Curse

tmr819 · Sep 17, 2008, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Hmmm.... I was looking back over this thread a bit and I'm inclined to just "agree to disagree" on this issue of 7 heroes: some players (like me) want them, some do not. Oh well.

There's no point in beating a dead horse (except of course that it can be kind of fun

), as they say. ANet will do ... whatever ANet will do.

But ... actually. I sometimes wish GW had been structured along a smaller party size from the get-go. Eight is not "enough"; eight is too many. I think eight is an unwieldy number (don't even get me started on the larger raids available in some MMO games.) Five or six would have been a better party size cap, imo.

And a party size of four is not bad, which is why I was so happy to learn of Dragon Age, a single-player RPG in development which, among other things, seems to have a party maximum of four. Based on what I have read about this game thus far, it sounds quite promising.

If the multiplayer aspect of Dragon Age is simple and accessible (assuming there *is* a multiplayer aspect -- I hope there is!) and if it comes out before April 2009, as currently projected, I think it could just replace GW in my affections.

Tyla · Sep 17, 2008, 09:51 PM // 21:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

So you could you and everybody else who wants 7 heroes...

That's a pretty awesome comeback, there.

JDRyder · Sep 17, 2008, 10:12 PM // 22:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

Hmmm.... I was looking back over this thread a bit and I'm inclined to just "agree to disagree" on this issue of 7 heroes: some players (like me) want them, some do not. Oh well.

agreed this is getting old

to the rest of your post, i 1/2 way agree, maybe some people are just playing to wrong game, but not 100% sure but i know biowear is coming out with a new MMO, If its any thing like their SP games the party will only be 3-4 as well.

link

Inner Salbat · Sep 18, 2008, 02:39 AM // 02:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

And a party size of four is not bad, which is why I was so happy to learn of Dragon Age, a single-player RPG in development which, among other things, seems to have a party maximum of four. Based on what I have read about this game thus far, it sounds quite promising.

www.perfectworld.com - it's a pretty cool game I will say this for it -GRIND- but so far it's not been grind where you feel like it is, it feels more like progression than grind, and it's -free-, although I don't know what the product will be when it comes out of beta if it will be the same free to play type of game, but it's definitely sliced hours out of my GW time that's for sure, you can jump/fly/swim/walk & mounts and solo most things it appears although as you go up levels it appears it becomes more team based and you get 1 companion that will fight along side you too, and the level of customization is off the charts! - and to think all we was asking for is a hair stylist.

And best of all they don't go running around nerfing skills every 5 seconds either, although I'm sure they would if the need came.

Now you see how word of mouth works ? someone recently in the forum put me onto perfectworld, and now I'm passing it on and to drag this whole thing from off topic back to on; what do you think I'll have to say about Guild Wars if I had no choice but to leave it now because I couldn't complete my goals because of lack of people?

Whirlwind · Sep 18, 2008, 03:03 AM // 03:03

95% of the time i play with hero/hench. I'd sure like to be able to set up those crappy hench the way i want them..... Anet doesn't like the anti social.

Inner Salbat · Sep 18, 2008, 03:26 AM // 03:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whirlwind

95% of the time i play with hero/hench. I'd sure like to be able to set up those crappy hench the way i want them..... Anet doesn't like the anti social.

That's a bit of a contradiction if they didn't like "anti-social" then they should not have state on the box you could solo by yourself, should have avoid making henchmen and should not have put heroes in the game at all, but then... GW would have been an epic fail.

zwei2stein · Sep 18, 2008, 06:28 AM // 06:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

they have already said they would never pug so. No1 here is preventing any thing, anet as already said they are not going to add them.

So, you are saying that introduction of 7 heroes would not hurt pugging at all because people inclined to use them don't group with humans anyway?

I must agree.

Zebideedee · Sep 18, 2008, 09:11 AM // 09:11

I'd be curious to see if Anet gave the ones that voted yes the ability to use 7 heroes, I bet the 15% would start a whine poll about how they couldn't lol

Sorry, just thinking out loud

Jade · Sep 18, 2008, 09:23 AM // 09:23

I'm wondering if they will allow 7 heroes myself. Personally, I think they will, but they won't do it until Gw2 comes out. After the mass exodus from Gw to Gw2, there won't really be enough people left to not allow the use of 7 heroes.

Inner Salbat · Sep 18, 2008, 09:45 AM // 09:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jade

I'm wondering if they will allow 7 heroes myself. Personally, I think they will, but they won't do it until Gw2 comes out. After the mass exodus from Gw to Gw2, there won't really be enough people left to not allow the use of 7 heroes.

There hoping you will go back to GW1 to max out titles to get the benefits of them in GW2, for those doing so they'd better be one hell of a benefit to it, there also hoping you'd you know go back and play it sense you enjoyed it, that is a big gamble and not one I would make in a million years it's far to risky with all the other games coming out now, besides there already is an exodus it's just a slow sad and painful death.

People on mass only return for events like Halloween/Wintersday & New Year thing in factions, then there gone again they don't stick around if another game started making events around the same time that where better than GW's you would see a dramatic drop in the population during those times, even so those events are still not enough to drag a single one of my Guild members back online.

There going about this entirely the wrong way there is no need for GW2, just upgrade GW1 with all the new features, modify the current content to be compatible to the new features add a new chapter with the new races and it's go time, no need to -completely- reinvent the wheel like this unless they've written GW1 so poorly that they can't.

Nasty things happen on my PC's when I found out there written poorly they hit the recycle bin never to be seen again.

Dawgboy · Sep 18, 2008, 09:56 AM // 09:56

"Somebody" made a generality earlier about nobody plays late at night. Well, I do! Not everyone who plays is a schoolkid or 9-to-5er.
When I first started playing 3+ years ago the mission towns had a steady population, even at 2am. Now, towns are silent and all but deserted at that time.
I just spent a half hour(at 4am) going on a walkabout to 9 random mission towns, 3 in each game. There were a total of 23 other players, most statues for the 3 minutes I was there. There was 1 person looking for a party(Ring of Fire), and that was the only chat at all anywhere.
The game's too lightly populated to support pugs. Simple as that. Why not add a little extra fun to it by letting me choose to use all heroes? It would probably keep me playing at least untill GW2 comes out. As it is, I'm about ready to take a break, and I'm not sure I'll be there for GW2.

Here's a saying for the girls; "Watch how your date treats the waitress, because that's how he'd be treating you after you're married."
I'm watching how Anet treats its current clients before I commit to another purchase. I hope they don't ignore us, but it doesn't look good.

daze · Sep 18, 2008, 10:08 AM // 10:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Even if they offer bribes of 1000NZD a copy for me to play GW2 I will not, I've had a guts full of the way they handle there games, after I've completed all my goals the only reason they'll see my money again is if they release the server software for GW1 so that I can play/add to it myself, I am done with ArenaNet (oh the things I would love to type here).

The only reason I'm still playing? I don't like leaving things unfinished or incomplete, that includes titles I paid money for it I want every inch of content there is not 60% but 100%.

I feel the exact same way. I lost a lot of respect for ANet through the years and as soon as i get my GWAMM title i will probably leave and never come back to ANet/Guildwars. I will probably dust off my PS3 and try it out for a change.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Just wait till we start lobbing yellow snow

Inner Salbat · Sep 18, 2008, 10:36 AM // 10:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by daze

I feel the exact same way. I lost a lot of respect for ANet through the years and as soon as i get my GWAMM title i will probably leave and never come back to ANet/Guildwars. I will probably dust off my PS3 and try it out for a change.

I just hope we're the minority and this isn't a general theme if it is a general theme, I think I can see ArenaNet going back to Blizzard with there tails between there legs.

daze · Sep 18, 2008, 10:38 AM // 10:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

I just hope we're the minority and this isn't a general theme if it is a general theme, I think I can see ArenaNet going back to Blizzard with there tails between there legs.

World of Guildcraft FTW... Still probably wouldn't play.. Ive smoked crack before, and it wasn't NEAR as addictive as Guild wars.

Red Sonya · Sep 18, 2008, 11:28 AM // 11:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jade

I'm wondering if they will allow 7 heroes myself. Personally, I think they will, but they won't do it until Gw2 comes out. After the mass exodus from Gw to Gw2, there won't really be enough people left to not allow the use of 7 heroes.

They won't they've already stated they won't. It's not like UB or other things as they never stated they WON'T change/update those, but, a couple of the devs have clearly stated they WON'T allow 7 heroes for specific reasons. It doesn't matter about the already anti-social people out there who don't pug, it's about keeping those that do still pugging as allowing 7 heroes would just diminish the pugging population even more or at least make it look less enticiing than playing with 7 heroes. So, they won't allow 7 heroes.

Amy Awien · Sep 18, 2008, 12:29 PM // 12:29

That was not the reason, their reason had more to do with the increased complexity of the user-interface.

Cobalt · Sep 18, 2008, 01:08 PM // 13:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

That was not the reason, their reason had more to do with the increased complexity of the user-interface.

So the real reason is they are too lazy to make seven flagable around the radar screen and increase the hero slot from three to seven, the skill pop up show seven and the inventory pop up show seven?

Sounds like all they need to fire the dead weight in charge of the game interface and get someone who does not mind working for a living.

EDIT: If you think about it they would not even make to those changes; just add 4 more hero slots, and give the heroes "active" buttons in the team player box so you can just enable any three at one time for flagging, inventory change or skill change. This way the only part of the interface that has to be reworked would be the team/player box, it could probably be done tested and implemented in just a few days.

Crom The Pale · Sep 18, 2008, 01:19 PM // 13:19

They seam to think that increasing the number of heros means we want every thing increased.

This is, infact, not the case.

We can stick with the 3 hero inventory/skill selection/skill bars/flags.

We just want 4 more heros in the party. We can outfit them and set up there skill bars with the current system just fine. We don't really need to micro manage them.

The bare bones of what we are after is 4 henchmen where we can set thier skill bars up. Thats really all that people want.

zwei2stein · Sep 18, 2008, 01:25 PM // 13:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobalt

So the real reason is they are too lazy to make seven flagable around the radar screen and increase the hero slot from three to seven, the skill pop up show seven and the inventory pop up show seven?

Sounds like all they need to fire the dead weight in charge of the game interface and get someone who does not mind working for a living.

EDIT: If you think about it they would not even make to those changes; just add 4 more hero slots, and give the heroes "active" buttons in the team player box so you can just enable any three at one time for flagging, inventory change or skill change. This way the only part of the interface that has to be reworked would be the team/player box, it could probably be done tested and implemented in just a few days.

No, they present it in way that they suggest that people would be stupid and clutter their screen with open hero bars.

Anyhow, it is more that 7 flags: skill screen and inventory screen, etc ... would need redesign too.

which is not issue because people wanting 7h thingie always come to this conclusion: "We only want to be able to add them to party, we don't require all controls for them."

(To change skills/equipment on hero beyond three you would simply kick one of three with full controlls and put there hero you want to mess with)

Shasgaliel · Sep 18, 2008, 01:25 PM // 13:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobalt

So the real reason is they are too lazy to make seven flagable around the radar screen and increase the hero slot from three to seven, the skill pop up show seven and the inventory pop up show seven?

Sounds like all they need to fire the dead weight in charge of the game interface and get someone who does not mind working for a living.

EDIT: If you think about it they would not even make to those changes; just add 4 more hero slots, and give the heroes "active" buttons in the team player box so you can just enable any three at one time for flagging, inventory change or skill change. This way the only part of the interface that has to be reworked would be the team/player box, it could probably be done tested and implemented in just a few days.

I do not think it is as easy. Some changes to interface may need quite a big changes to the source code and may need some weeks of developing. With only one developer working on gw1....

I do not see the reason for them to do it mostly if it will not bring them any money but additional cost. GW is not a game with monthly fee if you haven't noticed. If they see a chance to obtain some money out of it they would probably have whole team working on its implementation. Anet is not a charity. They have their business model and they want to optimize it.