Curse

Burst Cancel · May 30, 2009, 03:24 AM // 03:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by kunt0r

You can't have human-like AI because it is too expensive computationally. Each machine must run hundreds of instances, each with dozens of monsters `active` at any given time. There is a reason MMO's and online action RPG's always have bad AI, because it's all technology allows for.

You're overthinking it. Moderately intelligent play is easy to fake in GW; the heroes do a pretty good job already (at least compared to the average player). With monsters, the AI programmer has the additional advantage of knowing the skillbar ahead of time. You'd need some additional targetting rules since there isn't a player calling targets for them, but that can be pretty rudimentary - avoid targets that use particular tanking skills, prioritize targets that use certain skills (disruption, healing, etc.), etc. Heck, just having monsters spread out and ignore the permatank would be a huge improvement over what we have now.

Quote:

human-like AI would mean unpredictable and prone to messing up. As far as i know, no AI ever messes up at what it's supposed to do.

Build failure chance into the AI. It should be trivial to have the AI "mess up" some percentage of the time when doing certain activities.

Lishy · May 30, 2009, 03:38 AM // 03:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

If Anet wanted, they could make any mob
However, who would ever enjoy an unbeatable game? Ever played Ikaruga?

Yes I have.
And Ikaruga is for Pussies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pL-CyuVD_Uw

This is more of my game.
Mushihimesama is one of the best, albeit, most challenging shmups ever.
And I just love the insect theme since I'm a big buy boy :P

It's possible, and I've beaten it. Lern2smallhitboxandusebombswisely

EPO Bot · May 30, 2009, 07:09 AM // 07:09

You must have four brains and build in bullet time.
And precognition.

faraaz · May 30, 2009, 07:11 AM // 07:11

Everything is beatable, given enough time and dedication...the only problem is if ANet wants GW to have a playerbase of 1,000,000 or 1,000.

Default Name · May 30, 2009, 08:26 AM // 08:26

The thing is there are people that likes to be able to tank and spank, steam roll mobs with a single tactic all the time, use a single bar all the time. And their numbers aren't small either.

A-net wouldn't have sold as many copies if they didn't go down the same path despite contradicting with the game's initial concept.

That's just how business is.

The split is the best thing that happened.

Skill balances costs money. GWs aren't subscription based. That sums it all up.

EPO Bot · May 30, 2009, 08:41 AM // 08:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by faraaz

Everything is beatable, given enough time and dedication...the only problem is if ANet wants GW to have a playerbase of 1,000,000 or 1,000.

Most profitable for Anet in the current situation would be a constant influx of new players who buy all the chapters wile old schoolers leave because they just take bandwith and spend no more money.

I know the zoins keep me hooked, but i havent spend money on GW in two years. So basically the last update is good for the players but bad commerce.

DreamWind · May 30, 2009, 08:41 AM // 08:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Default Name

The thing is there are people that likes to be able to tank and spank, steam roll mobs with a single tactic all the time, use a single bar all the time. And their numbers aren't small either.

A-net wouldn't have sold as many copies if they didn't go down the same path despite contradicting with the game's initial concept.

Then make it so people can steamroll in PvE. Does anybody have a problem with this anymore? I see a bunch of people going on endlessly about "yea well the majority wants this so thats the way it should be blah blah blah". Fine...then I should be able to steamroll PvE because that is sadly what the majority wants. The majority of people who bought Guild Wars bought it because they thought it was something it wasn't. The real challenge has always been PvP anyways...Anet would be better served spending their time balancing PvP properly because PvE players in general are easy to please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Default Name

The split is the best thing that happened.

Replace the word "best" with the word "worst" and I absolutely agree with you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Default Name

Skill balances costs money. GWs aren't subscription based. That sums it all up.

Which is why the best PvP games in the history of the world have free updates, are balanced, and aren't subscription based. Yep that sums it all up perfectly.

Bryant Again · May 30, 2009, 09:12 AM // 09:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

You're overthinking it. Moderately intelligent play is easy to fake in GW; the heroes do a pretty good job already (at least compared to the average player). With monsters, the AI programmer has the additional advantage of knowing the skillbar ahead of time. You'd need some additional targetting rules since there isn't a player calling targets for them, but that can be pretty rudimentary - avoid targets that use particular tanking skills, prioritize targets that use certain skills (disruption, healing, etc.), etc. Heck, just having monsters spread out and ignore the permatank would be a huge improvement over what we have now.

I would love to start a team of 8 permaforms go into an area, aggroing the first mob they see - and wondering why the mob doesn't do anything besides buff themselves and kite. Once I see that, I'll know GW has taken a huge step in the right direction.

But sadly, this is now going to really hurt the game more than help it. More and more players have become far too accustomed to the AI, and any steps to make the enemies more intelligent would piss off far too vocal a crowd. ANet should've fixed this way back when 55's started, but they only did nerfs in the form of hitting skills themselves.

...But then again, what do they have to lose if they *did* go through with these changes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Then make it so people can steamroll in PvE. Does anybody have a problem with this anymore? I see a bunch of people going on endlessly about "yea well the majority wants this so thats the way it should be blah blah blah". Fine...then I should be able to steamroll PvE because that is sadly what the majority wants. The majority of people who bought Guild Wars bought it because they thought it was something it wasn't. The real challenge has always been PvP anyways...Anet would be better served spending their time balancing PvP properly because PvE players in general are easy to please.

What any gamer wants is being able to enjoy their game, be able to hit stuff and enjoy it, and this is already easily accomplished. The farming portion of the playerbase and the people who want "no work win all" aren't in that majority. Sure, people want their game dumbed down and be able to win it...but that's what Normal mode, and "Easy" difficulties in other games in general, provides.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Which is why the best PvP games in the history of the world have free updates, are balanced, and aren't subscription based. Yep that sums it all up perfectly.

As a sidenote, I think Starcraft has been the last game to come out that's been actually balanced. I don't think I've heard of anything even as structurely sound since it's release sans pre Factions GW

EPO Bot · May 30, 2009, 09:38 AM // 09:38

I think there hasn't been a balanced game since pong.

No wait, it may actually make a difference if you play left or right.
There are people out there who cant stand to play a fighting game from the right because they like to be on the left etc.

DreamWind · May 30, 2009, 10:00 AM // 10:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

What any gamer wants is being able to enjoy their game, be able to hit stuff and enjoy it, and this is already easily accomplished. The farming portion of the playerbase and the people who want "no work win all" aren't in that majority. Sure, people want their game dumbed down and be able to win it...but that's what Normal mode, and "Easy" difficulties in other games in general, provides.

I disagree (sadly). The majority of the population are people who want to be able to succeed no matter what they do. They want a failproof game to take away from the stresses of real life where failure happens. They want to be able to succeed in hard mode so they feel accomplished. They don't want to be able to not access areas because they suck. They get enough of that in real life. They want to be able to do EVERYTHING "because it is a game and I'm here to have fun".

This has become clear to me through years of gaming and just by reading forums like these. There is almost zero PvE players who want balance, especially through nerfs. They only want buffs that make the game easier and "open up options". If you are a person who says Anet should cater to the majority, then this is simply the future and you have to ask yourself why they shouldn't proceed with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

As a sidenote, I think Starcraft has been the last game to come out that's been actually balanced. I don't think I've heard of anything even as structurely sound since it's release sans pre Factions GW

Gw and Sc in the same sentence. OMY!

Bryant Again · May 30, 2009, 10:31 AM // 10:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

...

How is it known where the majority player mostly resides?
How is it known what the majority player does?
What they play? *How* they play? Do they *still* play, and if not why not? Etc.?

A lot of questions that are near impossible to answer, but why do you think people buy games?

Are most really gonna pick it up and say "holy crap I want everything I hope it's easy!" or "oh gees that looks pretty, I wonder how it is playing a Warrior?"?

People just want to have fun, and fortunately that fun isn't terribly specific and they usually look at the here and now. When it comes to games, people are generally easy to please, satisfy, and fulfill. In this sense Guild Wars simply nails it: It runs smooth and can look really decent on low-end PCs, smooth controls, solid animation, and simply fun combat.

Granted things get more messy as you go further more into the depth...but that's not what games are for. The casual player - the majority player - just wants hit things without too much difficulty. This has become clear to me through years of gaming and reading the WoW forums (haw).

EPO Bot · May 30, 2009, 10:49 AM // 10:49

Bring on the fun pve and casual pvp. I just want "On line gaming with no fees." Not "Cutting edge, Darwinian balls to the wall competition in wich only the top tier players are allowed to speak."

Maybe we need some kind of special arena for the elitists? Rank eight gladiator and the same on hero, or you won't get in. There they can get together, play only amongst themselves and marvell in their own greatness wile looking down on the pve'ing cattle below. Preferably on a mountaintop setting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYsCd...om=PL&index=17

Gun Pierson · May 30, 2009, 10:54 AM // 10:54

PvE is about developing your character. People play to get phat loot and the cool stuff and want content. Blizzard knows this and want to go all the way with D3. What did Anet do? Exactly the opposite. They first intruduced anti farming code, followed by loot scaling. The result was a decrease in the fun factor concerning pve. Anet thinks the way you farm is more important than the actual loot.

PvP is more about competitive play. The fun is to be found in beating other players so balance is important to make it somewhat fair or people will leave. Matchmaking systems are wanted too. The reward is usualy a rank on the ladder and what not.

A split between PvP and PvE is inevitable as there are conflicting expectations.

Avarre · May 30, 2009, 04:22 PM // 16:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Bring on the fun pve and casual pvp. I just want "On line gaming with no fees." Not "Cutting edge, Darwinian balls to the wall competition in wich only the top tier players are allowed to speak."

Maybe we need some kind of special arena for the elitists? Rank eight gladiator and the same on hero, or you won't get in. There they can get together, play only amongst themselves and marvell in their own greatness wile looking down on the pve'ing cattle below. Preferably on a mountaintop setting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYsCd...om=PL&index=17

Why would you play a 'competitive online role playing game' then? Play a game that suits you from the start, and don't bring mob rule down on the unique factors of Guild Wars.

I'd suggest RuneScape, but you might find the fact that people with higher stats than you can do more things offensive.

haggus71 · May 30, 2009, 05:46 PM // 17:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Bring on the fun pve and casual pvp. I just want "On line gaming with no fees." Not "Cutting edge, Darwinian balls to the wall competition in wich only the top tier players are allowed to speak."

Maybe we need some kind of special arena for the elitists? Rank eight gladiator and the same on hero, or you won't get in. There they can get together, play only amongst themselves and marvell in their own greatness wile looking down on the pve'ing cattle below. Preferably on a mountaintop setting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYsCd...om=PL&index=17

They have that style PvP. They are Competitive Missions, Random Arenas and Alliance Battles. You can go in there, be casual, have fun using crazy builds or test potential ones, and, if you are good enough, and win enough RA, you go into Team Arenas or get with a decent PvP guild, where you can compete in GvG and HA. If you want "EVERYTHING GIVEN TO MEEEE!!! NAONAONAO!!!!", as Avarre said, get an RPG; but I wish people would quit saying Anet, or any other publisher, HAS to make a game fit to theirs, and everyone else's, idea of what a game should be. That's how bad games are made, and how great ones become the same vanilla package as the others.

slowerpoke · May 30, 2009, 06:08 PM // 18:08

Would GW still be around today if it was purely pvp from the beginning?

EPO Bot · May 30, 2009, 06:17 PM // 18:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowerpoke

Would GW still be around today if it was purely pvp from the beginning?

Depends. Is Demigod doing well?

slowerpoke · May 30, 2009, 08:19 PM // 20:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Depends. Is Demigod doing well?

why yes, its doing excellent
that being said, its not purely a pvp game and has a single player campaign.

Buster · May 30, 2009, 08:46 PM // 20:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowerpoke

Would GW still be around today if it was purely pvp from the beginning?

It would die a slow horrible death if that was the case.

Brett Kuntz · May 30, 2009, 09:28 PM // 21:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowerpoke

Would GW still be around today if it was purely pvp from the beginning?

Of course it would, because the only reason the PvP failed was because Anet listened to the PvEers. It was the PvEers who demanded UAS be taken out of the retail game, it was the PvEers who demanded that their PvE characters be more powerful in PvP, it was the PvEers who whined that the original faction rate was too much, it was the PvEers who prevented the faction rates from being increased to a realistic level. The PvEers ruined the PvP in this game more so than any other single reason.

If this game was PvP-only, none of this would have happened and GW would still be the successful Competitive PvP RPG game like it once was.

If you want to make the most money, make an addicting PvE game and charge people insane amounts of money to play it. Build your game around the same mechanics that causes degenerate gamblers to piss away their kids college money on a horse named Gluestick at the local track. Target all of the neurological deficiencies of a degenerate compulsive person and gets them uncontrollably addicted to your game. These games are not fun, they are designed to make it always appear you are just about to start having fun.

If you want to make a game people actually play 10 years after it was released, make a Competitive PvP game with some integrated PvE which helps people learn the game.

Every RTS and FPS is a PvP game with integrated PvE. Few people buy FPS or RTS games for the story, most buy them to play through the story once, and then spend the next 10 years beating the poo out of other people online, entering tournaments, and following the community. Counter-Strike, Quake, StarCraft, all have massive healthy communities fueling the games.

Final Fantasy Online has managed 500k subs for 4 years, though that wont last much longer as it's past it's prime. Lineage, released over 11 years ago, peaked at 3,250,000 players and currently still has over 1,000,000 players. Lineage is a 10-year game. Lineage has a massive healthy active community of players. You wont even remember FFO existed in 6 years. Lineage was a PvP game right from the start. It's main/original draw was it's comprehensive castle siege and political aspects.