Curse

The Human Torch · Jul 12, 2005, 02:26 AM // 02:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis Ste Colombe

My gaming experience is a "fair game" environement (namely Total War series) in MP. Everything is unlocked, everyone got the same "gears" and access to the same stuff.

There is no chance in hell that a casual gamer can win over a hardcore gamer. Not even with a level playing ground. No amount of gear will change that.

You might think you're skilled (or not), but hours played are their own reward in terms of training, learning the skills and combinations. Casual gamers in a team game level playing field like TW were awfully defeated all the times by more experienced players with the same exact gears.
In TW, someone with 0 game experience will lose to someone with 100 battles who will lose to someone who has played a 1000 battles. At that point it level out... But that's 1000 battles, far more than any casual gamers would consider fair (given you need 1 hour to set up and play a battle...). The equivalent of GW so called grind.
Think battle = GvG

And I think the learning curve for GW is just as step as for TW, although being a beginner in GW is less embarrassing than in TW, mainly because in GW a beginner does not face top player as in TW (no matching system there).

At least in GW, you (can) play with same level players, you don't have your game spoiled because end up with a less experienced player on one team unbalance it drastically (and yes, given TW game mechanics, 1 low experience player was enough).

While you are on your way to maxing out GW gear, you're also learning the game... And that's the real difference with a hardcore player.

And to answer arredondo; I wish TW had a "only basic units available" mode to help beginners learning the game. Way too many TW beginners are focusing on army composition and units and think they're defeated because of that instead of their own skill. If they had less units to mess around they would focus more on battle awareness, communication, timing and control.

Just like in GW?

Louis,

Gear (runes, skills, and upgrades) DO make a difference in pvp. The more skilled player will lose if he only has half the skills in the game and no elites, runes, or upgrades. Any idiot can put together 8 skills that work well together if all the skills are unlocked. It's the more experienced, more skilled players that will win even if everything is unlocked. This goes back to the reasoning that even though someone is more skilled than me at pvp, why should they have everything unlocked while I only get half? No, this game is not for the casual player, because the casual players are always at a disadvantage and can never overcome that disadvantage unless they become a hardcore player.

Phades · Jul 12, 2005, 03:48 AM // 03:48

Ok seriously you need to pick a position and stick to it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Siren

The "combat" in MtG is nowhere near as intense or fast-paced as the combat in GuildWars. In fact, the respective pace/speeds of the two games are almost the complete opposite. True, in highly competitive play in MtG, surely cards are getting slapped down fairly quickly, but two points need consideration there:

1) You can find even faster speeds at top-tier play in GuildWars.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Siren

And how many matches in Guild Wars routinely last 30 seconds or less?
What is the average 4v4 match length in GW? Average of less than 5 minutes? 10 at most?

What's a round of CS, or Halo 2, or GoldenEye 64 like. Under even the normal settings, death occurs very quickly, and matches are over in very short amounts of time...some matches may last longer than 5 or 10 minutes, but the only difference there would be the level layouts, and if Halo 2 matches were to occur in say, Ascalon Arena, you'd see incredibly fast matches. If the win parameters were set like GW's...I wouldn't doubt we'd be seeing 2-minute matches.

So which is it, are you agreeing with me that guildwars is slow paced or are you disagreeing with me and saying it’s a faster paced game?

Also with the win parameters revolving around killing the other team creating the win condition, with some conditional kill target X and create and early win condition, it is very much the same as most of the fps games out there in style, but the pace is very different. Hell even bad or too fast pacing for a FPS can ruin it. The only exception being a CTF style setting, where the flag needs to be at the home point, but that is very off topic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Siren

But for argument's sake, let's continue along your postulation, and we'll use an example from the game itself:

Althea's Ashes is a quest out of Piken Square that has the player going through the Charr Flame Corridor, through loads of Charr warriors, archers, mesmers, necromancers, etc., to gather Althea's ashes from an urn at the very end of the area. This quest was a bitch and a half to complete, even for a well-organized and well-prepared team.

Understandably, because it was so difficult and time-consuming due to the amounts of Charr in the area, players requested it be made easier...and lo and behold, ANet responded. The amount of Charr in the area was reduced by I'd say 25%, maybe 40%.

If what you're saying is accurate (that because I'm suggesting the unlock system be tweaked so that players don't have to invest such huge amounts of time, I'm actually arguing for the total removal of the system), then those having problems with Althea's Ashes were actually arguing for a total removal of all Charr in the area.

This is a bad comparison to make. I think you can come up with better than this example. The big problem with this type of example is that difficulty does not equal time spent completing. That is why in my hypothetical situations involving average time spent in the arena to unlock skills did not attempt to calculate number of losses. Success versus failure has as much to do with the tools available as the quality of their use and the synergy of the team. By not having the tools available it is not possible to learn their use, nor create a good synergy within the team. Also, for example, ive completed villany of galrath at level 20 with only 2 human beings behind the keyboard. This mission can be challenging for even groups of players at varied levels. No henchmen involved and the two job combinations were a W/ME and a E/MO. To be quite frank, we could have done it much earlier than that due to the fact that it had little to do with our skill bar or gear as a whole. Barring some mistakes I made, we could have managed it without dying as well. Does this mean that the mission is too easy? Nope, but we found ways to drastically reduce the challenge involved by smart playing. This is possible within the PvE environment as the npcs operate in the same manner always. Other players do not, which requires the proper tools to deal with. Even copy cat build users will think creatively when forced to occasionally. In my opinion your particular example needs to be harder, in order to require a good team to complete as the actual quest is only an exp boost and can be done at any level. I did it solo as a warrior and it was prior to my wandering up to yaks bend, but I forget the level I was though….

Quote:

Originally Posted by Siren

If there's no real issue, then, no real desire from players to adjust the faction point payout/requirements, because GvG is such a huge payout, why are we seeing so many people requesting that the faction points be adjusted? If there's already a reduction ability...why is there an issue then? If faction points aren't a problem (and subsequently, the current state of the unlock system, as it's directly related to the faction points) because someone can hop into GvG and acquire a nice payout...what need is there for any instant unlock?

So you fall into my trap and derail your own position regarding any form of reward increase or cost reduction. I didn’t want you to do it, but you did. I was merely attempting to reinforce the idea that the current system isn’t meant really to help a pvp centric player, but only a way to change their habits of where they chose to participate within pvp. This falls back to game design shaping player behavior. Your statement would also fall into not considering all positions within the case before making your argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Siren

Phades, I honestly like much of what you wrote there, but this sentence is very important to elaborate on, because you've arrived at a point that I'm not sure you even realize what it is quite yet.

Going too slow is a long, drawn-out tutorial, sure. But then, if going too fast is at the opposite extreme...what might that be? Perhaps UAX?

The long, drawn-out tutorial will cause the faster players, more intuitive ones, to lose interest.

Thanks, but I didn’t think I needed to be expanded on, just merely reflected upon in conjunction towards my previous comments. I will summarize the position though.

Going too slow I would relate to forcing a pve style advancement upon a pvp centric player. Many people that I have come to know, that are competitive players do not need things like tutorials, manuals, or guides to help them through the game. All they require is the ability to explore all the options within the game, but even they progress at different paces and directions. A slower player could just go the route of the pve experience first or go the route within pvp with a UAX option. The difference is that the slower person will choose which to explore within either system rather than being spoon fed which they should know how to use first. That is the principle difference here. A slower person with all the options might choose what they think is cool or nice then go out and try them and subsequently get beaten. Then, if they are observant, know what combinations of things beat them and then look to what is available and begin to use counters to those things employed against them. Instead what exists is a person may or may not have that same game experience, but in turn will not be guaranteed at having the option to try those counters until after working an undisclosed amount of time in order to use them. This is a result of being spoon fed the options with no real choice of how to adjust the setup without going through the tutorial a few times. Forcing the learning style here is what I was trying to connect with the slow learner versus the fast learner analogy. Giving someone the option to learn is not the same as forcing them to learn it all at once.

Divinitys Creature · Jul 12, 2005, 04:21 AM // 04:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by sama

hmm first post here in 3 weeks.

*looks around*

*notices not much changed since i retired*

*laughs contently*

*opens bf2*

gg anet!

Yeah, trying to get things changed is a very steep uphill journey. I thought we finally worked things out *kinda* with the patch but they goofed on that too *sigh*

Since most of you are playing BF2, GW has lost a big chunck of it's best players *double sigh*

Hopefully they will fix faction.

arredondo · Jul 12, 2005, 04:54 AM // 04:54

Quote:

Also, show me where I'm saying 'only'. Show me where I'm saying PvE is "useless". Yes, you learn in PvE, but it is slower.

Those are my words here that you pointed out, right? Then how in the world do you not see it perfectly in line with all the stuff I said about PvE preparing one for PvP? Everything you underlined supports this very statement. I never said playing PvP is the ONLY way to get ready for PvP improvement as you originally accused me of, but I flatly stated it should be the main way to go about it. I never said the word USELESS for playing PvE in order to prepare for PvP play, but strongly implied it is far less useful. In fact, I originally gave it credit for getting one familiar with the controls.

But when it comes to learning and applying the use of skills, I am comparing process A to process B. Across the board (assuming all skills open for both modes) I stand by my statement that if you are trying to learn how to use all of this stuff in PvP, the fastest way to improve as a PvP player is to play PvP. You will learn slower (as opposed to 'not at all') in PvE.

And while some stuff is applicable in both modes (obviously), the real significant strategies and tactics that apply to the human mind are best tested on the human mind. I'm not saying anything controversial. I make the un-learning comments because, again, I've seen it time and time again (in competitive gaming). What you grow comfortable with in PvE initially slows you down in PvP. Stuff you never dreamed of being any good in PvE gets ignored longer than it should in PvP. The entire strategy approach is different, and the sooner you begin learning PvP properly (within PvP) the sooner you become a better opponent and teammate.

The problem that too many PvE supporters have is that they're offended if their mode seems to be always under attack, and the idea that people want to minimize its importance to Guild Wars. I think GW is a hundred times better for having PvE. I bought this game purely for PvP, and thought PvE was going to be a short throw in. If GW didn't have PvP, I'd still say I got my money's worth playing through PvE.

BUT... I play PvE for PvE. I play PvP for PvP. No one mode is good enough to cover all bases, and PvE is a poor substitute for legitimate competitive practice. I don't play PvP expecting PvE-type of enjoyment either (there's that theme again). I like each for what they are because they each are truly two different modes sharing the same engine.

The more they stand on their own (in my opinion, see, I can say it) the better each mode can be. The more they take mechanics of one out the other, the more they can each be allowed to grow. It's when you force the play mechanics of one style on to the other that it begins to create flow problems.

Unlocking slows PvP growth. Forced PvE mode slows PvP growth. You may prefer this structure, but it does have its negative effects on a significant portion of the gameplay. I'd say the same if I were forced to heavily PvP for on-going PvE adventuring.

Oh, and I only quoted Brian for the relavant comment he made on the current conversation. We're talking about learning PvP through PvE, so I'm not vouching for any of the rest of his post that's unrelated to this current topic.

JoDiamonds · Jul 12, 2005, 09:18 PM // 21:18

Peace.

Debate is fun in of itself, but some things here are getting a bit warm and flamey.

To me, it seems clear there are benefits to making PvP and PvE stand alone, unrelated, and there are also benefits to intertwining them, making one fuller experience overall. People like different things, so some will prefer it one way and others another (if that's not abundantly clear). Pleasing everyone is a fine goal, and Arena Net should keep trying to do it, and we should keep defining What We Want, separately and collectively. I think many people have done that here, and a few people many times, myself included. =)

Me, I just want some kind of "in-game fair" PvP, since it doesn't exist, and I think it should; there should be a format in Guild Wars where players can compete on truly even footing (again, within the rules of the game). A full unlock isn't necessary to achieve the goal I want, though it would be one method.

RMThompson · Jul 13, 2005, 12:11 AM // 00:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoDiamonds

Me, I just want some kind of "in-game fair" PvP, since it doesn't exist, and I think it should; there should be a format in Guild Wars where players can compete on truly even footing (again, within the rules of the game). A full unlock isn't necessary to achieve the goal I want, though it would be one method.

I think a fun, fair way to play without having cookie cutter characters would be the sealed deck option mentioned elsewhere.

You form a group of 4 - 8 and temporarily all your powers/attributes/armor and even Classes are stripped away. (It could fit into the storyline...)

Then you choose what class to be, and the computer randomlly picks your secondary. At this time you have a certain number of points to use to pick from the skills. For example, better more devastating skills/spells would cost more points, and so on down the food chain.

Either with those same points, or with new ones for armor/equipment you can choose armor (again the better higher rated armor costs more, as do Superior runes and big weapons and weapon upgrades)

It would be fair, because everyone would have a chance to get whatever skills they wanted, but it doesnt require any type of unlocking for the main HoH or GvG battles.

Then after the battle, your character reverts back to your old state.

The Human Torch · Jul 13, 2005, 04:45 AM // 04:45

I liked that idea better when everyone lost all their proffessions, skills, items, and attributes, and a random set of proffessions, skills, and items was presented to both teams. Then, individual members of each team would take turns picking out those things out of the whole pool. It's extremely strategic, very fair and even, and would add a LOT to the pvp experience.

MuKen · Jul 13, 2005, 02:33 PM // 14:33

I still think the easiest and simplest solution that would satisfy the most people would just be to have a separate UAX arena and ladder. Just like that MtG league people were talking about that allowed the card proxies. They still have their 'real card only' tourneys, but they also have the option of the more open proxy tourneys as well.

Louis Ste Colombe · Jul 13, 2005, 03:08 PM // 15:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Human Torch

Gear (runes, skills, and upgrades) DO make a difference in pvp. The more skilled player will lose if he only has half the skills in the game and no elites, runes, or upgrades. Any idiot can put together 8 skills that work well together if all the skills are unlocked. It's the more experienced, more skilled players that will win even if everything is unlocked. This goes back to the reasoning that even though someone is more skilled than me at pvp, why should they have everything unlocked while I only get half? No, this game is not for the casual player, because the casual players are always at a disadvantage and can never overcome that disadvantage unless they become a hardcore player.

I disagree with that statement... And I agree with it partly. I don't think the more skilled player will lose if he only has half the skill and no elites, rune or upgrade.
Any idiot with all skills unlocked is likely to make a bad build that won't work, unless he copies it from an internet forum with good templates (if there is such thing). Even then, he'll have the timing wrong, the target wrong, everything wrong.
I got no doubt that I prefer to be teamed up with a mesmer that had played his mesmer 100 hours, got no rune and unlocked nothing, than with a mesmer who played his template 0 hours but got everything unlocked with UAX.

Time is a virtue of its own.

A casual gamer will lose no matter what... That this casual gamer got half the equipment is unlikely to make any difference at all in GW. The casual gamer just know less about the game, and has trained less.

The good news in GW is that chances are you'll be matched with players of the same level and dedication, ie casual gamers if you're casual, or hardcore if you're hardcore. So you'll have fun

If you're really casual, you won't care if your guild is in top 10 or top 5000

Louis,

Louis Ste Colombe · Jul 13, 2005, 03:28 PM // 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by arredondo

This isn't simply about a 100 hour player beating a 1000 hour player. It's all about the rate of learning that one goes through before he is able to possibly take down the top dogs.

You can't possibly believe that holding someone back from exercising ALL the options that a competitior has access to helps serious players in the long run. How does the designer know how many morsels (and which ones) would best suit me? Are all of us players being molded the exact same way? Do we all learn at different rates? How does he know whether I may come up with a strat that's even beyond what he thought of, given the chance?

I sure can believe that; it's basic pedagogy. The designer may have no idea about what may best suit YOU, but I am sure they try to figure that out for the general public.
We all learn at different rates, and ANet had to make a decision about what rates they need to adopt, not for you, but for everybody.

Quote:

I don't want to be treated like a 3 year old kid, having a little bit doled out by some unknown entity's idea of what's good for me. If the high level players are doing amazing things with full access to the tools, let me have at it too! There's no logic to treat all of us like morons who can't figure out how to put on our own shoes.

My rate of growth with limited access is STUNTED, it has a CEILING... there's no way you can deny that in this system. In UAX my rate of growth is limited only by my imagination and personal aptitude for the activity I'm playing. Slowly gaining access to needed gear and equipment works for PvE games, but in competition it's all about beating the other guy. Period. I don't need to wait for the system to show me what's best when I have a brain that can figure it all out myself.

Chances are that you would learn slower with UAX than just going through PvE or unlocking through faction. Or you're a genius and you don't really need to learn the game.

Make a test, give the skill list to someone who has NEVER played the game and ask them to design a character for PvP with the skill list. Give them all the crazy items they want, runes, whatever.
It's very likely that won't even get close to be as good as the basic template. And if you let them play around with it, let them change stuff as they wish, chances are that after 20 hours, they will know less about their character that someone who will have play consistantly the same character with slow evolution: that translates in worse timing, worse targeting, worse battle awareness.

Quote:

Do I start with horrible tactics and strategies? Of course, and I'll eat it hard when I try them against a worthy HUMAN foe. You know what? That's exactly what I want! I don't want to develop bad habits, secure that it works with the CPU for hours on end. I want other opponents to help me hone my skills early on, so I'm not constantly UN-learning the junk I got away with in PvE.

I don't question PvE gives bad habits: it was the same situation with MTW/RTW.
However, you are, of course, aware that you can unlock throught PvP, with no need to unlearn anything from PvE at all?

Quote:

And for the same reason, I need all access from the start to see the big picture as it develops based on my hard knock experiences. How can I put the puzzle together of defeating my opponents if the publisher forces me to play without all the pieces? This babysitting approach is not the answer.... save it for kindergarten, but let me be all that I can be.

There is a reason human learns bit by bit. Hey, you might be a genius and figure it all at once. But people that makes puzzle usually starts with a little bit and move from there, part by part.
You got all the pieces, all that Anet is doing is handing them to you in a right order, 1 at a time, so that you can put the puzzle together faster.
That may not be the best for you, but on average, for a casual gamer population, that's what work best.

Louis,

The Human Torch · Jul 13, 2005, 04:26 PM // 16:26

But guild wars was advertised as a game made for casual gamers. If they NEVER have a chance to win against hardcore players because the hardcore players have everything unlocked, what's the point of playing? Games like CS can be played casually, because everyone is on even footing, and casual players are capable of beating hardcore players. Why can't GW be the game it was advertised to be and have even competition?

Louis Ste Colombe · Jul 13, 2005, 04:39 PM // 16:39

Oh...

I think you misread me. I think casual gamers got very little chance against hardcore gamers, not because they don't have everything unlock, but because GW got a tougher learning curve than CS may have...

Casual gamers may never spend enough time to master the game. It's not about unlocking, it's about learning: learning the skills, learning how they work, learning the target, learning the timing, etc. Hardcore got a edge, it's not grinding for items, it's time and training. In a complex game, that helps.

Even with unlock all, casual gamers would lose. Because there are a lot of options and a lot of stuff to figure out. That also what makes GW interesting.

Louis,

arredondo · Jul 13, 2005, 05:52 PM // 17:52

Hey, someone changed the thread title from what I originally put. Any reason why? Maybe a way to keep it from being two lines perhaps?

JoDiamonds · Jul 13, 2005, 06:26 PM // 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis Ste Colombe

However, you are, of course, aware that you can unlock throught PvP, with no need to unlearn anything from PvE at all?

Without harping on a point made many times, that's simply not true at this time. The PvP rewards are given through Priests that exist only in PvE areas, and you have to get to high level PvE areas to actually unlock the elites (not all skills and runes are available from each priest).

I'd like to think this is merely a fairly massive oversight on Arena Net's part, and they will fix it soon and just move the priests into the arenas. Then again, I'd like you to actually receive the items when using the priests, not just unlocking it for new PvP characters.

Weezer_Blue · Jul 13, 2005, 07:57 PM // 19:57

The problem is that this game is definatly not for the "casual" gamer. It takes hundreds of hours through either PvE, PvP, or a combination of both to unlock all the skills, and a few hundred more to get all the runes and upgrade components. When I bought this game, based off of every ad, promo, or article written on the game, I thought I was buying a game where I could jump into competitive play in a very short amount of time, and the have fun playing PvP a hell of a lot. Come to find out, that all the ads were lie after lie, I decided this game sucks.

If you want a PvE game, there are much better. Try Neverwinter Nights.

If you want a PvP game, there are much better, but different. Guild Wars was one of a kind in it's early days. But since that has all gone to crap, then check out BF2, CS:S, RTS games, GunZ Online, and so on.

Guild Wars could have made it big by going for the hardcore PvP status, but instead, they went for the grind monkey PvEer side. That side can only hold one's attention for so long without actual content to back it up.

Mormegil · Jul 13, 2005, 08:16 PM // 20:16

Oh hey Weezer!

I disagree mostly. While it's true that getting ALL the elites and the normal skills is a hell of a task, having a more than sufficient number of skills to play PvP on a very competitive level is not that time consuming, and the situation got better after the faction points update.

My guild is ranked 45-50, I don't have all the skills unlocked (I'm not even close) but that's not a major problem. When I can't fit in a particular build I won't play, of course, but it's fair to me...and with the skills I already have I play GvG 90% of the times.

Not everyone will like this mix of PvE and PvP to get everything unlocked, but I do and many others do.
It's really about tastes in the end.

Guild Powder · Jul 13, 2005, 08:26 PM // 20:26

We see more complaints because the updates they release are nothing more than mere bug fixes and barely any interestng content.

Mormegil · Jul 13, 2005, 08:33 PM // 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guild Powder

We see more complaints because the updates they release are nothing more than mere bug fixes and barely any interestng content.

...and this comment is worth zero from a constant crybaby who only writes destructive posts and had 2 whiner threads closed at the same time because of moronicness. Nice trolling.

It's ridiculous. Impossible to discuss in a civil and reasonable way with some of you. I understand having drastically different opinions, but bashing on the game with idiotic, absolute statements like you just did is childish.

I'm off.

Guild Powder · Jul 13, 2005, 10:06 PM // 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mormegil

...and this comment is worth zero from a constant crybaby who only writes destructive posts and had 2 whiner threads closed at the same time because of moronicness. Nice trolling.

It's ridiculous. Impossible to discuss in a civil and reasonable way with some of you. I understand having drastically different opinions, but bashing on the game with idiotic, absolute statements like you just did is childish.

I'm off.

It's been 3 weeks now..... like i said the next update is coming in august. and that will probably be the last until they release one of the 4 expansions

expansions will be

1. south map
2. east map
3. west map

we currently have the north map

arnansnow · Jul 13, 2005, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guild Powder

It's been 3 weeks now..... like i said the next update is coming in august. and that will probably be the last until they release one of the 4 expansions

expansions will be

1. south map
2. east map
3. west map

we currently have the north map

I thought we went over this in another post. Compass roses usually only have the north arrow.

Also, the next update will be sooner than August, the new areas may be coming out then, but there is other content that is in the works that will most likely come out before August.

Please don't make posts that are just continuations of threads that you made that were blocked.