Curse

Lordhelmos · Feb 26, 2008, 11:53 AM // 11:53

The problem with Guildwars is that the game tries to do too many things at once. This problem leaks into game balance (for example if you try to fix NPC AI, and suddenly 1000 problems explode into PvE). People are sitting here expecting Arena Net to deliver perfection in terms of competitive play. But the truth of the matter is that the game engine is not designed for serious competitive play. The same NPC AI, pathing, and skill system governs all aspects of the game from GvG to Slaver's Exile. Instead of doing one thing exceptionally well, Guildwars instead provides an atmosphere that provides good play in both PvE and PvP, but not exceptional play in a specified field.

You people looking for a competitive atmosphere and expecting Guildwars to deliver are sorely mistaken. Because the game engine has too many flaws (like ViO, balance, and pathing) to be taken seriously as a tournament game. If you want fast paced and serious PvP your playing the wrong game.

Why the hell do you think Izzy plays Team Fortress instead of this? Guildwars is too flawed to deliver a serious pvp atmosphere. This is why high end gamers are quitting after the last series of updates. One after the other, Guilds are coming to the realization that Guildwars can only reach so far into the world of serious pvp before it smashes itself against the limitations of game design. Players are expecting more and are disillusioned by the physics of GvG, expecting the game to provide a solid competitive atmosphere.

Despite stale game balance, Anet can't go back and rewrite the entire engine. Hence, we get all these promises in Guildwars II, because this current engine can't satisfy the needs of high end players that decide on getting serious about PvP style play.

I began thinking on this after playing a round of frustrating GvG's and then just shutting the damn computer off and playing Guilty Gear XX instead, which is a game designed for nothing but PvP play. Guildwars simply doesn't carry the dynamics and feel of a game that can be taken seriously in PvP. There are just too many problems with pathing, skill balances, the lack of a Z-axis, idiot NPC's, lag issues, and gimmicky builds.

This is why high end players are getting so frustrated with the game, because they are dealing with the frustration of ramming their heads against the low ceiling that is Guildwar's limitation for providing a solid competitive atmosphere.

This fact is further enforced by the recent MAT in which two gimmick builds (Sinsplit and Paraspike) faced off in a grandiose battle of epic fail. On top of that, many high ranking guilds have been breaking up because of the stale metagame that has been increasingly prevelant in GvG as of late.

For a game that is originally designed as a cooperative RPG, the PvP in Guildwars isn't bad. However, it is definitely a joke when compared to other games like TF, Unreal Tournament, etc. Eventually I found myself quitting GvG/playing Guildwars competitively in favor of other games due to the fact that its various game engine and balance flaws make it not worth pursuing to the point of becoming a high end player. Especially after various failed updates to fix problems that lie at the core of the game's foundation.

The bottom line is simply, why play a game thats half hearty pretending to be a serious PvP game when there are others out there that are solely designed to appeal to PvP interested gamers? GvG can be fun, but striving to get to the high end bracket just seems worthless when the developers obviously didn't design the game to support the needs of a serious PvP community.

In this way, I can understand how "high end" Guilds felt with their recent disbandings. The question is, is the PvP community asking too much from a game that has obvious flaws and limitations? Because I think it does.

JR · Feb 26, 2008, 12:00 PM // 12:00

The only thing flawed here are your arguements.

ViO, balance or suitability as a competitive title have nothing to do with game engine. There is everything in place for Guild Wars to be a perfectly strong competitive title, it is the game design decisions that have negatively impacted it.

Quote:

Why the hell do you think Izzy plays Team Fortress instead of this?

Having worked on the game for 4/5 years doing insane hours maybe he is just a little tired of it? Maybe he just really likes Team Fortress? Maybe the fact that he can't really play competitively in Guild Wars due to tournament restrictions on Anet employees is holding him back? Assuming it is because he doesn't think the game is competitive enough is just ridiculous.

With all that said: He does in fact still play, and his obs mode account is online more often than not.

Quote:

The bottom line is simply, why play a game thats half hearty pretending to be a serious PvP game when there are others out there that are solely designed to appeal to PvP interested gamers?

Perhaps people play the game because they enjoy it? Guild Wars PvP provides a far deeper and strageic experience than most FPS games, which also require far more twitch, and neither does it require uber mirco like competitive RTS games. It is played simply out of preference, and I don't see how you have the right to question that.

You make it sound like these other 'serious competitive games' have never had simmilar issues. I'm afraid 'cheap tactics' and imbalance aren't just exclusive to Guild Wars. They exist in any PvP game that is more complicated than chess.

I'd give your post a generous 3/10 for being well written, but lacking any substance or well researched content. As someone who has written many critical hit inducing walls of text I believe it is not over-stepping myself to advise you that it usually helps to know what you are talking about.

bungusmaximus · Feb 26, 2008, 12:05 PM // 12:05

The same pvp you speak off is usually dependent of retarded NPC' s. A little too much if you ask me. When you look at, say, GvG, HA and AB npc's can cause you to either win or lose while it's the players who playing the game. You don' t have that trouble in, say, ra or ta.

Lag-wise I fully agree with you. On a bad day of lag everything that is required to interrupt stuff is at a serious disadvantage. And theres a LOT of VERY nasty lag.

As for the rest, GW has a zillion possibilities when it comes to builds. Put 4 guys with a minigun against 4 others with the same minigun you wouldn' t have that problem. The thing that makes GW so much fun also causes a hell of a lot of trouble imho. But 4 guys with miniguns are boring compared to GW.

Asplode · Feb 26, 2008, 12:22 PM // 12:22

Despite the negativity I have to somewhat agree with you there, Lordhelmos. I'd love to try and defend my playing of paraspike in the finals (was really our only idea against Uni's build, too bad we got wrecked by sloppy play, chokepoints, and shield's up) but I have nothing here. The game is more than a little lopsided right now, and regrettably may be too late to fix things.

I'd also like to say I understand your frustration in gvg in general, it's annoying to only be able to play in prime times because off-hours generate rank 2k+ guilds which take 20 minutes to get matched up against. Prime time generates the same few regurgitated builds or stupid gimmicks which are 1) not very fun to play against, and 2) typically aren't indicative of what turns up in the mAT.

yule · Feb 26, 2008, 12:29 PM // 12:29

The AoE farming of ranged npcs should've been stopped by use of the same code that makes melee monsters in pve scatter.

Im not sure about the pathing, but maybe adding more waypoints so as to avoid corners would have been a better move, having said that, to take advantage of npc pathing you usually had to be in a better position than the opposing team leading up to vod. It gave some meaning to the pre-vod skirmishes.

Gimmicks should be hammered by lack of versatility. If any gimmick is able to be versatile and still gimmicky it needs to be nerfed out of the game, or nerfed into in-versatility. Laziness in game balance isn't something that is inherent to the game, it is inherent to the wait and see approach Izzy takes.

ViO was a stupid attempt to try rectify the previous meta's lack of diversity. The unwillingness to rectify the mistake, the implementation on the eve of a tourney, and the additional mistake of adding LOLDMG to the archers was just more evidence that giving one person responsibility for game balance is a bad idea. Well, maybe it is just evidence that a giving a certain person sole responsibility is a bad idea.

Ping is painful at times, but again, welcome to the internet. Sorry modern technology is not quite up to your high expectations.

It isn't asking too much for GW to be a balanced high end pvp game. It may be asking too much for it to happen when Anet main focus is going to be selling us on GW2 relatively soon...

JR · Feb 26, 2008, 12:37 PM // 12:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by yule

The AoE farming of ranged npcs should've been stopped by use of the same code that makes melee monsters in pve scatter.

The same mechanic applies to NPCs in GvG as well as PvE mobs, iirc. The problem is the priority to heal first rather than scatter, which also applies to PvE mobs, that causes archers to stop to cast Troll whilst being bombarded by AoEs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yule

Gimmicks should be hammered by lack of versatility. If any gimmick is able to be versatile and still gimmicky it needs to be nerfed out of the game, or nerfed into in-versatility. Laziness in game balance isn't something that is inherent to the game, it is inherent to the wait and see approach Izzy takes.

I agree entirely with this sentiment, and those in Asp's post. I don't think anyone can really argue that particular serious balance issues are dealt with as quickly as they should be. That said, I believe efforts are being made to speed this process up.

DutchSmurf · Feb 26, 2008, 12:47 PM // 12:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

I agree entirely with this sentiment, and those in Asp's post. I don't think anyone can really argue that particular serious balance issues are dealt with as quickly as they should be. That said, I believe efforts are being made to speed this process up.

I really hope so. So far I haven't seen any proof of that tho, balance updates have been late for years (unless something was really broken) and when they came they often missed the target, didn't hit it hard enough or hit it far too hard. However, balancing something correctly is very hard.

Akaraxle · Feb 26, 2008, 12:51 PM // 12:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

<snip>

Wow JR, you didn't have this passion when defending "some other" game!

Quote:

Originally Posted by yule

The AoE farming of ranged npcs should've been stopped by use of the same code that makes melee monsters in pve scatter.

See, I suggested the same thing long ago, but I was told there are two problems with that:

if the NPCs start scattering, they stop attacking and a lot of their pressure goes away;
the impact of complex AI in an environment where there are 16 players and more variables compared to an 8-player PvE buttonmash fest.

My own interpretation is investing time into solving the issue at this point would be too consuming and not worth it for ANet. Remember they ain't a no-profit organization.

Brimstonez · Feb 26, 2008, 01:12 PM // 13:12

And in my closing statement...Guild Wars wasn't designed as a serious PvP game...have you got any idea how many times you repeated yourself?

Yes, Guild Wars was designed as a competitive PvP AND PvE environment, though you are right in people expecting too much from the game. I prefer to just see it as a stepping stone to something greater. I have played far better MMORPG's, though look at it from this angle; how long has A.Net been around for? From a business point of view, they are still a new company in the jungle. And look at what they have accomplished in that short time they've been running!

Before people bag them out, take a step back and realize how much effort has gone into this series, to keep 'everyone happy'. They are constantly updating, and monitoring public response, looking for what 'we want'. I see this company going very far in the future, with a massive client base (already having one). If people they don't like the game for what it is, then bugger off and find something more to your tastes, or better yet...make your own company/games.

red orc · Feb 26, 2008, 01:21 PM // 13:21

Comparing FPS and GW is like comparing school algebra with partial differential equiations.
As for playing GW, it is the only RPG style PVP game around. So anybody who likes RPG and PVP and do not like to win due to gear and grind, has no other alternative.
Another point is: we play the game cause we enjoy it. Just this year, a new game was introduced providing PVP RPG style called FURY. It failed cause it was not good. This to prove that GW is a good product and an enjoyable game.

phoo slaya · Feb 26, 2008, 01:47 PM // 13:47

u compared gw pvp to a bunch of fps, if u want fast paced/smooth action, go play CS or TF2. Those are completely different games with different play styles. next time you cast a spell or enter a stance in CS lemme know.

C2K · Feb 26, 2008, 01:48 PM // 13:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by DutchSmurf

I really hope so. So far I haven't seen any proof of that tho, balance updates have been late for years (unless something was really broken) and when they came they often missed the target, didn't hit it hard enough or hit it far too hard. However, balancing something correctly is very hard.

To achieve perfect balance is impossible by any standards as nothing can ever be perfectly balanced. However, getting as close to it as possible is the goal. This is true in all pvp games.

Anet may hit and miss with its updates, but ever since the MAT, their skill updates are frequent. Thats alot of work, getting patches out almost ever month. RTS and FPS games are lucky enough to get a patch from 6 months to a year. So, I do think Anet is doing a good job getting the updates out there, whether or not they stimulate pvp or not, well, you guys know when you see them.

As for gimmicks, the problem is once you stomp one out, 2 others get made. When you kill one skill, another skill will stand out and be abused. You make a weaker skill better, it makes a bunch of borderline or better skills better. Its the nature of this system.

DreamWind · Feb 26, 2008, 01:52 PM // 13:52

I think Guild Wars had what it took in the past to be a serious PvP game. It was the first PvP game of its kind, and still is really. The problem is that the direction of the game changed, and all the things that make a PvP game great went along with it.

Cirian · Feb 26, 2008, 02:51 PM // 14:51

I think it just got too complex for the designers to keep a handle on it, so going back to a clean slate with GW2 is their answer. Suits me.

In the mean time we can expect band-aids to balance GW1 as much as they can, but it's never going to be absolutely perfect. Just take a look at the Street Fighter franchise, how many iterations they've had and how close they've got.

Rift · Feb 26, 2008, 04:43 PM // 16:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by yule

The AoE farming of ranged npcs should've been stopped by use of the same code that makes melee monsters in pve scatter.

AoE spells with instantaneous discrete events (such as Meteor Shower and Splinter Weapon) do not register on NPC AI as being damaging over time at this specific location, and therefore don't trigger the scatter mechanism effectively, even in PVE.

Until recently, MoP had the same flaw, but now after a few hits, the MoP'd NPC starts running around like a headless chicken.

lacasner · Feb 26, 2008, 05:02 PM // 17:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by C2K

Anet may hit and miss with its updates, but ever since the MAT, their skill updates are frequent. Thats alot of work, getting patches out almost ever month. RTS and FPS games are lucky enough to get a patch from 6 months to a year. So, I do think Anet is doing a good job getting the updates out there, whether or not they stimulate pvp or not, well, you guys know when you see them.

This is one of the biggest problems in pvp atm, at least in my opinion, and I would greatly like an explanation why you think skill updating is a lot of work.

JR · Feb 26, 2008, 05:14 PM // 17:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacasner

This is one of the biggest problems in pvp atm, at least in my opinion, and I would greatly like an explanation why you think skill updating is a lot of work.

It is a massively complex task, and takes a very strong understanding to be able to try and predict the consequences of any major skill balance.

You buff a skill out of mediocrity and some obscure skill combination makes it broken. You nerf a skill that was just a little too popular and suddenly a gimmick springs up that capitalizes on the hole left by it.

Though again, I'm not saying this is a valid excuse for past questionable skill balance updates or the speed at which they are released.

Ec]-[oMaN · Feb 26, 2008, 05:20 PM // 17:20

The only thing in my mind that has skewed PvP gameplay is Anets need to release all these extra chapters with bonified imba skills not balanced at release and taking 3-6 months to remove idiotic power creeps; can't deny the fact that with every release the game became much more complex in the sense that added click once dmg skills with little draw backs and minute tools to deal with such sank the ship that once was a more simple balanced game. Throughout GW's life ever since they released the second chapter skill balances revealed an obvious direction in which way the game was going. Balances ignoring or even promoting gimmicks time after time, buffing crap that wasn't needed and slightly nerfing last months gimmicks, only to provide windows for the next. Engine design or capability has very little to do with the bigger picture.

lacasner · Feb 26, 2008, 06:08 PM // 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

It is a massively complex task, and takes a very strong understanding to be able to try and predict the consequences of any major skill balance.

You buff a skill out of mediocrity and some obscure skill combination makes it broken. You nerf a skill that was just a little too popular and suddenly a gimmick springs up that capitalizes on the hole left by it.

Though again, I'm not saying this is a valid excuse for past questionable skill balance updates or the speed at which they are released.

Fair enough, we can agree to disagree. I say that because although what you say is true, I'm not talking about just some random updating with some random number changing. I'm sure a lot of people on this forum who are knowledgeable about this game could update a bunch of skills (way more than we currently see in these updates) and do a fine job. We can say this is pure speculation, but I think I've read enough posts on this forum and so have a lot of other people to have a high amount of knowledge about the game.

Whenever there are skill updates there is a mass interest brought into the game, not only to see if the gimmicks were nerfed, but also to see if any viable alternatives were brought into the game. Closed Deck play (so to speak) would get boring pretty quickly in this type of game.

I'm sure when you say massively complex you are exaggerating, as I really cannot see why it is so. And even if worst comes to worst and Izzy does something dumb in an update, he can just revert after he sees a stupid gimmick has arisen (how long does it take for people to figure out one, a day?)

Zuranthium · Feb 27, 2008, 12:11 AM // 00:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akaraxle

See, I suggested the same thing long ago, but I was told there are two problems with that:[list=1][*]if the NPCs start scattering, they stop attacking and a lot of their pressure goes away.

If they don't scatter, they die, and their pressure goes away. Plus, the NPCs have extra attack skills now so that makes up for the lost time, no?

~Z