Curse

eximiis · Oct 01, 2008, 07:16 PM // 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

So if I enjoy doing 1,000,000 damage to monsters should it be added to the game? Not everything you enjoy should be added to the game. It doesn't matter if people are teaming up because thats how they have fun if direct negative effects come along with the addition. Anet has to ask themselves if that would be good for their product to turn it into a completely single player game. At least as it stands now you have to have at least 2 humans for max heroes and you have to play with henchmen if you want to solo. Those give some players SOME reason to party with humans.

Do not compare adding 7 heroes and giving ppl a skill that deals 1,000,000 damage. come on !!

The problem is that ppl already don't team up with others. I'm pretty sure A-nets already see that.

[/QUOTE]I don't see why not. The game was built from the ground up for it. The problem happened when Anet strayed from their vision and then the game because a cookie cutter single player game instead of an epic massive multiplayer game. The day heroes came out was the day Guild Wars ceased being an MMORPG (or a CORPG) to me. It became a single player game just like any basic console game.[/QUOTE]

The day they added heroes was the next step after henchment, maybe anet just could,nt add heroes at the beginning, thus giving us only henchmen. Maybe if they could add heroes, tehy would have done it.

You see, A-net give us a game that can 1. play with others and 2. play alone.

Yes, at the begining, pugging was huge, cause they were alot of ppl and less outpost. It's not heroes that killed pugs, it's puggers quitting the game, ppl change from pve to pvp. New ppl that buy the game, usually goes for hench/heroes.

Inner Salbat · Oct 01, 2008, 10:54 PM // 22:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

We have already said it is both. I am saying that the game was mostly designed as a multiplayer game when it came out even though the option to play solo was there. Anybody who can't see this is out of their mind. But this is off topic as the game today has changed. That is why I think bringing an old box into this thread as some kind of evidence for 7 heroes is a waste of time.

Nope it was designed as both from the start no favoritism either way it was both from Prophecies with exception of 2 key areas if you don't count PvP, the reason for this is they could not project either way of which part of there game was going to be the hook so they had to cater to a broad spectrum of people from solo too multi-player, Factions was designed the same way for the exception of 2 key areas and then again with Nightfall & EOTN, if they had favored at any point either side then you would have seen a reduction in henchmen at out posts or no heroes at all or have you not noticed that as the chapters progress the group of henchmen in outposts increased a little.

You need to see the scales balanced or this debate might well end up continuing to your death bed, because both sides of the argument have equal amounts of ammo when that happens the cancel each other out as both being right, and the parties should just agree that it's both.

Bryant Again · Oct 01, 2008, 11:37 PM // 23:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I don't see why not. The game was built from the ground up for it. The problem happened when Anet strayed from their vision and then the game because a cookie cutter single player game instead of an epic massive multiplayer game. The day heroes came out was the day Guild Wars ceased being an MMORPG (or a CORPG) to me. It became a single player game just like any basic console game.

The only way in which they "strayed" from their vision - more like "pushed from" - was by giving everyone what they wanted: more game. If they simply kept PvE in the same campaign and in the same areas, we'd see the game dwindle quickly. If you provided more areas and other content you provide more game, but separate more people.

For the rest, I'd quote Upier's list. Not because it's a good list of faults but a good example of why Guild Wars' multiplayer was going to have trouble right there from the start.

And people have been playing Guild Wars as a "single-player game" long before heroes came out

Daft Shifty · Oct 02, 2008, 01:25 AM // 01:25

7 heros would be leetsauce... but seeing as thats not happening maybe update skills sets on henchies?

pumpkin pie · Oct 02, 2008, 04:15 AM // 04:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

He's saying that if you can easily win with 7 heroes, there would be no incentive to group with players - 8 humans might be stronger, but if you can already roll everything with the benefits of fitting your schedule better, why bother?

It's a valid point to consider. Why join a guild if you don't need help in any areas anymore? With more and more information available out of game, guilds aren't even needed for weaker players to learn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

With 7 heroes, why would anybody need a pug or a guild or friends? The game would already be easy enough, they wouldn't need help.

There would still be plenty of incentive to group with players Avarre, much like now, when lots of players already playing H/H, alot of my guildies still only want to play with guildie, they alway ask before taking h/h as an option, (not that H/H should be an option, I think of it as a choice) or that they wait for more guildies to log on, they always go with guildies. And you know why? PVE SKILLS. you cannot use it on hero's bar. Thats the thing that is keeping pug alive, We even have forum for members to post a list of request to area that they wanted help with.

And believe me when I say there are lots of people like this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yawgmoth

If I wanted a single-player game I would buy something else. Playing GW solo with H/H is soo boring it makes me Alt+F4 after 10 minutes.

playing Guild Wars Still

Though its a valid point, a weak one non the less.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I struggle to see how you make the leap from one statement saying "play alone with a party of henchmen" to "the game was meant to be played solo with 7 heroes". Read the rest of the box and the website. The rest is all multiplayer information. How can you claim the game was meant to be anything? I can claim the game was originally meant to be a multiplayer game with the option to play solo and have a legit point.

No, you cannot "claim the game was originally meant to be a multiplayer game with the option to play solo and have a legit point." Why, becasue playing solo or playing with henchmen or playing with other players are 3 choices offered by this game, none of it should preceed any of the other 2 choices.

DreamWind · Oct 02, 2008, 06:13 AM // 06:13

I'm sorry, but the last 3-4 people who responded to me are completely wrong. This game originally was created to be a multiplayer game with the option to play single player. I can pull up multiple quotes from devs and sources if you don't believe me. The game was built to be a competitive game (ie multiplayer PvP) when it first came out. There is no debate about that...its factual.

That is completely off topic to the thread though because the game is different now and it has nothing to do with whether or not 7 heroes should be in the game. But I thought I would just inform you of the facts.

pumpkin pie · Oct 02, 2008, 06:15 AM // 06:15

and we are talking about PvE

Inner Salbat · Oct 02, 2008, 08:07 AM // 08:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I'm sorry, but the last 3-4 people who responded to me are completely wrong. This game originally was created to be a multiplayer game with the option to play single player. I can pull up multiple quotes from devs and sources if you don't believe me. The game was built to be a competitive game (ie multiplayer PvP) when it first came out. There is no debate about that...its factual.

That is completely off topic to the thread though because the game is different now and it has nothing to do with whether or not 7 heroes should be in the game. But I thought I would just inform you of the facts.

Okay then wise ass explain the reason for enough henchmen in EVERY outpost to complete an entire team to complete quests/missions in that area, further more explain why it is even possible to complete the entire game without interacting with a single human at all, if was designed to be multiplayer from the start you could do none of that by yourself at all period, now go back to your little fantasy land and suck eggs.

ED: And by the way no one I've read here wants 7h for bloody PvP, get your PvP ass out the thread if you don't play PvE, because I hate PvP types that think there some kind of god of the game actually I hate PvP.

rexalex · Oct 02, 2008, 08:12 AM // 08:12

thread could be closed.... its like lott scaling thread was months before.
People hates LS ... ANET ignores.
People loves 7H ... ANET ignores.
All these changes would extend the game's lifetime, which means more player more server resources needed.
We payed the price for the game, we got 3000 hours playtime, we can go....
Its not business to keep player in the game.

Numa Pompilius · Oct 02, 2008, 08:36 AM // 08:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Okay then wise ass explain the reason for enough henchmen in EVERY outpost to complete an entire team to complete quests/missions in that area, further more explain why it is even possible to complete the entire game without interacting with a single human at all, if was designed to be multiplayer from the start you could do none of that by yourself at all

Actually he's kindof right. The game was and is primarily seen as a multiplayer game, not a single player game. The henches were added to let casual players play when friends/guildies were not around, and of course to give a selection if the team was one or a few players short. The henches were intentionally given functional but weak skillsets in order to not be as good as human players, thereby encouraging pugging.

But there is no escaping the fact that the game WAS intentionally made possible to solo with henches, even though it was much harder than if playing with humans.

The game was primarily multiplayer yes, but ALSO by design soloable with henches.

(Another thing: I can't believe that you guys are still debating box blurbs! The text on the boxes are not written by Anet designers, but by some random marketing droid, quite possibly not even employed by Anet. Box blurbs are, to put it another way, not canon.)

Quote:

ED: And by the way no one I've read here wants 7h for bloody PvP, get your PvP ass out the thread if you don't play PvE, because I hate PvP types that think there some kind of god of the game actually I hate PvP.

Well, PvP players note that it's easier to burn through the PvE against monsters with intentionally gimped builds than it is to defeat human teams on a level playingfield, and that's of course true.
It is also irrelevant.

Knight O Cydonia · Oct 02, 2008, 08:55 AM // 08:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Okay then wise ass explain the reason for enough henchmen in EVERY outpost to complete an entire team to complete quests/missions in that area, further more explain why it is even possible to complete the entire game without interacting with a single human at all, if was designed to be multiplayer from the start you could do none of that by yourself at all period, now go back to your little fantasy land and suck eggs.

Pre-Searing says hello! You know, where people are encourage to group together from the very start? At least then you would have a valid excuse to not take a res sig into RA i suppose. ("Res me please!" ... "Well actually I have no res sig because i hate that grouping quest in Pre. It's awfully mean of them to force you to team up with that noob lv 2 monk with bane sig on his bar don't you think?")

I mean you can't really believe that it was designed as a solo game primarily can you? Why would they even bother making it online in the first place then? Come on it's even got 'Guild' (a group of like minded people) in the title of the game!

Where's that team spirit gone? I think someone needs to use /goteam emotes a bit more often

Numa Pompilius · Oct 02, 2008, 09:04 AM // 09:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight O Cydonia

Pre-Searing says hello! You know, where people are encourage to group together from the very start?

Now that was a really bad argument.
The res-sig quest exists to learn new players how to group, and no one denies that it is possible by design to group in GW. That's bad for your argument.
Worse is that that's one of only two quests in pre which require grouping, the dozens of other quests do not, and are easily soloable.
Worst is that originally there was a forced PvP match when you exited pre-searing, where you were paired up with other players to fight a human team - but that was removed, by your logic suggesting that ANet don't want PvP in the game.

But beyond all that you're missing the point: he's not saying that GW is ONLY a single-player game, he's saying that it ALSO is a single-player game. That it, intentionally, by anet design, can be played both as multiplayer and single player.

DreamWind · Oct 02, 2008, 09:31 AM // 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Okay then wise ass explain the reason for enough henchmen in EVERY outpost to complete an entire team to complete quests/missions in that area, further more explain why it is even possible to complete the entire game without interacting with a single human at all, if was designed to be multiplayer from the start you could do none of that by yourself at all period, now go back to your little fantasy land and suck eggs.

ED: And by the way no one I've read here wants 7h for bloody PvP, get your PvP ass out the thread if you don't play PvE, because I hate PvP types that think there some kind of god of the game actually I hate PvP.

Sorry you can't handle the truth dude. I'm really sorry. Now then lets get this thread back on track maybe.

Inner Salbat · Oct 02, 2008, 09:33 AM // 09:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Sorry you can't handle the truth dude. I'm really sorry. Now then lets get this thread back on track maybe.

Okay fine since you like DJryder refuse to meet the argument at least half way, your ignored .. bye bye have a nice life.

DreamWind · Oct 02, 2008, 09:41 AM // 09:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Okay fine since you like DJryder refuse to meet the argument at least half way, your ignored .. bye bye have a nice life.

The argument didn't even have to be met. There was no argument. Everything I said was truth and the Anet founders said so. You are simply spewing in the face of facts to fill some kind of void you have. But I am ignored so oh well. Just another illogical person in favor of 7 heroes in this thread.

Red Sonya · Oct 02, 2008, 10:03 AM // 10:03

Quote:

And people have been playing Guild Wars as a "single-player game" long before heroes came out

Yep this is very true lots of people played the entire Prophecies with just henchies all the way through. I even killed Glint as a solo player and henchies and that proved to me right there the entire game could easily be played solo as long as you understood the skills and how to use the skilled henchies in your favor. I think many people expected henchies to be over the top players, but, they are just average as that is what they should be. It was heroes that took the game over the top and if anything I wish they would remove the heroes and make everyone that wants to solo just use henchies like before.

Etta · Oct 02, 2008, 10:11 AM // 10:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Sonya

if anything I wish they would remove the heroes

They gotta remove all the idiots in game first though.

upier · Oct 02, 2008, 10:14 AM // 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I'm sorry, but the last 3-4 people who responded to me are completely wrong. This game originally was created to be a multiplayer game with the option to play single player. I can pull up multiple quotes from devs and sources if you don't believe me. The game was built to be a competitive game (ie multiplayer PvP) when it first came out. There is no debate about that...its factual.

That is completely off topic to the thread though because the game is different now and it has nothing to do with whether or not 7 heroes should be in the game. But I thought I would just inform you of the facts.

The bolded part is the winning part.

Despite one's feelings towards heroes - they simply HAD to be introduced since the game evolved past the original vision. And it's not just the players that are to blame for this change in the way the game is player (aka the selfish little bastards that would rather play by themselves then with other people) - it's A.net's fault just as much. I mean who is going to wait for a group for HFFF when you need to do the run 10k+ times?
Because of the size of the game AND because of how PvE evolved - multiplayer in PvE rarely works anymore.
So what we are left with is a big number of players that not only consist of players that want to be left alone - but also a huge number of players that are FORCED to be alone. While some of the guilt does fall on the fact that it's really easy to bring a bunch of NPCs and leave the outpost pretty much as soon as one enters it (which would also be a good reason against all-hero parties!) - the bigger part of the problem is that some parts of the game are pretty much empty. The way HoM works promotes the idea of having just ONE character. And when you have just one character and pretty much all that is left to do it grind - you don't waste time by looking for the right party - you just want to get it over and done with as soon as possible so that you can do it again. And again. And again ....
And it's because of this that single player options must be present - and not only that - it would be wise to make them as good as possible.

So for multiplayer to become appealing again - the game would need to be completely reworked. While this is something I am much in favor of - I mean I still fondly remember the times when me and 3 more folks fought our way from Piken to Grendich chatting all the way while killing baddies (we didn't even run monks because self heals were good enough - which made partying so much easier!) - there is a reason why we are getting GW2.
It just won't happen. So the whole original vision of how GW is supposed to be played can be thrown out the window and try to make it as good for the players that are currently playing.
Full hero parties would be the next step.

Red Sonya · Oct 02, 2008, 10:15 AM // 10:15

Nope they don't gotta remove all the idiots because those idiots payed their money to play the game the way THEY want to as well as anyone else. There are no rules or bylaws that says everyone must comply to a certain build or standard because you say so.

Avarre · Oct 02, 2008, 10:48 AM // 10:48

It's not complying to a certain build, it's called not being a damned horrible player.

These are two different things.

Bad players should not dictate how the game develops. That's just a slap in the face to the good players, and is a big factor for most of them leaving.