Curse

Hobbs · Jan 31, 2011, 04:58 PM // 16:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassma

-SNIP-

I don't know where to begin. Competitive play is bad for MMOs and more PvE content is bad for them too? So you're saying that a game the size of Prophecies with no PvP element whatsoever would have survived 5 years? I think not.

MithranArkanere · Jan 31, 2011, 05:40 PM // 17:40

The problem with competitive play is not the mode itself, but the players. While some play fair, others just exploit gimmicks as much as they can and grovel with a fake feeling of superiority when thrashing less inexperience players. When you get too many of those, competitive play begins to get empty.

As for outposts being empty. Well... people is OUTSIDE, in explorables, doing stuff. You can't look there.
With a Calculator to fill, there's no reason to stay in an outpost doing nothing, unless you are one of the few that bother to trade, or just socializing a little with some friends.

So you can't say how many people is in there looking at outposts. Not even if you look at the most populated American outpsots, the calculator changed the trend of things to make people more active and waste less time in outposts.

shoyon456 · Jan 31, 2011, 07:51 PM // 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apok

Also, I know that a lot of posters here are PvEer's, but it was a damn good thing that Anet didn't push the update TWO DAYS from the mAT. Doing so would've made for a relatively horrible tournament and more flaming than there already is. It happened in the past and it would sure as hell do it again.
...
Am I telling you to be patient? Well, maybe, but that's only because I've never been that excited for the Dervish since they were released. But what I am telling you is they have a damn good reason for taking their time on this one.

Its not that anyone expected the actual update two days before the mAT, but we did expect the skill preview which is supposed to come prior to the update.

I don't care how many coders, how thin they're spread, or how much they bullshitted away their time. Eight months for a single skill update is flat out bs. Even if the update was freakin godly it woudn't meet 8 months worth of expectations. Anet released a whole goddam campaign in 8 months, and now they can't even manage a skill update however extensive it may or may not be. I'm also tired of this "overhaul" bs. Of course the coding is complicated, but the way to fix Dervishes has never been complicated or obscure. I looked forward to the update initially but as another mentioned, even the update wouldn't make me reinstall the game at this point. I'll come back to look at what's changed and thats about it.

It has nothing to do with complaining about a "free update," but when Anet promised bi-monthly skill updates as mentioned previously, they screwed the pooch and NEVER hit that target. I don't care that they fail at making their own schedule, but OWN UP TO IT. Stop putting on this facade that you're actually doing several skill updates a year cause you're clearly not. Hell you can barely do ONE in a year. But then, skill updates aren't their main concern since they need to make new costumes to milk the remaining GW1 players before dropping active support for it completely and moving to GW2. Anet needs to either meet its' own words or stop lying about trying to.

TheGizzy · Jan 31, 2011, 07:52 PM // 19:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassma

Well just don't be surprised when I get to say I told you so if the Apr/Jun 2012 release comes to pass.

The average game nowadays takes 5 years to make and even then most of them are a POS out of the gate. So since the initial offering came around 2007 I wouldn't expect the release to be much earlier than 5 years from that mark. We might get to see it before the Armageddon of Dec 2012.

Since I haven't posited any theory on when GW2 will actually be released, telling me "I told you so" would be rather...well... pointless. I have no idea when they're going to release GW2. What I've offered is a possible interpretation of current events. Nothing more.

I've waited 10 years for DIII... I'd certainly wait 10 years for GW2 if I had to. DII:LOD was released June 29, 2001... I'm hoping that Blizzard is planning on doing some big, epic, "10 years to the day after we brought you LOD, Blizzard is proud to present DIII!!!!!" thing. But I'm not holding my breath for that, either.

I am too intimately familiar with all the problems that can arise when trying to roll out a new game, updates to a game, bug fixes, etc. to join in with any QQ'ing about delayed releases. I've spent hundreds of nights staying up all night trying to help developers I've worked for meet their own self-imposed and publicized deadlines. And I know that a very small thing can snowball into an enormous delay.

So yeah, your "I told you so" would be wasted. But you know, feel free to say it anyway if that's going to make you feel better. We've all seen enough of your posts to give your words exactly the weight and value they deserve.

Bassma · Jan 31, 2011, 10:57 PM // 22:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hobbs

I don't know where to begin. Competitive play is bad for MMOs and more PvE content is bad for them too? So you're saying that a game the size of Prophecies with no PvP element whatsoever would have survived 5 years? I think not.

No you misunderstood me. Adding more content to the already established world isn't harmful. Adding more worlds to play in that world is. You separate the population you have and it spreads and spreads till eventually there is very little population to play with in ALL areas.

Add content to the already existing areas so players still play in the same places but for newer items or newer bosses to fight. Why does the same monster have to be in the same place with the same stats everytime? Why not have those change on a daily or weekly basis? Don't have the same bosses drop the same items either so there can't be a wiki of oh this boss drops this in this area.

There's plenty of ways to make an MMO fun and exciting without having to make it bigger and bigger.

Killed u man · Feb 01, 2011, 12:23 AM // 00:23

I think noone is going to claim reworking an entire professions doesn't take a whole lot of time. The majority of the complaints also don't come from the size of the updates, they come from the fact that it takes so long to roll them out.

It's been almost a year now. A year. Entire games have been made in less time with less people.

Anet works slow, really slow. You can't blame anyone for pointing that out time and time again if the PR keeps saying "things will improve".

Verene · Feb 01, 2011, 05:04 AM // 05:04

Quote:

A year. Entire games have been made in less time with less people.

Um...unless you mean little flash games and the like, no, not really. Most games take several years with dozens (or even hundreds) of people working on them.

Protip: Games are in development long before they are announced. A year from reveal to release != a year to make.

dancing gnome · Feb 01, 2011, 06:13 AM // 06:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verene

Um...unless you mean little flash games and the like, no, not really. Most games take several years with dozens (or even hundreds) of people working on them.

Protip: Games are in development long before they are announced. A year from reveal to release != a year to make.

Runic Games was founded in 2008 by the scattered remains of Flagship Studios (makers of Hellgate London) after they went under (and like full on under, like the only remaining guy was sleeping in his office trying to pull together something from all of the mess - read the incredible interview here: http://www.1up.com/features/flagship...oper-interview). In 2009 they released Torchlight, heralded as one of the best PC action games to come along since Diablo 2, so much so that it still generates buzz today (it's actually on the "games I'm playing" list on John Stumme's wiki page atm) and the sequel has a sizeable amount of anticipation. The game is awesome, and if it didn't lack multiplayer it would be incredible.

Protip: Great games don't require several to dozens of years to make or a massive studio staff.

I'm not saying the Live Team are slacking off or taking too long to produce content, from what I've seen Stumme has actually stepped up the amount of content they've been releasing since he took over (and aims for a greater amount of content in WoC than we got from WiK over a similar period of time in addition to his festival and feature side projects). I disagree with the priorities which always seem to result in the dervish being delayed another month and something else coming out instead. I also think it's weird we get hit with separate big updates close together (the final part of HotN was released at the same time as Wintersday after a 2-3 week gap of nothing, wouldn't it be better to space them out?).

TheGizzy · Feb 01, 2011, 07:11 AM // 07:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by dancing gnome

Runic Games was founded in 2008 by the scattered remains of Flagship Studios (makers of Hellgate London) after they went under (and like full on under, like the only remaining guy was sleeping in his office trying to pull together something from all of the mess - read the incredible interview here: http://www.1up.com/features/flagship...oper-interview). In 2009 they released Torchlight, heralded as one of the best PC action games to come along since Diablo 2, so much so that it still generates buzz today (it's actually on the "games I'm playing" list on John Stumme's wiki page atm) and the sequel has a sizeable amount of anticipation. The game is awesome, and if it didn't lack multiplayer it would be incredible.

I love Torchlight. I paid for 7 copies for me, my family and friends. It was basically a fix for my Diablo addiction. Why? Because it was done by many of the same guys who did Diablo... and while it sounds impressive that they rolled out Torchlight so fast, the reality is that a lot of the base engine work, mechanics and system work was done by those same guys long before there was ever a need, or a thought, for Torchlight.

I 100% support their success, I think Torchlight is incredible and I have nothing but praise for the game AND the developers... but it is a really poor example for this discussion. If they'd had to start from scratch... yeah, that'd be something to point to, but they didn't. There's a reason people refer to it as a Diablo clone, and a reason long-time fans of Diablo absolutely flocked to buy Torchlight and were very satisfied with it as a "fix" for their addictions.

But let's look at the original. It has been nearly ten years since LOD hit the shelves. Everyone knew there was a DIII coming long before the formal announcement in 2008. Blizzard openly admits they began working on the concepts even before LOD was rolled out. Ten years - for a much less complicated engine and less intensive mechanics than what GW has been building.

The only real protip: It will always take exactly as long as it takes, no matter how much fans QQ, scream, whine, complain, abuse, denigrate, demand, insist or beg. Gamers are some of the biggest whiners on the planet, possessed of an exceptionally high sense of entitlement compared to the rest of the population. Gaming development is one of the most murphy's law-laden endeavors in the world. These two points will always, inevitably, clash in stellar ways.

I've done a lot of e-based customer service work besides just gaming. I do a lot of pro-bono work for non-profits and charities I support. I've done a lot of small contracts for new eCommerce businesses. I've done sites, eSupport and ticket sale setups for cons. I've even done a few setups for adult networks (I'm such a perv). I have never faced the disrespect, abuse and outright death threats I've gotten in the gaming industry. I did the site & support portal for a charity where the president of same bilked people for donations and took off for Aruba or some such... and not one of those people flooding the helpdesk with tickets about the thousands of dollars they'd lost ever resorted to even a tenth of the abuse I've gotten from a single banned player of an f2p game.

So my sympathies nearly always lean towards the developers, rather than the fans... hell, just read some of the nasty, disgusting comments people make on THIS site about developers of THIS game.

It takes as long as it takes. Does anyone really think these guys & gals are sitting around the breakroom asking, "how can we disappoint the fans today?" I promise, they're not. In some cases, they're stuck dealing with corporate constraints the fans will never hear about. Some VP of Marketing who hasn't looked at a fansite in his life is sitting in his office 5,000 miles away and saying, "this could be more profitable if we...*insert idea that screws the fans*" and then sending off a memo that the developers are not only forced to comply with, but forced to be SILENT about.

Imagine being a gamer yourself, and a developer, and being tied to your desk with corporate shackles and a noose... knowing your fans are basically hating you for something you have no control over.

I can tell you from experience, it sucks.

Bassma · Feb 01, 2011, 08:24 AM // 08:24

Quote:

Imagine being a gamer yourself, and a developer, and being tied to your desk with corporate shackles and a noose... knowing your fans are basically hating you for something you have no control over.

What you leave out is nobody told them they HAD to go the corporate route. They CHOSE to go that route because they wanted SOMEONE ELSE TO FOOT THEIR BILLS!

There are developers out there who are their OWN DISTRIBUTERS and PUBLISHERS as well as developers. So since they can do it others can also.

I don't care for the crying about how hard or abusive it is for developers since it's their own fault, they didn't have to go the corporate route.

Shriketalon · Feb 01, 2011, 10:04 AM // 10:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassma

I don't care for the crying about how hard or abusive it is for developers since it's their own fault, they didn't have to go the corporate route.

Yes, how dare they attempt to use their talents as a means of sustaining their lives!

Developers don't need to eat. They should gain nutrients from their code as they type.

Artisan Archer · Feb 01, 2011, 10:16 AM // 10:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassma

Life was better in the RPG world when they didn't implement player vs player. It didn't matter who was a little overpowered than the next class. You adventured together against the elements and not each other. Also in the good ole days you had 5 classes period. Warrior, Ranger, Cleric, Wizard, Thief and you could combine up to 3 of those together in one character and still have a lot of fun. I remember I always went for the Ranger/Fighter/Cleric build. Had 2 pets, great range attack and some healing, protection and turning undead skills with some decent parry and dicipline skills until they nerfed the way you could combine fighter class with others...and why? you might ask? Because crybaby pvpers said it wasn't fair. PVP has always ruined most RPG games in some form or fashion over these last 10 years or so. The game starts out great for PVE and by the time PVPers get through whinning the PVE game is ruined and then the game falls apart and the PVPers wonder what happened to all the population?? lol

In the case of Guild Wars though they ruined both sides of the fence PVe & PVP, most are leaving or have left. Cities and outposts of Prophecies and Factions are ghost towns now. Even Nightfall is pretty barren except for the trade areas. Same thing happened to other mmo's. Add too much and too many places to play and the population splits up and eventually disappears.

I think you're trolling, but anyway. You're basically saying a balanced game is less fun than a unbalanced game? I'm gonna have to disagree.

Martin Alvito · Feb 01, 2011, 06:49 PM // 18:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

The problem with competitive play is not the mode itself, but the players. While some play fair, others just exploit gimmicks as much as they can and grovel with a fake feeling of superiority when thrashing less inexperience players.

Gimmicks that are not fun are the game designer's fault. You can't blame players for using efficient solutions in a competitive environment. If you don't, someone else will, and losing isn't fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassma

Life was better in the RPG world when they didn't implement player vs player. It didn't matter who was a little overpowered than the next class. You adventured together against the elements and not each other.

It doesn't work that way in an MMO. Competitive play adds a lot of replay value at the cost of creating a lot of maintenance hassles for the designers. But those hassles would be present in Guild Wars irrespective of the presence or absence of PvP.

The designers' decision to include fixed supply and ultra-rare items as endgame PvE content introduces a competitive process to PvE. You have to acquire more in-game wealth than most other players in order to get those items, and that means that PvE balance matters.

For example, if ectos, armbraces or zkeys suddenly become much easier to get due to the discovery of a loophole in the game's design, there are winners and losers. Players with the items people wanted to buy with ectos/zkeys/armbraces get richer, and players that have lots of time to spend abusing the loophole until it is closed get richer. Everyone else loses because item prices increase. Fixed supply is fixed supply, and people aren't farming the ultra-rare items any faster.

Long story short, what other people do in an MMO affects you, whether you realize it or not. It follows that PvE balance matters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassma

In the case of Guild Wars though they ruined both sides of the fence PVe & PVP, most are leaving or have left. Cities and outposts of Prophecies and Factions are ghost towns now. Even Nightfall is pretty barren except for the trade areas. Same thing happened to other mmo's. Add too much and too many places to play and the population splits up and eventually disappears.

Again, this one's on the designer. It's their responsibility to provide easy, intuitive systems for players to link up for cooperative play. One might try to absolve the developer by pointing out that the game is six years old, but the system used in Guild Wars is actually worse than the system in Diablo II that it is based upon.

A better approach would have been to include the player search feature from day one, create a single meeting ground for each campaign (keep the instances, but include filters so players can advertise/search for what they want to do), and let players initiate quests from the meeting ground via a menu.

To be honest, I don't see why this cannot be done, has not been done already, and is not at the top of the Live Team's priority list.

I'll give you a story that illustrates how bad the current system is. When I was doing dungeon runs a couple of years ago, I literally used to pay guildies to spam zones looking for customers and pay them 20% of the cost of the run per player found. This caused me to make more money than I would have otherwise (no downtime), and the guildies profited.

MithranArkanere · Feb 01, 2011, 11:20 PM // 23:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

Gimmicks that are not fun are the game designer's fault. You can't blame players for using efficient solutions in a competitive environment. If you don't, someone else will, and losing isn't fun.[...]

But when you get rid of those gimmicks, you'll see them raging all over the place, and saying that 'their' game is ruined.

That's the annoying thing.

Xenomortis · Feb 01, 2011, 11:34 PM // 23:34

Let them rage. Seriously.
ANet fear the cries of the playerbase too much.

Hobbs · Feb 02, 2011, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenomortis

Let them rage. Seriously.
ANet fear the cries of the playerbase too much.

People playing now are probably the most likely to buy GW2. Piss them off too much and you lose a lot of sales.

Martin Alvito · Feb 02, 2011, 01:14 AM // 01:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

But when you get rid of those gimmicks, you'll see them raging all over the place, and saying that 'their' game is ruined.

This happens because ANet has been slow to recognize and resolve problems. When these problems are nipped in the bud, people don't adjust their expectations to include the gimmick and these complaints are never voiced. Instead, the people that play the gimmick briefly feel like they got away with something (and are happy), and the people negatively impacted feel like the developer is being responsive to their concerns.

It also happens because ANet rarely applies grease until the wheel gets squeaky enough. Try doing that with a child. I guarantee you the child will learn to throw more, longer and louder tantrums in a hurry.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hobbs

People playing now are probably the most likely to buy GW2. Piss them off too much and you lose a lot of sales.

I agree that it's best not to change much in the original game right before release of a sequel. But the game has had prominent gimmicks since 2005, and ANet has frequently turned a blind eye to them. Your argument can't excuse that choice. The developers seem to believe that gimmicks are a good way to introduce players to new areas and activities, and draw that conclusion from the spikes in activity in areas with a gimmick. But that data doesn't answer the real question, which is how the arc of players who play a gimmick heavily compares with those who don't.

FoxBat · Feb 02, 2011, 07:44 AM // 07:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hobbs

People playing now are probably the most likely to buy GW2. Piss them off too much and you lose a lot of sales.

If the people still playing GW1 count as "a lot" then GW2 already failed.

Shadowspawn X · Feb 02, 2011, 06:43 PM // 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hobbs

People playing now are probably the most likely to buy GW2. Piss them off too much and you lose a lot of sales.

I would not be too sure about that because GW has a huge fan base of ex-players who are awaiting GW2. In fact I would guess that the total fan base is much larger than the current number of active players. These are the people who Anet doesn't want to piss of by altering GW1 so much that the old timers can no longer recognize the game and lose interest in GW2.

Hobbs · Feb 02, 2011, 07:21 PM // 19:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowspawn X

I would not be too sure about that because GW has a huge fan base of ex-players who are awaiting GW2. In fact I would guess that the total fan base is much larger than the current number of active players. These are the people who Anet doesn't want to piss of by altering GW1 so much that the old timers can no longer recognize the game and lose interest in GW2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

If the people still playing GW1 count as "a lot" then GW2 already failed.

Thousands of sales are not something to take loudly. What they do to Guild Wars 1 now is going to have little effect on sales to those who never played it, it'll have something of an effect on ex-players, but only those who're still actively members of the community and who read the updates. These people are the dedicated fans, they still keep in touch with a game they no longer play and as much as they protest against the current state of the game I imagine they'll still buy GW2 in the end. Then there's the demographic that still play GW1, this is the demographic that is most affected by the current state of the game when it comes to them buying GW2. If GW1 gets screwed up they'll still have that fresh in their minds when it comes to GW2, whereas those who've already left are less likely to take it into consideration.