties with PvE skills and/or consumables, but its nicely balanced for 2 player parties.

That sounds like a lot of loss to me.

What I meant more, though, is what was gained by making HM just as easy as NM (and generally toning down the whole game) if in regards to the casual player.

In regards to monsters having "totally OP skills": I used to think them ridiculous as well, until I realized how exploitable and stupid AI always ends up being.

[the_jos]

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

@ sneak: I follow you there, but at the same time I admit I use pve only skills and the most efficient builds too. It's just unnatural to gimp myself, or at least that's how it feels to me.

In my opinion, for what it's worth, PvE skills are the least of the problem.

Skills are like tools. To get a certain task done, people might need some tools to do that. I would be a bad hairdresser without scissors or comb.
Couldn't build a house without hammer and screwdriver.

Now in Guild Wars, people don't start out with PvE skills. They start out creating a certain profession. And they could become craftsmen after a while. Mastering their tools and knowing how to perform their job with great skill.
When one of that tools is 'overpowered' it doesn't matter for a craftsman. He knows it is and uses it to his advantage. However, it doesn't mean that he can't use any other set of tools.

Now let's look at some of the more visible 'problems' in the game.
Perma-sin/Cryway/SY.
The perma-sin isn't a real problem at all in the 'sucking player' discussion.
If the perma-sin would be nerfed the game won't be flooded by bad assassins. Most players would find the next best tank and start learning to play that build.
Next one is Cryway. It's partly connected to the perma-sin, since the best way to play it would be Tank&Spank (T&S).
T&S has been around for ages now in PvE. It's a way of playing that works because of the way AI works. If CoP is nerfed people won't stop using T&S, they will find the next form of it.
T&S is a caused by the design of GW. I played Ooze Pit HM last evening with guildies and it's no fun having those earthquake and exploding Oozes all over the team. It's easier to ball them on some kind of tank and just nuke them away. We played balanced, so had some party wipes because at some points only two copies of PS were not sufficient....

Next to SY.
Going back to Ooze Pit, if we had a SY para/warrior we probably would have finished without any wipe. Maybe the E-surge/Spiritual Pain mesmers would have done some damage since it's armor-ignoring, but most of the damage would have been migrated. Make sure the the SY is protected and it should be easy.

Now the difference between T&S and SY is that T&S offers players a limited way of gaining experience while SY could actually be teaching players bad habbits. To put it into 'tools' perspective, T&S teaches players that there is only a limited set of skills and professions needed to achieve goals.
Tank/Nuker/Healer. We've seen that before in about every farming group in elite areas. Only exception was Ursan, but hey, those were tank and nuker combined in one player.

But SY teaches players that about any tool could work as long as they have a SY para or warrior.
The same with Consumables. They also teach players that almost anything will work as long as consumables are used.

However, SY, Cons, Cryway and perma-sin are 'advanced' problems.
The main problem lies far before this point.
It's people not learning and mastering their profession in the first place.
I've seen countless Ele players who could only play fire.
Warriors with combo's that don't work (for example Sever/Gash when no flesh foes in the areas). Monks who could only play a HB build.

It's not only the player's fault. Sever/Gash works in 90% of the game, so someone might not be knowing that it fails against certain foes.
Elementalists who team up with others will most likely be asked to take some fire build. And many elementalists can play that role rather well. Just don't ask them to run a warder or water snare. They lack skills or experience.
And HB monks... Well, that works in most part of the game. Just push red bars up. It's the best way to play till far into the game. And when it fails, we take a tank and PS and .....

Using PvE skills or consumables doesn't mean people are bad players.
They also make life a lot easier for experienced players.
It's only that those skills and items have the potential for teaching bad gameplay that makes them somewhat problematic.

[kostolomac]

Originally Posted by snaek

and that if one does want challenge, the -only- respectable place to find it should be in pvp?

That's because the two opposing sides always improve, use the best skills at their disposal and have brains.

Pve has challenge when you play it the first time. After you beat all the campaigns at least once the game loses it's challenge, that's natural. Stop thinking that the pve part of GW or any game can or must be challenging for a long time without a major overhaul of the game or new content.

[CHannum]

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

From a +33 who started with pong when he was still a very very young kid and played countless games since then, even wrote for the magazine 'PCGameplay' for two years. Now let us set our ego's aside and go on to the stuff that actually matters:

You're getting rusty aren't you?

Some of us here are genuinly trying to help players if they want to get better at the game.

Maybe I am a bit crotchety in my advancing years

However, my point still stands. It's not that I don't care about players being good at all, it's just that you're all blaming the game design and that is not the issue.

You're either a GAMER or you're not. I start new games just so I can let the game wash over me, infuse my imagination. I want to see how all the elements come together, what design choices the creators made, how they synergise, what works, what doesn't. I all but live for the experience of mentally dissecting games (which makes balancing the wife and kids into a game of its own ).

Most people are not gamers in this vein and, as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. That goes for double for something as complex as GW. I can't tell you as a newcomer to the game how amazing the "/wiki <term>" command was in game. There it was, an answer to almost any question I had with a few seconds of typing, or how invaluable the archived information on boards like Guru and others were. Just about anything I was curious about was there to find out with ease.

The point is that I and my friends got good at the game because we wanted to get good at the game. With the exception of some of our farming builds so we can grab holiday drops, I don't think there's a pure PvX cookier cutter build on a single character or hero between us since we all know the game well enough to make our own builds or at least tweak someone else's ideas to suit our own playstyles. And while I may still cringe at my brother's fetish for pets on heroes where it makes zero sense, if that's the worst sin in our group, we'll live. We've always been around consumables, PVE skills, heroes, etc., but we still learned the game because, well, that's what you do if you want to play a game in our books.

Then you compare that to the local chat of someone repeatedly asking where he gets armor or where to go next or can anyone sell me a good sword or can somebody ping me a build for my dervish or...

The information is there and I don't think it could be any easier to find out. If you look across all three games, you'll find something the designers put in there to make sure you grasp the basics of the game, e.g. the little tutorials on snares and condition removal in Factions. There' the F10 key which hotlinks to the wiki for just about anything you can think of relevant to your character, quests, and missions. What the game designers can't do is take the thousands upon thousands of people who may play games but could hardly be called gamers by my reckoning and turn them into gamers. It's just not in their "DNA" and no amount of wishing from the "real gamers" will change that.

It's much the same reason some people, like me, have a graduate degree, and around a quarter of the population have some college degree, but over half quit after high school, and another 20% didn't even get that far. While yes, financial and social issues play some role in these figures, the largest part is individual desire as to where you stop wanting to get better (and for myself, I can say that's with my Masters - those PhD people are nuts ). I'd be willing to bet those same percentages are probably pretty reflective of the community. Probably around a quarter are competent to outright good players, a bit over half just get by and inspire this thread, and another two tenths just got lost and frustrated by the "difficulty" of the game and never even finished one campaign. The community reflects humanity and all the game design polishes in the world won't magically make everyone into good to great players because those game design polishes aren't going to change their very nature.

[snaek]

Originally Posted by kostolomoac

That's because the two opposing sides always improve, use the best skills at their disposal and have brains.

Pve has challenge when you play it the first time. After you beat all the campaigns at least once the game loses it's challenge, that's natural. Stop thinking that the pve part of GW or any game can or must be challenging for a long time without a major overhaul of the game or new content.

thats not wut we're discussing here

i am a pvp player...not a pve player
theres no debate that pvp takes more skill and is more challenging

wut we're discussing here is whether or not pve should be laughable, period
-not- compared to pvp, but as a standalone product

pve should be challenging within its own rite
not "who cares bout how hard pve is when pvp is harder so lets jus make pve one big push of the easy button and ur done"

Originally Posted by the jos

In my opinion, for what it's worth, PvE skills are the least of the problem.

Skills are like tools. To get a certain task done, people might need some tools to do that. I would be a bad hairdresser without scissors or comb.
Couldn't build a house without hammer and screwdriver.

thats exactly why skills r a big problem...
but all other broken skills included, not jus pve skills

performance level = skill of player + effectiveness of tool(s) (among other variables)

a player of great skill can overcome underpowered tools (which is basically wut gimping urself is)
but its generally pointless to do so in most cases...
nascar race drivers should drive nascar race cars
gw pve players should use pve skills


but since the effectiveness of certain tools in gw r clearly overpowered
it can compensate for the lack of skill level for players
and that results in them relyin on their tools rather than feeling the need to develop any skill

how is this not a problem?

Originally Posted by channum

However, my point still stands. It's not that I don't care about players being good at all, it's just that you're all blaming the game design and that is not the issue.

so ur saying that no matter which college/university i go to, i will receive the -exact- same quality of education as anywhere else?

people need to stop thinkin in absolutes
these r not 1 solution problems here...

education = environment + teacher + student + many other variables

yesh, a good student will compensate for the lack of a good teacher
that does not mean that the teacher can not be pointed out as to having very little effect


and while it may seem that im biased towards one way...
im arguing from the perspective of wanting to change the game
because its easier to change the game, rather then to try and change every single player of the game...
perhaps if i could, i would ~___~

[Bug John]

Originally Posted by snaek

wut we're discussing here is whether or not pve should be laughable, period
-not- compared to pvp, but as a standalone product

pve should be challenging within its own rite
not "who cares bout how hard pve is when pvp is harder so lets jus make pve one big push of the easy button and ur done"

wrong, we're debating whether the community fails at this game

and we deviated to the influence of pve only features on the level of pve players


wondering whether pve is challenging enough is not relevant here

run a balanced build in doa (hm or not, as you wish), without imbagons, and have fun


as others have said, pve only features (consumables, skills...) are tools you choose to use to be more efficient

but saying that people fail at the game because of them is a total nonsense : if the game was so easy, they'd use them all the time and succeed everywhere, and this thread wouldn't exist

people who really fail at the game do not use consumables regularly, have bad builds (maybe a few pve skills, but bad builds are bad) and a poor understanding of the game mechanics

[Fril Estelin]

Originally Posted by snaek

wut we're discussing here is whether or not pve should be laughable, period
-not- compared to pvp, but as a standalone product

NO! This is not the topic of this thread, so can you please now go back on-topic and stop derailing this thread? Next I'll ask a mod to clean this mess.