Curse

Miss Persephone · Nov 08, 2006, 10:04 PM // 22:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerus Tel Veren

People online are horrible. They really, really are. It is a trusim that without controls of some sort in place (moderation, strict barrier of entry, something else), the larger a community grows, the worse the quality and caliber of person becomes.

This is true of every mmo and the bulk of online games out there, and perhaps more true for GW because it attracts competitive players (who are, by and large, more high strung than players more interested in exploring and enjoying the world or missions) and it has no monthly fee.

It is true for most online forums as well - generally the smaller, carefully moderated, tightly focused discussion groups tend to be the most friendly, interesting, and insightful - until they become large and unmanageable. Then they either adopt strict moderation policies, or otherwise restrict access (take a look at the SA forums for an example of a huge but still thriving community... with amazingly harsh moderation AND a pay-to-talk entry barrier). If not, they tend to collapse under their own weight and either fragment or die completely.

Some mmos burn out and fade due to really atrocious gameplay, technical issues, support, or other problems. Guild Wars most certainly does not have those issues (I still thinking the tech they have in place is amazing, and I've played it on and off since beta with few or no problems that I can recall), and it is blessed with some astonishing artwork and world design.

But the community - the quality of the community is, unfortunately, not tied to the quality of the game. And indeed, as the popularity of the game grows, so too does its user base, and the average level of expertise drops - no barrier of entry, and an increasingly large amount of information, knowledge, and skill to absorb before a player can become truly proficient all cause serious problems; particularly when previous in-game learning barriers become circumvented and corrupted.

Witness the growth of running, until it becomes difficult to simply get a group to do a mission or an area 'for real'. Perhaps done initially by bored vets leveling pve alts, it eventually becomes the 'norm' for a large chunk of people, who start to expect that sort of treatment (and behavior) from others.

Similarly, genuinely challenging missions for new players are incredibly hard to work through in an environment where the population around the mission consists of either veterans (who know what to do, have already done it, expect you to know the same, and will be annoyed if you don't), or incredibly poor players who were rushed to the location, and are, in essence, completely new players (who will quit at the first sign of difficulty, whine relentlessly, and look for someones coattails to pull them through to the next sticking point).

Guild Wars is especially bizarre in that it has a little of something of everyone - it has a vast world to explore, it has a series of storyline quests to tackle, it has incredibly competitive pvp, and it has a strange mix of very easy and very very difficult pve content. It's an rpg, but it plays like an action game at times. You can spend weeks or months building a pve character, or you can, as a brand new player, buy a pvp unlock and never touch the campaigns.

The result of that eclectic blend of possibilities available to the prospective player is pretty obvious - you get a really eclectic blend of players. You get ex-quake clanners out for blood in GvG battles. You get card game players who like the Magic-esque feel of the skills. You get single player rpg fans. You get mmo fans. You get really young kids, you get older married couples.

It is no surprise, none at all, that pugs are a horrible experience for many people - the odds of you getting matched up with people who have similar tastes, similar expectations, and similar desires from a group are so bad, it's amazing that you can meet cool people at all.

Really, the next big jump for GW (and mmos in general really) isn't adding Heroes so you can skirt the issue entirely by playing online solitaire, it's adding the tools in-game to match compatible players in a group - and by compatible, I'm not talking about character class :P Think internet dating for online gaming nerds instead of a lfg window.

Anyway, that went off on a tangent.

Back to the topic - Heroes absolutely are a replacement for other players in coop. Why? Because I play Guild Wars to enjoy myself, and grouping with random PuGs is somewhere between the 7th and 9th layers of hell in terms of enjoyment for me.

I consider this to be unfortunate, as nothing beats the fun of playing with a group of like-minded people, but locating them in the seething cesspool of genetic rejections at Lion's Arch 1 isn't happening any time soon.

'lfg' in-game is a dire tool of last resort. Group with friends, make new friends on forums who seem sane, get in a guild that seems to have cool members... or group with Heroes and Henchmen, who are more likely to get you loot than they are to give you an ulcer.

Thank you, very eloquently put. I think Kerus here has hit the nail on the head. I would really like to play with seven like-minded people and have fun in a mission. However, being able to find seven people of similar ability, and of a similar mindset is incredibly difficult in a game of this size.

Not to mention the continuing community bias towards certain builds. My primary character being a mesmer, I can say it has been incredibly difficult to find pugs that will take me, simply because of my class. I think you will find many sins will say the same. I don't ever get asked my build because most people don't have a clue what a decent mesmer build would look like. I believe if you look in the mesmer forums, you will find threads of 'all-mesmer outings' to THK and the like, with great success. However most people would prefer to stick with the cookie cuter types of builds, ele nuker, healing monk etc. NF allows me to play with friends and guildies, and fill the gaps effectively with my heroes. I love heroes and the freedom they bring to the game.

Jetdoc · Nov 08, 2006, 10:11 PM // 22:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

they have been asking for better henchies ever since and the heros are the result.

But the question is:

Did they go too far with Heroes?

Did they make them so appealing that people will tend to use them over other people, if they have the choice?

That's the crux of this thread.

By the way, I am already seeing the impact of heroes. Last night, I was messing around and decided to try to do Ring of Fire with a PuG. I went into the town, and there were 12 players there. Every single one of them had three heroes with them. Needless to say, after 15 minutes, I gave up trying to get in a group.

THAT is the potential impact of heroes that you are starting to see trickle through the game. Before, those players may have been more inclined to join a PuG due to the relative difficulty of making it through that mission with henchmen.

Horseman Of War · Nov 08, 2006, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Age

I would just like to remind you about hero's are not a replacement in coop mission as real players.Don't forget this is cooperative game where we are all cooperate and coodinate with each other.This is mostly in coop missions even if you have heros or not.I would suggest if your hero is not needed use real ppl as to the reason most are outfitting thier hero's with runes/dyes etc..They are just like henchies don't forget.

you know its funny I was of this very mindset before NF came out- since nightfall came out I have only gotten ONE single pug that did anything remotely well... and gotten Masters on most of the Missions with my Heros+Hunchies; or one guild member and their 3 heros.

Im sorry, but my Heros are better than most everyone Ive grouped with... wish I didnt have to say it because i totally understand what you are saying... it SHOULD be coordinated- but often egos clash and ppl do not COOPERATE.

I have a great deal of respect for every decent player Ive grouped with over the past year and a half- but I know exactly what Im getting when I Hero the Missions.

Prospero · Nov 08, 2006, 10:17 PM // 22:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemon

"must level heros" is the only thing i have issue with. This is imho the root cause of problem. If all the henches were lvl20 or the same level as the player _and_ customizable then ppl wouldnt need to lvl them and reject real parties, they would just use them sparingly to fill in for missing players.

??? You mean that my Koss and your Koss both need to complete the mission? So I we have to take both or run it twice? Not so. There is no NEED to level them. Adding a feature an then saying that the feature encourages single play and further encourages uninformed playing does not make sense.

Sure people are going to want to level their Heroes, but come on, it doesn't take long, and they will be lvl20 by Mission 4 or 5. I'm sorry, but even if Heroes caused a lack of PuG groups in a few missions, the benifit outweighs the loss.

Loviatar · Nov 08, 2006, 10:23 PM // 22:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetdoc

But the question is:

Did they go too far with Heroes?

Did they make them so appealing that people will tend to use them over other people, if they have the choice?

.

it is not that the hero is so appealing as so many people have had so many bad experiences that by comparison to the average jerk the hero looks good.

i expect them to further improve the hero as we go on.

if i were forced to play with the average jerk i would be long gone.

also it was stated around original release date by i think Alex Weekes that with henchies GW could also be considered a single player RPG with the OPTION to play with friends.

it looks like that is the direction it is headed.

dont expect chapter 4 to be anything like Factions at all with any kind of forced grouping

Age · Nov 08, 2006, 10:37 PM // 22:37

I would just like to say that I play a couple of other games although I haven't since of GW but when I do we all get along.I guess the reason we all know one another from another gaming Forum I post on and there is another reason and that is communication as we do use teamspeak.These games are different though and reqiure TS as we Flying around in StarShips.When in a cooperative game communication is the key think of team sports like baseball,football,hockey,basketball and soccer.Those in team sports like those communicate all the time and if you were to really see a GvG match there is probably a lot of communication going on.These ppl that turn a mission into a failer need to be in a better guild with a good leader.I have said this since 3 months from realease of Prophecies that there is no Support for Guilds which should be no 2 after reconnects on Anets list and why shoud there be support it isn't called Guild Wars for nothing.

This is one thing I am looking for when doing missions or even if someone is in need of a hand completing quest as I am in need of more guildies myself.Short post gone long.

Rera · Nov 09, 2006, 12:04 AM // 00:04

I still think some of you have the hero issue backwards. Heroes are not the cause of any additional problems, they are the solution to existing problems.

The people using heroes are the people who would be using henchmen anyway. The only thing that heroes changed is that certain areas are less frustrating on your own than they used to be. It has never been in doubt that every area in the game can be henched - many people have done it. Even if heroes had not been introduced, these same people would continue to hench every area.

So the issue is that people actually prefer henchmen to people. If you try to make areas incompleteable with henchmen, in effect forcing people to party with other people, you simply get discontent - because none of these guys wanted to PuG, but they're being forced into it.

There are two reasonable ways to make PuGs more attractive, but neither one is actually going to happen. First of all, people have to use their brains (lol?). I don't think even veteran players take issue with newbies. I, for one, am more than happy to explain the correct way to play a mission to first-timers, and I usually ask before we enter the mission whether everyone in the party has done the mission. What pisses veteran players off is people who either can't or refuse to follow the directions they are given, talk back, and in general just make an ass out of themselves. Unfortunately, this is the kind of newbie you usually get, and these are the people who never get better at the game, no matter how much instruction they receive. The second thing that needs to happen is that people need to stop following the Greater Internet ****wad theory. If you aren't a complete asshole maybe people will party with you.

Aside from reaction speeds, CPU-controlled party members are actually pretty bad. The fact that most human players can't do better is quite sad, frankly.

Mister Overhill · Nov 09, 2006, 12:46 AM // 00:46

I usually team up with family and friends, adding heroes and henchies as needed. And I took one character through Prophecies with henchies alone.

But, I have to admit that there is a certain satisfaction about beating a difficult mission with several people that you never met before in your life -- and that rare feeling of "mission accomplished" may be hard to attain from now on.

Xenrath · Nov 09, 2006, 02:19 AM // 02:19

Ok I've been with GW since campaign 1, have multiple Protector titles on almost all my chars (which is quite a few) as well as 100% mapper x 3, and also founded and built up a guild which is over 14 months old, so this isn't just some opinion formed recently. This means I've played a LOT, teamed up a lot and not just been spending all my time farming (I've not farmed anything since the first AOE nerf in fact)

Progression of GW (Euro servers, can't speak for others) has been like this
- Prophecies, people teamed up a lot.
- Factions, many people didn't seem to like it, lots of district hopping to try to get people for parties. Many mostly empty outposts.
- Nightfall, the majority are not teaming up. The last few missions that might encourage some teamplay does not compensate for the majority of the game being like that.

It's quite simple: general/casual coop play is on the decline and as things currently stand, if there is no turnaround that's how it will continue. It seems to be the way the wind is blowing.

For those who seemed to not comprehend my reference to single player games I'll put it even more bluntly: it's like playing Quake or UT with bots only.

For the record I attained 100% grandmaster cartographer, well on the way to another Protector, for 99.9% of it, having killed every single creature on the mainland map just about with virtually one unchanged party of Heroes and henchies. Which weren't even as well equipped or set up as they could have been (still had starter gear mostly) I advertised in most mission outposts for a group but it just wasn't happening. I don't see what could possibly be so interesting and fun to repeat going through the game with multiple characters, essentially on autopilot with bots.

I'm starting to wish Anet followed the NWN model. Released the campaign as single player offline, and have online coop mode (possibly without heroes online). That way everyone who doesn't like to team up can stay offline and leave the real multiplayer/coop game to those who want to online. After all, if you don't want to team up you can just play offline in single player mode. Doubt it will happen though, people will whine about not being able to use it as a giant chat room.

Sanji · Nov 09, 2006, 04:49 AM // 04:49

I don't see how you guys can get so bothered that people who are miserable grouping with random strangers now have a better option.

The only thing you lose is people that want nothing to do with you in the first place.

cellardweller · Nov 09, 2006, 04:58 AM // 04:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenrath

I'm starting to wish Anet followed the NWN model. Released the campaign as single player offline, and have online coop mode (possibly without heroes online). That way everyone who doesn't like to team up can stay offline and leave the real multiplayer/coop game to those who want to online. After all, if you don't want to team up you can just play offline in single player mode. Doubt it will happen though, people will whine about not being able to use it as a giant chat room.

Not sure why the "PUGing is the only way to go" camp is having such difficulty understanding the difference between grouping with friends + a hero/henchie or two and grouping with random strangers whom you have nothing in common with, never speak to again and most likely never want to.

Rera · Nov 09, 2006, 06:55 AM // 06:55

The point is that Heroes won't change the behavior of most players. Players that always wanted to play with other people (whether PUG, Guild, or what) will continue to do so. Players that always wanted to hench now have an extra tool. The Heroes themselves change nothing. People will continue to do what they've always thought was the best way.

Nemon · Nov 09, 2006, 07:10 AM // 07:10

Frankly i think there is a lot of ignorance in this thread; If heroes were just the same as henchies it would be just as easy to get a PuG as it was prior to heroes. Obviously these views are coming from the POV of a solo hench player because anyone on the other side of the fence can see and experience the problems. You are seeing flashy heroes you can hench all about with better controls, and are being ignorant of the problems they cause to the other games who enjoy to PuGs.

Heroes are MORE than a choice they are _encouraging_ uncooperative game play. It obviously _isn't_ just the ppl who henched everything anyway, that simply begs the question. If it's just the people who henched anyway how come everyone now hero-henches? Everyone did _not_ hench before only some when needed, or like you say those that always have. Conclusion -- NF encourages hero-henching and _thus_ uncooperative game play. You may think this is a good thing but you can't argue it's just better for everyone when it's not. You have to acknowledge the problems it causes for casual PuG gamers who would otherwise be having a lot more fun, and _not_ at your expense. I _want_ you to have your heroes and play the way you want, but i also _want_ to play the way i like too. I see no reason why we both can't have that and so i don't see why you are arguing for something that doesn't affect you and hurts other players. You are just ignoring mine and other players needs and selfishly reveling in your own.

Default henchies are also an anti-cooperative game feature, but i admit they are required, and there are those who choose to play with them always, _but_ there is no incentive or requirement to use them so people are free to choose. Your point that not everyone has to level their hench is wrong. Everyone is leveling their henchies because they both might need them later (which they do) and because they might want to use them later (which they might).

I also reject the fact heroes are better than real players, their AI sucks, and when they try evade attacks they directly agro everything in the area even if flagged. The only tactic that seems to work with hench and heroes in the later explorable areas is to flag them way back out of the way and then go lure on your own, rinse repeat. I don't consider that _better_ at all. Another example of why hench aren't better than real players is in later difficult mission areas. There are far more people looking for PuGs in the later missions because those who were hero-henching get stuck and need help like everyone else.

Seems to me you just want servants to obey your every command and not question your delicate egos. I've said it before, i'd bet most of these hench players _are_ the rage-quitters.

Pevil Lihatuh · Nov 09, 2006, 07:56 AM // 07:56

I personally would love to PUG through this game; I play it online for a reason, otehrwise I'd be on Oblivion instead. Problem is, 99% of people on GW are the kind that rage-quit, flame-bait and just generally try to cause people problems, either by not realising that they *may* have contributed to that total wipe of the group, or because they think its fun to aggravate people online where they're anonymous. Hence I only play with my friends that I know from forums, real life or my guildmates. I also do hench/hero a lot

Heroes/henchies are NOT better than people, as long as the people communicate. If you know as a team what everyones role is, you can actually be a bit flexible if things go wrong, but most groups are too busy with the "go go go!" and trying to rush through missions. And also don't forget this is supposed to be a 'casual' game. I used to be able to play a lot, now I have little time, and I'm sure there are loads of people who can only play an hour or two a week, and for them it's better to both maximise their time doing what they want, and not annoy others by having to leave halfway through a quest.

Personally I play a game to avoid stress and hassle; I get enough of that at work. I've never rage-quit, even when I've been in some really terrible groups who did nothing but slag each other off and aggro everything in sight, but I'm not going to spend my gaming hours listening to total idiots anymore. So I'd disagree Nemon that most hench players are rage-quitters... but it would be a lot nicer for the community if that was the case!

quickmonty · Nov 09, 2006, 08:12 AM // 08:12

For me, PUGs are always a last resort. I prefer guild members or friends but when thay aren't available I have always used henchies. Now I have these wonderful Heroes to help and I doubt I will ever PUG again. It also means I can leave local chat off and don't have to see WTS WTS WTS WTS WTS every half second.

Thank you Anet!

Nemon · Nov 09, 2006, 08:12 AM // 08:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pevil Lihatuh

So I'd disagree Nemon that most hench players are rage-quitters... but it would be a lot nicer for the community if that was the case!

It was just the feeling i was getting off some of the post in here, i think you're probably right tho.

I still dont understand how people have so many problems with PuGs. I mean you'd have to be extremely tightly wound to reject the entire public gaming community because of some 12yr old irritating you. Why i labled some people arrogant and passive-aggressive, that's how they seem to be acting. The attitude of some of the pro-hench players in this thread are what i imagine is the same as the odd player who rage-quits in a PuG, or insults everyone in the party for being PuG.

Like i've said in my previos posts, most >80% of my PuGs are great, i crack jokes and have a laugh, it's fun............. ya know. So some ppl dont listen and screw up, big deal, the benifits far outweigh the odd booger eater. In elite areas my attitude is much different tho, in missions i dont really care because they're a walk in the park crap team or not, but elite areas that take hours to complete i am _very_ strict with the party, i demand to see everyones skills, ask their experiance, and that way i avoid bad parties in places it matters.

tassadar · Nov 09, 2006, 08:14 AM // 08:14

Ppl exaggerate too much when it comes to pugs, most pugs ive bin with have not been bad and personally i perfer playing with real ppl than npcs.
Its just so tiring watching ppl flame sins or warrior/monks in bout every 2nd thread just because of their proffession (most choose monk 2ndary for hard rez not mending).

Just remember that a lot of people are new to the game and they r being taught by u guys to stick to themselves and npcs just like a singleplayer game.

lastly, to put it bluntly, the next time ur in a pug thats having trouble maybe its not the guy next you you sucking maybe you suck?

Pevil Lihatuh · Nov 09, 2006, 08:22 AM // 08:22

I agree to an extent. I personally don't mind going through missions more than once, but you find a lot of people when stuck with the stereotypical wammo who aggroes everything and wipes the team will then get really moody and ragequit instead of giving it another go, or they'll all wind each other up without really meaning to. The problem is most people ARE tightly wound and a lot have elitist ideas (the guys who insist the whole team follow their build and have the professions they want); I can understand there are easy ways and hard ways through things, but its just all too much for me.

I want a nice relaxing stroll through things, even if its over and over (like Consulate Docks for me right now lol) but a lot of people want to rush through the easy bit of the game so they can get to the end and farm for that max armour that looks oh so good, or go to the elite missions etc

I'll be 100% honest, most of my pugs were fine; not great, but not terrible. But the ones that were terrible really left a bitter taste in my mouth; I'm not exactly the most social of people in real life but generally in online games I'm hugely social (god knows why). But there's just something about this game... *shrugs* I still attempt pugs occasionally, but I'm more inclined to join new players than old. I'd rather teach someone to communicate with their team than leave the poor guys to end up becoming just another guy who runs through doing what they're told.

baz777 · Nov 09, 2006, 01:32 PM // 13:32

So far it’s just been Heroes and Henches for me, (except going back and helping guildies out).

Only had one real issue with a Hero, that was when I equipped Koss with mending and then had to kick him

He's promised never to do it again!

Sanji · Nov 09, 2006, 01:56 PM // 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemon

Seems to me you just want servants to obey your every command and not question your delicate egos. I've said it before, i'd bet most of these hench players _are_ the rage-quitters.

No, I just want party members who get the mission done properly without having to sit through idiot AOLer speak and minimap abuse. Henchmen, now that they have more control options, are much less likely to run off and 100% less likely to draw a penis or pingspam on the minimap.