Curse

Aera Lure · Jan 15, 2008, 10:36 PM // 22:36

That's what already happens.

Isnt that proof that the current system is already a failure?

Problem is you are making assumptions that the GW2 party create system wont be any different than the GW version. Maybe we can see players' builds right off the bat, if we want to - we just dont know yet. Many things might be different.

Add to that, the reason that happens now is the immaturity of the pool of players that remain in PUGs. I blame heroes, myself, since its the only real change post-Factions that affected the mix of players playing in PUGs. PUGs were actually better prior to the introduction of heroes. I know. I was in many. I also played in many guild and friend-based groups, but I enjoyed the meeting and playing with stranger aspect that is almost non-existent now.

So, your example doesnt account for GW2 party creation differences that might be possible, as well as the fact that if we had to play with human players again (or alone, or with a single AI as I thought I read somewhere), the player base would actually work together again a bit more. Dont want to do that and want to try on your own? You at least can. At least without full AI party options around, there might actually be parties that can accomplish something. Heaven forbid.

ValaOfTheFens · Jan 15, 2008, 10:39 PM // 22:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aera Lure

That's what already happens.

Problem is you are making assumptions that the GW2 party create system wont be any different than the GW version. Maybe we can see players' builds right off the bat, if we want to - we just dont know yet.

Add to that, the reason that happens now is the immaturity of the pool of players that remain in PUGs. I blame heroes, myself, since its the only real change post-Factions that affected the mix of players playing in PUGs was the introduction of heroes. PUGs were actually better prior to then.

So, your example doesnt account for GW2 party creation differences that might be possible, as well as the fact that if we had to play with human players again (or alone, or with a single AI as I thought I read somewhere), the player base would actually work together again a bit more. Heaven forbid.

Unless ANet makes some MAJOR changes to certain professions I have a feeling the trinity will be reborn and everyone else will be SOL. This is before we consider the possibility of racial bonuses or penalties.

warcrap · Jan 15, 2008, 10:40 PM // 22:40

this is freaking gau the game is not coming out until 2009 or 2010 we have to wait so damn long! =(
but i heard 4 months from now is beta time!!! i hope so because the sooner gw2 beta opens the sooner world of warcraft can start being sucked dry of there players.
a game way better than wow or anything else out there with no monthly fee.

Aera Lure · Jan 15, 2008, 10:41 PM // 22:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens

Unless ANet makes some MAJOR changes to certain professions I have a feeling the trinity will be reborn and everyone else will be SOL. This is before we consider the possibility of racial bonuses or penalties.

Well, that's different. It would be folly to say there arent balancing issues currently.

Aera Lure · Jan 15, 2008, 10:44 PM // 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by warcrap

but i heard 4 months from now is beta time!!!

I heard a 2008 beta as well, but I sincerely doubt it. Maybe late 2008, but not four months from now. At least I hope not. They have a lot to do. I dont want it rushed. I'd encourage them to take it slow and develop it smart. I'd rather play a better product a little later, but hey, you might be right. Beta might be soon.

Buster · Jan 16, 2008, 12:00 AM // 00:00

I'm not understanding this whole companion thing.

Why would someone need a companion and if we choose not to bring one then we get some sort of buff. Why would we need to be buffed ? It makes me think that the mobs are going to be at a higher level than you. Not complaing or anything it just seems quite confusing at the moment :P

Hundreds of dragons, this is nice. Dragonslayer title anyone ?

doctorn · Jan 16, 2008, 12:47 AM // 00:47

My impression is that PUGs in GW are really, really bad. On the other hand, what probably makes them really, really bad is that it is too easy to do everything with HH only, so people are not ever trying. If they don't like your build, the ragequit - instead of explanations or discussions, for example. Thus also I played *all* chapters with AI only, trying only to PUG a few times.

The situation is different elsewhere. In LOTRO, PUGing is enjoyable after newbie levels (and before pure endgame stuff where you really want to go out with people you know and trust - that is, your kin/guild). You get to meet nice people, make friends, etc. Everyone is trying - I have had somebody quitting in mid of quest, but not more than 5-7 times in total, and often for understandable reasons.

So my guess is that having HH makes it too easy for people to play, and thus they really don't value human companions. Also, may be LOTRO has more mature players.

Also, having no AI doesn't mean you have to PUG. Group with your guildies.

aTT!kus · Jan 16, 2008, 01:04 AM // 01:04

maybe off topic, but in order to gain access to the HoM does your GW2 character have to have the same name? that would suck because most of my characters are profession specific names. im assuming no one knows for sure but from what we've learned so far i think that might end up being the case.

angmar_nite · Jan 16, 2008, 01:32 AM // 01:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens

Mo: STFU! I had 5 15k armor sets, fissure armor, AND tormented weapons for all my GW1 toons! so i'm not a noob.

I don't have a single set of 15k, but from what I've seen, although conceited these players almost always know what they're doing presuming they haven't ebayed it all.

Vinraith · Jan 16, 2008, 01:48 AM // 01:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by doctorn

My impression is that PUGs in GW are really, really bad. On the other hand, what probably makes them really, really bad is that it is too easy to do everything with HH only,

They were just as bad, if not worse, before heroes. At least with heroes the only people PUGing are the ones that want to.

Saelis Scarfang · Jan 16, 2008, 01:57 AM // 01:57

I was skeptical about the heroes, but now that I've used them, I like them LOTS. And that's just GW:EN. I wish I could have a party of all of them (maybe not Vekk) because it's like we share something. I don't RP but I'd imagine Pyre's constantly pissing Gwen off, etc, lol.

Alas, 3 per person. D:

I've never minded pugging though. Never got to a point where I was insanely pissed off by a pug's inadequacies. It makes the game somewhat more interesting and I've met lots of friends that way, joined in hatred for noobs.

Dwimmerlaik · Jan 16, 2008, 04:10 AM // 04:10

Dear ArenaNet:

I hear rumors of there being 100 levels of character progression in Guild Wars 2. I'm writing to voice that this is garbage. If you go through with this, you will be creating yet another boring fantasy MMO with the same exact setup as every other game.

Please stick to 20 levels. Please make GW2 backwards just like GW1. I like reaching max level immediately and having attribute points in place early. I like capping skills. I like doing the things I do now. Your formula works well now, so don't change it.

You see that game over there? Yeah, World of Warcraft? Don't be like them. They bore the piss out of you and suck your soul into the darkness of Grenth's domain. Be different. Be unique.

Cacheelma · Jan 16, 2008, 05:28 AM // 05:28

They never said it will be 100 character levels. They actually said "100 or higher or UNLIMITED" character levels.

...not that I'm trying to calm you down or anything. XD

Master Knightfall · Jan 16, 2008, 05:38 AM // 05:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by doctorn

My impression is that PUGs in GW are really, really bad. On the other hand, what probably makes them really, really bad is that it is too easy to do everything with HH only, so people are not ever trying. If they don't like your build, the ragequit - instead of explanations or discussions, for example. Thus also I played *all* chapters with AI only, trying only to PUG a few times.

The situation is different elsewhere. In LOTRO, PUGing is enjoyable after newbie levels (and before pure endgame stuff where you really want to go out with people you know and trust - that is, your kin/guild). You get to meet nice people, make friends, etc. Everyone is trying - I have had somebody quitting in mid of quest, but not more than 5-7 times in total, and often for understandable reasons.

So my guess is that having HH makes it too easy for people to play, and thus they really don't value human companions. Also, may be LOTRO has more mature players.

Also, having no AI doesn't mean you have to PUG. Group with your guildies.

LOTRO has paying customers by the month thus you ARE going to have a more mature audience. Whereas GW has no monthly fee so you are going to have 8 to 10 year old little imps and even a shipload of teenagers who are immature as well. You can see it on this board with all the QQing and tattletailing on a daily basis here. You don't see this as often on the other mmorpg boards. They have some, but, not like the GW community which is really the worst of them all when it comes to maturity. But, there isn't really any reason to keep QQing about it, it's never going away as long as there is no monthly fee. It's a TOY to the little kids nothing more. It's just something to do with as you please and let god sort out the rest. It's really a form of chaos and to really show what young people are really like when there is no control or law.

I played Everquest for five years and in all that time online or on forums I only ran into about five total jerks. The rest of the community was helpful and fun to group with. Sure some couldn't play the best you ever saw, but, at least they would "LISTEN" that's something in the GW's community I find hard to find people that are new who will listen and even people who aren't new that you can help if they would just stfu and listen. GW has hordes and hordes of immature children on a daily basis playing this game. It's no wonder they invented Heroes so the more mature people could get away from this childishness.

Lonesamurai · Jan 16, 2008, 10:52 AM // 10:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dwimmerlaik

Dear ArenaNet:

I hear rumors of there being 100 levels of character progression in Guild Wars 2. I'm writing to voice that this is garbage. If you go through with this, you will be creating yet another boring fantasy MMO with the same exact setup as every other game.

Please stick to 20 levels. Please make GW2 backwards just like GW1. I like reaching max level immediately and having attribute points in place early. I like capping skills. I like doing the things I do now. Your formula works well now, so don't change it.

You see that game over there? Yeah, World of Warcraft? Don't be like them. They bore the piss out of you and suck your soul into the darkness of Grenth's domain. Be different. Be unique.

The thing is from a marketting and sales point of view, the formula DOESN'T work

Numa Pompilius · Jan 16, 2008, 11:12 AM // 11:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

I will sorely miss heroes and henchies if they are not around in GW2.

I can perhaps, at a pinch, accept that GW2 wont be instanced, although I'd greatly prefer for it to be instanced; but if GW2 *requires* grouping with humans I simply wont buy it.

The complete solo-ability is one of the biggest reasons I at all got, and stay with, GW.

The heroes/henchmen is the single best feature of the GW franchise, and if they're not in GW2... no deal.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

LOTRO has paying customers by the month thus you ARE going to have a more mature audience. Whereas GW has no monthly fee so you are going to have 8 to 10 year old little imps and even a shipload of teenagers who are immature as well. You can see it on this board with all the QQing and tattletailing on a daily basis here. You don't see this as often on the other mmorpg boards.

You obviously don't read the World of Warcraft fora.

Jaceb · Jan 16, 2008, 11:15 AM // 11:15

Well , i cant think of a game where PUG's arent bad from time to time :P. MMO's like WoW can have the worst ones: "lol that priest sucks. kick him/her and i'll bring a guildie." then 10min later "we're leaving, have to raid." - "LF priest and a tank" for hours until the group disbands. Depending how old the server was(is) because everyone only did stuff with their guild, hardly any pugs for higher dungeons and those that were formed broke up in minutes or because of loot drama, "noobs" - drama, "HEAL ME!!" yelling tanks

etc.

Completely new game/servers dont initially have this issue because the content is new and everyone is enjoying the pugging but as time goes by that above "guild only" mentality grows. Those that want to pug or get help for a simple elite monster quest - cant form a reliable group or get any help at all.

On an older server only most popular dungeons had PUGs, lvl 20, lvl 40, 46 and then you're done but these days someone that knows people gets higher levels to run them trough those places. With luck there was a pug for lvl 50 dungeon that actually managed to complete it but after that it was mostly with guilds. At 70 if one was without a guild, he was pretty much out of luck if he/she wasn't a specific class (healer/tank) or without a proper gear (cant get gear without pugs, pvp-gear wasn't good enough for pve). (my expiriences).

WoW is a prime example how difficult it can be for a new player without a guild when playing on an older server (highly populated servers attract people). Hopefully we dont go there with GW2 though. For the record best PuG's i've ever had were in City of Heroes and they usually lasted for quite long plus it was wicked fun and easy to form them.

zwei2stein · Jan 16, 2008, 11:30 AM // 11:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens

Unless ANet makes some MAJOR changes to certain professions I have a feeling the trinity will be reborn and everyone else will be SOL. This is before we consider the possibility of racial bonuses or penalties.

Trinity will ALWAYS be present in RPGs.

Its not because its effective or particulary fun, its gonna be simply imported by people who are used to it. All you need is classes being able to sustain healer role, tank role and nuker role, and thats kinda always possible regardless of game.

Sirius-NZ · Jan 16, 2008, 11:40 AM // 11:40

Unless you just use potions, D2-style.

P.S. No I am not suggesting they do this.

tmr819 · Jan 16, 2008, 02:38 PM // 14:38

I have to agree with Numa's post that the Heros/henchmen are the single best feature of GW1. It'd be a shame to lose them. No other MORPG offers anything like this! A single "Companion NPC" seems like a real step backward from this system, in my opinion, although how this all is going to work is still awfully vague so I'm trying to remain hopeful. (Come on, ArenaNet, throw us some info. bones! A press release. Something!

)

I do enjoying grouping occasionally, but I also like soloing, and I like being able to play through a mission or dungeon with just one friend or two (plus Heroes). Most of all, I like having the option of playing the way I want to play. When I read the article quote (which is really from PC Gamer's overview of games coming in 2008), my heart skipped a beat at the line...

Quote:

… If you’re just grinding, you’ll be able to join up with an AI party, but playing with real-life online humans will net you more experience.

Why? Because it sounded like henchmen/Heroes might ... possibly ... still be around in GW2. People who would prefer that the h/h be eliminated really should just play WoW; WoW is the perfect game for players who are looking for mandatory player grouping for all instance content.

...Now, if GW2 wants to be truly groundbreaking, they would add a feature allowing players to play their alts as their Heroes for all instanced areas. This would allow a group of two players (or even one player), the option of getting through, say, a five-man instance dungeon as you might find in World of Warcraft on their own.

The difficulty here is that the dungeons in WoW are considerably more complex, requiring five players to act individually, than anything in GW1, so I do not see how you could balance things out equitably. Trying to get through a WoW-like five-man dungeon with one player and four AI/Hero NPCs, for example, would be extremely difficult, I think, and would require a lot of micromanagement.

Still, the beauty of using alts as Heroes is that you (and a friend or two) could choose which of the characters you wanted to play as your primary toon and there would never be an issue of the endless and tiresome "LF for healer and tank for XYZ Dungeon!"

I'd rather see much slower leveling, but leveling that included you and your alts. So, too with faction. Let's have it accrue very slowly but have it apply accountwide. If soloing means getting less xp than grouping, as stated in the quote above, I'm not sure I would care about that. As long as I can still solo with an "AI party" whenever I want to, I'll be a happy camper.