Curse

EPO Bot · May 31, 2008, 10:24 AM // 10:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golgotha

Imagine getting to the end of Gates of Madness without having checked a wiki or having played it before. That great team being astounded as they're wiped as soon as Shiro's health gets widdled down. Not fun.

That's the point.

arcanemacabre · May 31, 2008, 10:44 AM // 10:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

You still need to know what's coming. This game is easy indeed if you look everything up in Wiki before entering a mission...

^ This

Despite poor AI, overpowered skills, heroes, and consumables, the biggest reason PvE in GW is easy is the predictability. If you somehow find a way to remove it (random instances, etc), then PvE would very quickly prove to be quite difficult; especially HM and elite areas.

Although, Ursan would still reign supreme, since there's really no preparation involved, but at least it would be a little more understandable why it exists.

DarkNecrid · May 31, 2008, 10:49 AM // 10:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

I have no idea what they were thinking with that change. Well actually I do: They wanted to buff the skill that is a classic example of a heavy handed nerf.

It's now absolutely ridiculous, and that was pretty obvious from the first time I read the description.

maybe this is part of the plan...

a month down the road they go "and thats why we used PvP to balance skills....." and revert the PvP/PvE skill system and /laugh.

I can dream can't I?

ShadowStorm · May 31, 2008, 11:42 AM // 11:42

I don't see why all the whining in this thread exists. It's not like Guild Wars PvE is a multiplayer game anymore. Ursan Blessing saw to that long before Anet decided to separate PvE skils from PvP skills. If you want to play the game as it was intended, using a balanced group with diverse and unique skill bars, then the outposts might as well be empty. All of them. Even the ones that have multiple full districts.

So... If Guild Wars PvE is a single-player experience, why all the whining?

aapo · May 31, 2008, 12:36 PM // 12:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antheus

No, it's not overpowered.

Why don't all you elitists think of us casuals once. We only log in once a month for 15 minutes. We can't spend 8 hours every day playing with pvp FOTM builds. This skill is what we want. It's what's really making us love GW. It has improved the game so much.

- They should put speed boost of 300% and godmode in the game. Finish the game in 15 minutes for those casual players out there.

But maybe Izzy is thinking like this quote suggests?

Tyla · May 31, 2008, 12:58 PM // 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Gimping yourself would be an issue if PvE was competitive.
PvE isn't balanced on Ursan.
Even crappy builds can win.
And one has the option of moulding their own instance in their liking.

This is true, but it doesn't stop the fact it affects you due to self-gimpage.

I want higher difficulty, not stronger skills on the same two difficulties.

Quote:

So that brings us to the question - what is one playing for?
IF you are playing to win - then one will use the most effective way to do it.

Only in PvP. You don't exactly "Win" PvE. It's already pitifully easy, and better AI > super ultra awesome buffed up mobs of lameness.

Quote:

You run paragon teams, you run Ursan - and you /point and /laugh at mesmers.

What have Paragons and Ursans got to do with Mesmers?

Quote:

IF on the other hand you play to to complete something in a very specific way (for instance an inspiration mesmer in PvE) - then being at your most effective isn't what is the primary motivation for your actions. You make a conscious decision to NOT use the best option available because of ... who cares. And in that case - your motivation doesn't matter.

An Inspiration Mesmer wants to deal damage?
And you don't matter.

Quote:

The issue here is that people want to win but REFUSE to use the best option available because it's not fun.
Sorry - but you having fun - isn't an issue we should care about.

Higher difficulter would be better. As stated, DMC - It has many modes varying difficulties and you have to get better for every single one of them.

The only "I win" buttons on them games, are hacks, or cheats. Then Ursan comes along in terms of Guild Wars. It's the C-Space to Fame of PvE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyper Cutter

That IS usually the way people make challenges for themselves in games ("I'll play the game using X character/no items/no magic/ at low levels/etc")...

No, people make challenges in games themselves by cranking up the difficulty.

Gimping yourself is not doing that. The enemies are the same, but they're more imba depending on what you do. If you gimp yourself, it's possibly not doable, but impossible instead.

I play higher difficulties to not only extend my skill level in said game, but to have another challenge to surpass. I'm not gimping myself. But I'm making it harder while keeping what I already have.

And no, you don't even need Wiki to know these enemies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShadowStorm

So... If Guild Wars PvE is a single-player experience, why all the whining?

You have the choice to go H/H, or with players.

Anyway, Avarre already won this thread.

Avarre · May 31, 2008, 01:46 PM // 13:46

Quoting myself!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Sorry, PvE players asked for PvE to be cut away from balance, so now they get what they ask for. I'm sure the majority is ever so happy.

This isn't even new. This started way back with the first PvE skills being introduced. I don't see why people are making any more of a fuss - the problem was already here, and the writing on the wall was clear: ANet was going to keep on that road.

Actually, why are they making a fuss at all? You don't have to use it! Why does anyone complain? Why does it matter if Ether Renewal is overpowered? PvE is about fun!

Oh man, this whole thing is hilarious. I don't know what more to say.

Oh wait, yes I do.

GUIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLD WAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRZZZZZZZZZZ

Sab · May 31, 2008, 02:47 PM // 14:47

ANerf? More like ABuff.

c wut i did thar

Abedeus · May 31, 2008, 02:56 PM // 14:56

Fun. Oh. Yeah. Watching mindless mobs that pose no challenge is fun. Right. I think that I'll stick with 8-years old Diablo 2, thank you very much, at least there some monsters were a bit hard (end-act bosses, actually).

If I wanted to watch things die super-fast, I'd go to old ascalon NM and beat the crap out of helpless Gargoyles hitting them with a domination cane.

Burst Cancel · May 31, 2008, 03:05 PM // 15:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by strcpy

Until or unless you (and the others) get over it *all* online games that you spend thousands of hours will end up this way for the same reason - there is no way to make the game so hard that a multi-thousand hour vet with an equivalent guild can not learn to blow through fairly quickly and still have it beatable. You can think I'm full of it yet note that all the examples given you didn't put near the time in before you quit - you will be disappointed for the rest of your gaming career.

I tend to agree here. A couple points, however:
- The comparison between console and GW falls apart when you consider that GW can be changed, constantly. That is, the difficulty at the high end can be continually scaled upwards as the skill of the playerbase improves. Some console games like Valkyrie Profile do this by making the game harder every time you beat it. While I've often lamented the shortcut difficulty buff of simply increasing stats, in a well-designed game mechanic buffing the enemy's numbers past a certain point will force changes in player tactics beyond the scope of dealing with bigger numbers (e.g., you deal more damage, I heal more damage).
- GW is being treated as an MMO-style game that is played constantly and for extended periods. While this perception may or may not be in error - particularly considering that the fee structure is not MMO-style - it remains that difficulty/content standards are substantially different from a 20~60-hour console game. A console game that stays challenging for just 100 hours and no more is perfectly fine, because gamers don't expect to get more playtime out of it. At the end of that time, we sit back and say, "alright, I've beaten it", and we move on. GW isn't treated in nearly the same way. So while we might not have invested 1000s of hours into those console and arcade games, we didn't expect to. With GW, we fully expect 1000s of hours of play from GW - and we don't mean 1000s of hours of grind. Whether this is a reasonable expectation given the fee structure is another question. Other posters constantly repeat the tired mantra, "you get what you pay for" - GW may very well be Exhibit A in this regard.
- The low end can stay wherever it is, and thus the game will always be 'beatable'. DMC, for instance, retains its normal/easy mode as well as an unlockable 'super' character. Similarly, GW could retain its ludicrously easy 'normal' mode while continuing to scale difficulty of other modes upwards. There really is no reason why hard mode content should be accessible to everyone - isn't 'hard mode' a misnomer then? Where is the real hard mode? GW doesn't have one.
- As a multiplayer game, GW benefits from a better playerbase. A lot of anti-balance arguments inherently assume that GW is single-player. While it may effectively be such now, this treatment frankly gives up a great deal of the potential that large-scale multiplayer provides. This is one of the points I was making in the other thread with my counter-posting. Thus, while it may be possible to leave the low-end where it is, it is not to the benefit of the game to do so. Ideally, we would like to nudge everyone towards higher-end play. Imagine if GW had only competent players. What kind of difference would that make in the experience? There is a good reason for why sports clubs and other groups push hard to foster the improvement and growth of their members.

Finally, I'll say it again: give us Chimera of Intensity and eight elite skills. Anet could, in fact, have done this earlier to dumb-down PvE without introducing PvE skills and PvE/PvP balance separation - and it would have been more fun and no grind, to boot.

upier · May 31, 2008, 05:58 PM // 17:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Only in PvP. You don't exactly "Win" PvE. It's already pitifully easy, and better AI > super ultra awesome buffed up mobs of lameness.

What have Paragons and Ursans got to do with Mesmers?

An Inspiration Mesmer wants to deal damage?
And you don't matter.

Should have worded it differently.
"Playing to win" in PvE would mean using the best available options which would allow you to achieve the chosen goal in the easiest manner.
That's why one'd use Ursan/Paragons and not Mesmers.
BUT if one chooses to not go with the best available option - in that case - the person isn't exactly acting as an average individual.
One's goals are then massively different then that of an average player.
And that's why one can't matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Gimping yourself is not doing that. The enemies are the same, but they're more imba depending on what you do. If you gimp yourself, it's possibly not doable, but impossible instead.

But that does not apply for GW.

Esan · May 31, 2008, 05:59 PM // 17:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

That is, the difficulty at the high end can be continually scaled upwards as the skill of the playerbase improves.

The only way this would work is if the difficulty setting were specific to a player. If the game as a whole kept getting more and more difficult, then the game would be heavly biased towards the vets, the opposite of GW's design philosophy. Think about how unfair the 6.5 HM titles would be if those who got them done long ago can simply rest on their laurels while new aspirants have to scale a higher and higher wall. (This is already the case to an extent because of bugfixes and altered mechanics, such as removing the multiple Siege Devourer trick in the Charr lands.)

If GW did scale the difficulty per player, then it would have to do something sensible for multiplayer groups. Also, as presumably this would only be done for GW2 as GW1 is eol'd, something would have to be done about persistent zones (no HM for them at all?). The per-player difficulty should also decay because player skill decays over periods of unuse.

It is highly debatable if such a system is implementable and if it would even be worth playing.

Tyla · May 31, 2008, 06:05 PM // 18:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Should have worded it differently.
"Playing to win" in PvE would mean using the best available options which would allow you to achieve the chosen goal in the easiest manner.
That's why one'd use Ursan/Paragons and not Mesmers.
BUT if one chooses to not go with the best available option - in that case - the person isn't exactly acting as an average individual.
One's goals are then massively different then that of an average player.
And that's why one can't matter.

But even then, the toggle for Hard Mode was for an increased difficulty. You didn't really click it so you can still continue to steamroll everything as you did in Normal Mode.

If you wanted it to be easy, stay in Normal Mode. Don't try and "increase the difficulty" by toggling Hard Mode, but then butcher that and run PvE skills, Consumables, or whatever.

Same thing for RA Syncronization. If you want organization, play Team Arenas and not RANDOM Arenas.

Quote:

But that does not apply for GW.

Whatever you mean by this I don't know.

Increasing difficulty > Gimping yourself.

upier · May 31, 2008, 06:59 PM // 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

But even then, the toggle for Hard Mode was for an increased difficulty. You didn't really click it so you can still continue to steamroll everything as you did in Normal Mode.

If you wanted it to be easy, stay in Normal Mode. Don't try and "increase the difficulty" by toggling Hard Mode, but then butcher that and run PvE skills, Consumables, or whatever.

No, you click on the HM button for semi-normal drops (instead of that shit that drops in NM) and titles.
I thought everyone knew that was the point of HM?!

Like I said in the Izzy-interview thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

The issue is simple:
PvP seems to balanced on the wishes by the few good players (since there is NO freaking way that the people who do not play high-end PvP do NOT want overpowered skills to trash people in something like RA!) - whereas PvE seems to be balanced on the wishes by the bad players.
As a player grows and gets better - the PvP player reaps the benefits whereas the PvE player just gets more frustrated by the shitty design.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Whatever you mean by this I don't know.

Increasing difficulty > Gimping yourself.

Sorry I understood the last sentence like "if you gimp yourself in GW the game becomes impossible."
My mistake.

The Meth · May 31, 2008, 07:29 PM // 19:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golgotha

What?

[skill]Hexbreaker Aria[/skill] + [skill]Wild Blow[/skill] + [skill]Distracting Blow[/skill]

Game over.

You don't even need that stuff. [Distracting Shot] + not using skills while hexed. Warriors should all have an elemental weapon on their switch.

Still, the reason shiro was allowed to be so insanely hard to an unprepared team was that you didn't have to go through a 20 minute long mission to get to him like glint. You play him once, you wipe, you saw what he used, go back and win.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Strangelove

God I love Devil May Cry. That is quite possibly the best action rpg ever made. Go away Diablo.

My rule of thumb is that if I can't beat the highest level of a game, it's well balanced. This means there's always room to improve and whip the AI a little more effectively. Games from the Nintendo era fit this fairly well, primarily to satisfy the arcade audience. if players keep dying, they keep pumping in quarters. For better or for worse, games lately favor accessibility - any schmo can beat the game without too much undue effort. This isn't completely bad, players feel ripped off when they can't make any progress in a game they paid 50 bucks for. Anyway, harder modes and endgame content often exist to satisfy the need for a challenge.

Guild Wars doesn't have any challenge left. Any idiot can beat all of hard mode and the elite missions given time. There aren't obstacles to be overcome, the learning curve is a slight downward slope, and there's not motivation to become engaged in the game. For the thick, this is a bad thing.

For the tired old argument of playing with 4 skills/solo/drunk:

Would it be a good game for the Arsenal to play a youth soccer team while hopping on one leg? Would the Tour De France be a better challenge for riders if they had to have flat tires? The biggest part of the fun of a challenge comes from trying your very best to improve yourself. When you add artificial roadblocks, you remove that idea of trying your best.

TL;DR version: Bah, games are too easy today, you kids get off my lawn.

Agreed. Still playing DMC today btw

.As for gimping myself, my friends think I'm crazy for preferring to play on a keyboard.

Has anyone EVER played a MMO that was actually difficult? The whole genre is normally focused on building a character, and once you get the right character/build/skills/attributes, its a walk in the park. The only time the game is difficult is when you haven't figured out the specific trick everyone else is using to beat an area.

Unfortunately Guild Wars is starting to go back to the MMO norms instead of what it was pre-nightfall.

Yawgmoth · May 31, 2008, 07:41 PM // 19:41

I'm surprised nobody realised they made Ether Renewal ridiculously overpowered in threads discussing that update. I've noticed that the moment i saw that in update notes, it was the biggest *jawdrop* i had for a long time. My old number 1 favorite skill I used even after nerf (certain farming builds), I've always knew how stupidly potent and powerfull this skill is. If they gave it a fixed duration of 10 seconds it would immediately be one of the best ele elites in game, but we know how far they went.

And it's the same with Shadow Form, it was an amazing skill before this buff and they made it much better for no reason. Crazy.

Tyla · May 31, 2008, 07:58 PM // 19:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

No, you click on the HM button for semi-normal drops (instead of that shit that drops in NM) and titles.
I thought everyone knew that was the point of HM?!

I find that funny. Want to know why?

It's got "Hard Mode" and not "Better Drops Mode" on it.

"Hard Mode" implies the difficulty will be harder, and they just go and butcher it by introducing stupidly imbalanced things.

Lorekeeper · May 31, 2008, 07:59 PM // 19:59

''Madness''?

''This IS Sparta!!''

(sorry couldnt help it and I cant believe noone else has yet)

Tyla · May 31, 2008, 08:01 PM // 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lorekeeper

''Madness''?

''This IS Sparta!!''

(sorry couldnt help it and I cant believe noone else has yet)

It has!

12chars

DreamWind · May 31, 2008, 08:14 PM // 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Ahh then I didn't miss it.
And you are just simply wrong.

If you have skills that are balanced for the (PvP) set of rules - and those rules do not apply in PvE - then these skills can NOT be balanced in PvE.
It doesn't matter if they are more fun or better for the game or whatever you want to throw in there.
Balanced - they are not.

You have a very odd definition of balance then. When PvE was balanced around PvP rules, PvE was MORE balanced than it is now. Take PvE away from PvP rules, and PvE is already more inbalanced than it was just a few weeks ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkNecrid

maybe this is part of the plan...

a month down the road they go "and thats why we used PvP to balance skills....." and revert the PvP/PvE skill system and /laugh.

Would be the best thing Anet has ever done.