Curse

lyra_song · Jun 12, 2008, 01:57 PM // 13:57

This just boils down to the two player types

A) Players who care about balance and challenge and skill based gameplay.
B) Players who dont care about balance and challenge or skill based gameplay.

and Anet created a game for the first type, then turned it into a game for the second type as they added new chapters.

Who wouldnt feel betrayed?

edit:
Dark necrid, Mario is ageless because its gameplay, level design and challenge scale is very good.
Same with other games like Tetris.

The same cannot be said about GW PvE.

sixofone · Jun 12, 2008, 01:58 PM // 13:58

Yeah, I know. Just pointing out the frustration stemming from seeing the opposite things happen from what you expect (or want). ANet can do whatever they want, and it does feel a lot like experimenting - testing things out before GW2. Which is probably a good thing!

But, my experience of this game has changed as they change the direction of it. And as it is going, so, too, is my interest in GW2. I very well may be in the minority, I don't know. I'm not a leet player, just someone who got hooked on creating characters. I can always go back to Oblivion and Morrowind - lol

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 02:03 PM // 14:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

This just boils down to the two player types

A) Players who care about balance and challenge and skill based gameplay.
B) Players who dont care about balance and challenge or skill based gameplay.

and Anet created a game for the first type, then turned it into a game for the second type as they added new chapters.

Who wouldnt feel betrayed?

edit:
Dark necrid, Mario is ageless because its gameplay, level design and challenge scale is very good.
Same with other games like Tetris.

The same cannot be said about GW PvE.

And the best part about A is that it's what made GW unique. Not so much with B.

Lopezus · Jun 12, 2008, 02:06 PM // 14:06

Quote:

and PvE would actually have served what (as I understood it when I first started) was to be a "training ground" for PvP.

but it turned out faster that anything about GW that it will never happen and what can be frustrating for some that pve content became if not major then certainly very important selling point for gw franchise. Expectations fail to meet with reality, it happens pretty often.

Ravious · Jun 12, 2008, 02:22 PM // 14:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Where Avarre quotes Weapon of Choice.

And on the other hand TF2 is adding new mechanics to the classes. There is no perfect, right way despite the fact that StarCraft is an enshrined god of PvP. There are good ways for sure.... just helping to find the middle here.

I think A.Net has realized that 1000 skills is not the best way. They talked about emergent complexity skills for GW2, and with the fact that Structured PvP is going to have all their skills unlocked and we now have PvP only skills... I think that they are going to go the simpler route instead of the buy new skills route.

Avarre · Jun 12, 2008, 02:28 PM // 14:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravious

And on the other hand TF2 is adding new mechanics to the classes. There is no perfect, right way despite the fact that StarCraft is an enshrined god of PvP. There are good ways for sure.... just helping to find the middle here.

Sure, I'm not saying adding mechanics is a bad thing. I don't play TF2, so I can't make any statements on it, but if you look at StarCraft there were a lot of mechanic changes introduced by BroodWar, many of which are used heavily in progaming today. At some point, you have to consider 'does the game need any new mechanics', and really, Guild Wars was pretty much set out from Prophecies. Every class added since then has been an overlap on the role of something else.

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 02:29 PM // 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravious

And on the other hand TF2 is adding new mechanics to the classes...

Valve's focus for TF2 has always been just for fun, not to be taken seriously.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravious

I think A.Net has realized that 1000 skills is not the best way. They talked about emergent complexity skills for GW2, and with the fact that Structured PvP is going to have all their skills unlocked and we now have PvP only skills... I think that they are going to go the simpler route instead of the buy new skills route.

True that to death. I remember people saying how "perfectly balanced TF2" was (save for the Pyro but leave him out of this! (and Lyra knows who I'm talkin' about ; ) ). The reasoning for that is because there aren't as many variables as in Guild Wars. Is this a bad thing? Well as you can observe in the clusterRED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO that is GW PvP, no. The scales can only take so much. I think ANet learned this, and in GW2 they aren't going to fill it up with so many possibilities than they can handle.

lyra_song · Jun 12, 2008, 02:38 PM // 14:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravious

And on the other hand TF2 is adding new mechanics to the classes. There is no perfect, right way despite the fact that StarCraft is an enshrined god of PvP. There are good ways for sure.... just helping to find the middle here.

Ya, they added new weapons and achievements.

Its being called World of Team Fortresscraft 2.

Because you have to grind for achievements to get the new weapons, you end up with matches with 200000 medics.

Oh and when the new Pyro thing comes out, guess what, everyone's gonna be a Pyro.

Not exactly the best thing to do.

TF2 is more easily balanced because theres only a few classes, and they have limited weapons and balancing within this is much easier than Guild Wars skills/class synergies and Starcraft's multi unit/tactics.

Quote:

I think A.Net has realized that 1000 skills is not the best way. They talked about emergent complexity skills for GW2, and with the fact that Structured PvP is going to have all their skills unlocked and we now have PvP only skills... I think that they are going to go the simpler route instead of the buy new skills route.

The constant addition of new skills has ALWAYS been a burden to balance.

This is why Magic and other TCGs have "forbidden" and "restricted" cards and rules constantly change. These cards get cycled to make sure that tournaments remain fair, even with additions of new expansion sets that might be exploiting existing cards, or synergize too well.

This is why skills got nerfed and buffed.

sixofone · Jun 12, 2008, 02:54 PM // 14:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

The constant addition of new skills has ALWAYS been a burden to balance.

This is why Magic and other TCGs have "forbidden" and "restricted" cards and rules constantly change. These cards get cycled to make sure that tournaments remain fair, even with additions of new expansion sets that might be exploiting existing cards, or synergize too well.

This is why skills got nerfed and buffed.

Add on top of that: whenever a new campaign is designed with the new skills (and extra bells and whistles), mobs were created to be a challenge for that! Which only further exacerbated the PvP/PvE split, and having new skills that completely wanked PvP play... it became a vicious circle. To the point where, now, PvE and PvP are officially split. And some skills have 2 sets of values, and uses. From a design point of view: ugh!

Lopezus · Jun 12, 2008, 03:01 PM // 15:01

Quote:

Sure, I'm not saying adding mechanics is a bad thing. I don't play TF2, so I can't make any statements on it, but if you look at StarCraft there were a lot of mechanic changes introduced by BroodWar, many of which are used heavily in progaming today. At some point, you have to consider 'does the game need any new mechanics', and really, Guild Wars was pretty much set out from Prophecies. Every class added since then has been an overlap on the role of something else.

Guild Wars couldn't step into Starcraft shous because it turned out that Gw PvE alone is succes and PvE players strive for a new content. EoTN is just the example: okey maybe pve players didn't ask for owerpowerd skills but wanted something new in skills department for sure, i think that if devs could easily add new profesion(s) exlusivly for PvE, it will be make appearaence in EoTN. Can people be blamed that they want something new with each expansion,chapter or developers that want to give it to their customers ?

Rocky Raccoon · Jun 12, 2008, 03:30 PM // 15:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

And this, right here, is the most unreasonable demand in your entire letter, and an indication of a wrongful sense of entitlement. Did you sign the NDA? I did, and even I don't expect to be privy to internal decisions of ANet.

I have to agree here. Some players think because they have played so long they have some sort of entitlement to know reason for all ANET does. Their only real entitlement is to play the game as it is presented to them or not play the game. That is not to say people can't care about the game but we really have no control and have no right to demand change.

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 03:38 PM // 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

I have to agree here. Some players think because they have played so long they have some sort of entitlement to know reason for all ANET does. Their only real entitlement is to play the game as it is presented to them or not play the game. That is not to say people can't care about the game but we really have no control and have no right to demand change.

In an online centric and always-changing game like Guild Wars, you have to maintain a good communication with your players. This isn't to say every single one, but just as long as you're provided input. Anarkii gave a good example in his post here.

That said, the reason we'd like to know what ANet is up to is because all of these changes, both PvE and PvP, have hurt things more than helped in the long run.

phan · Jun 12, 2008, 03:45 PM // 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

-Snip-

I'm sorry Regina , but this time you disappoint me .
I normally like your short and hard style of answering but now ; Well you sound like me on my oral exams . I basically say the question 10 times in different ways with short answers in between and the teacher thinks i did great because i answered him fluently without actually giving firm responses .

You didn't really answer any of Avarre's or Nolan's questions .

I know it's hard to please all people with responses but please next time ; skip the intellectual fooling around the questions and give us real answers .

Friendly greets , Alex

Sleeper Service · Jun 12, 2008, 04:13 PM // 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

Well, you just failed to see the issue from your opponent's point of view. The thing that is stopping these goal-oriented people from attaining their goals is that the goals have been devalued to null and void by some changes to the game.

Would you pursue a university diploma from an online university who sends you one provided that you send them your name, address and some moolah?

no i can see where these people are coming from just fine. These people have already "achieved" their goals yet want everyone else to "do it the hard way" when...it wasnt hard to begin with.
Gaming is a futile endevour made to entertain not educate.
They feel that their "goal" is now worthless? well maybe their goal was worthless to begin with.

even so, their own goals have not been invalidated, after all they achieved it in their own way. A game is a personal experience a personal adventure. However once i've played it who am i to decide how OTHER people should play it?
So they want to achieve the same goals they/we achieved years ago when everyone was a scrub? we CAN'T. even if we had the exact same skills and environment, unless someone came up and wiped our collective memories we still would find it "easy".

show me these NEW players who hate this "newfangled" fashion of playing the game? Nope. its just "vets". jaded. old. vets. transformed into diehard "hardcore" fanboys and their clique.

much like a book, movie or even music... you use it, enjoy it (or not) and should come out of it entertained, maybe a little wiser, a little changed...but going up to someone and saying "You! when you use this you have to do it like i did! and if you dont then youre not doing it right!" is just wrong.

i mean christ, look at that giant "ether renewal" whine fest thread. nobody used it post nerf, then it gets buffed (because hey anet can do that now) and hot damn look at the resulting storm about how its gonna destroy the game yadda yadda.

Well ive been pugging the past few weeks looking for these so called broken mechanic abusers (something tha most of these people wouldnt touch with a ten foot pole...by their own admission), just waiting for some random EL to stick 11 enchants on me and make me invincible in pve....and nope. not happened. Seen a lot of bad builds, bad players, the occasional bear...but nothing that different from "ye olden days".

People dont PLAY the way these guys play its a little point they all seem to miss.
Dont get me wrong, people could play like that and you would see nothing but imbagons, ursans, 55's, ER.Els and "sabway" teams...but no thats not reality...it might be their "reality" but its not the one most people share.

It does become an issue when you hit the "elite" areas of the game but now we can hope to enter a pug using a variety of overpowered skills rather than just bear.
the problem lies more within the design choices of these elite areas than anything else imo.

you cant force people to play a certain way when theres so many options, many will choose the path of least resistance but...its their choice and it affects other players only as much as they are willing to be affected.

These are not goal oriented people, these are Vanity driven bandwagon fanboys.

Enix · Jun 12, 2008, 04:15 PM // 16:15

Very nice post.

I agree wholeheartedly. It seems Anet has given up on skill>time and has implemented grindable superiority in PvE. It saddens me as I am a loyal PvE player (and I spend money - all chapters, two collecters, 3 extra slots, mission pack, GoTY Ed).

I liked the PvE skill split, but it was somewhat underwhelming. I am still waiting for rebuffs to skills that were nurfed 3 years ago (i.e. chain lightning), and AoE buffs to Mesmers (single target degen is silly against a level 30).

Plz Anet - make the game challenging and fun again. :`(

kostolomac · Jun 12, 2008, 04:37 PM // 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enix

Plz Anet - make the game challenging and fun again. :`(

You do realize that what you sad can't be more subjective?
@Avarre : Great post , nicely written, but i tend to disagree more than i agree with you so: /notsigned
I agree more with Sleeper Service , when i read those forums , it seems that when i play pve will be full of ursans , exploiters , bad pugs and whatnot. I rarely see ursans other than elite areas (i see more and more non ursan groups btw). Pugs are mostly ok.
Also , your achievement won't be made lesser if someone does it faster/better.

Jetdoc · Jun 12, 2008, 04:38 PM // 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

the problem lies more within the design choices of these elite areas than anything else imo.

you cant force people to play a certain way when theres so many options, many will choose the path of least resistance but...its their choice and it affects other players only as much as they are willing to be affected.

These are not goal oriented people, these are Vanity driven bandwagon fanboys.

Your post actually had some good insight to it, before that completely ignorant parting shot.

The issue you describe above is the same issue that Avarre (and others) have been describing throughout this thread. Instead of correcting the poor design choices that were made related to "elite" areas and their ridiculous mobs, A-Net instead took the easier way out by overpowering skills and providing consumables.

What A-Net failed to realize (at least I hope they did) is that those overpowered skills and consumables would be used extensively through the non-elite areas, and that this would cause the agnst expressed by many posters in this thread.

Personally, I do not believe that A-Net consciously wanted to create a Staples "Easy Button" for most of PvE. Now that it exists, I believe that your point is completely valid - it's an option that exists and we cannot fault players for using it (and there would be very negative ramifications if it were taken away). It allows for a playstyle that previously did not exist in GW, and it's a style that many of the more "skilled" players (whether veteran or new to the game) have difficulty with.

Although I cannot speak for everyone in this thread, I believe that this design decision (and/or mistake) is the core of what this thread is all about. As I said in an earlier post, I simply would like some sort of confirmation from an A-Net representative as to whether this design decision was intentional or whether it has morphed into something that they did not intend, but it's "too late to take back." Either comment would be a breath of fresh air into the community, IMO.

DreamWind · Jun 12, 2008, 04:38 PM // 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

I think the void of CR response is due to the overall 'greedy' reasons behind the changes. I, for the life of me, cannot remember who said it, but I truly believe this: Ursan, and all the other imba PvE crap, exists to encourage people to title farm and fill their HoM. This way, very few people will feel 'left out' by the time GW2 comes around, and will actually have more incentive to purchase it. It is a relatively intelligent marketing trap, and admitting to it will do nothing but piss everyone off.

This was actually a very solid post that brings up an interesting point that I'm surprised more people aren't discussing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJWheat

You're right, this current generation is going to leave, new folks are going to leave, and the reason why is because in this day and age gamers want a game that is ageless. They want a game that they can... and Counter Strike 1.6 is a great example. That game looks like shit, it's older than my Gramma, and there are still a crapload of people that play it like CRAZY. When Source came out people were like 'Oh Source is going to decimate 1.6 it's got better graphics, its got a better engine,' and what did they prove? That you don't need great graphics, you don't need the most amazing friggin' physics engine that you can see peoples' eyeballs rolling down the stairs the same way they would in real life, you don't need that crap. What you need is good solid gameplay. That's what Prophecies had and that's what is slowly but surely being eaten away by the new content of Guild Wars.

It's the same reason why StarCraft... they had their expansion pack, Brood Wars. They're like 'if we add anything else, we're going to completely jack this game.' And they left it as it is. Which is why, still to this day, nobody says 'God it would be great if the Zerg had one more unit.' NO. IT WOULDN'T BE. THE GAME'S ALREADY OK. DON'T CHANGE IT ANYMORE!

I listened to this live when it happened and it is as epic now as it was back then. People need to understand that Guild Wars had the potential to be in this category, but all the changes made to the game have killed that potential. I think this is truly the major tragedy of Guild Wars.

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 04:41 PM // 16:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

you cant force people to play a certain way when theres so many options, many will choose the path of least resistance but...its their choice and it affects other players only as much as they are willing to be affected.

The problem? One path becomes more popular than the other. How will this affect my play? I don't care. What I do care about is why they considered appealing to the whiny MMO crowd a good idea, and what ANet's actions in GW1 will indicate of what to expect in GW2. If more of the same, then I'm not looking forward to it.

The fact that in your pugging you've seen very little of all of this "imbalance" is just further proof that these updates and additions don't appease to the majority player but to the "whiny" player - and if that's going to be ANet's target crowd in GW2 then, well, gg.

Yichi · Jun 12, 2008, 04:44 PM // 16:44

Wow so many of you are completely missing the point. The point isn't about who gets titles the fastest, or that OMG you can farm 10 more mobs than I can...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetdoc

The issue you describe above is the same issue that Avarre (and others) have been describing throughout this thread. Instead of correcting the poor design choices that were made related to "elite" areas and their ridiculous mobs, A-Net instead took the easier way out by overpowering skills and providing consumables.

This is the point that this entire open letter to anet 1 & 2 are about, which is ANET's design choices and how rather than fixing a problem, they decide to bypass it completely with a whole new problem. Thus reverting their entire game concept in the first place.