Curse

Loviatar · Nov 28, 2007, 06:00 PM // 18:00

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Sorry macie, GW is not meant to played with other people. (Will people read threads before posting?)

You have the option of playing with others or going solo. Thats why a lot of people purchased the game with the sole purpose of playing solo.

that was only on the original chapter

Nightfall says

from the box by the way

Quote:

TEAM UP WITH A FRIEND
Brave the dangerous lands of Elona as you and a friend venture forth with an entire party of Heroes at your command

Isileth · Nov 28, 2007, 06:07 PM // 18:07

In Nightfall the adition of heroes. That was a huge boost to solo play.

In GW:EN more heroes and greater access to heroes.

Both of those show support for solo play so no its not only the original chapter.

oh and also on the Nightfall box

Quote:

Heroes at your command
Recruit a team of fearless Heroes who will fight at your side and follow orders in combat. Customize armour, equip weapons and lead your team to battle.

A team of heroes, not half a team. A full team.

Bryant Again · Nov 28, 2007, 06:11 PM // 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Well still in that case its the players choice of which he prefers. So in that case he would prefer to go solo but is currently unable to do so.

Point is he didn't have a problem pugging before. It's okay to play how you want, but adding alternative methods and playstyles when there's not much of a problem in the first place can alienate a lot of players. Not to mention that some playstyles restrict the playstyles of others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Those players who prefer to PuG over solo play will carry on PuGing....

That's a risky assumption to take, and part of the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

It also works the other way round. Solo players shouldnt be disadvantaged to support PuGing.

With 7 heroes would PuGing be reduced? Possibly
With 7 heroes would PuGing die? No (Due to reasons above)
With 7 heroes would solo players finally have access to most of the game? Yes (minus a few elite areas simply due to the mechanics there)

Firstly, h/h players are not at a disadvantage in the slightest. Since the main concern is simply being able to play through the areas successfully and not with "missing out on the game", that point is moot.

Secondly, the bolded part is the unknown. How reduced will pugging become? How harder would pugging be? We don't know, ANet doesn't know, no one knows. Part of the reason ANet will make no move to increase hero size: We don't know what will happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

And that minor reduction in PuGing could easily be offset with improvements to the party search system or something along those lines.

Many of these improvements have been suggested ever since Prophecies. By now, I think it's safe to assume that these additions are as possible as an auction house.

Vinraith · Nov 28, 2007, 06:11 PM // 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

that was only on the original chapter

Nightfall says

from the box by the way

Yeah, Anet introduced heroes in a chapter that was supposed to force people to play together, THAT makes sense. Heroes are great when I've actually got a friend online with time to play, but since I'm an adult with a job (and friends with other adults with jobs) coordinating that can be a problem. I can't imagine why Anet would want to inconvenience the older demographic that plays their game, but that does seem to be the plan with regards to the high end areas.

You want to group, we don't, I really never will understand why your preferred style of play should take precedence over ours. Fortunately, by and large, it doesn't. This game is a fantastic SP experience but for the elite zones and HM. If they'd just get around to that, everyone could be happy and play the game as they please.

Bryant Again · Nov 28, 2007, 06:17 PM // 18:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

I can't imagine why Anet would want to inconvenience the older demographic that plays their game, but that does seem to be the plan with regards to the high end areas.

For the same reason people with tough schedules don't complain about WoW being too inaccessible: It's just how the game is.

The elite missions can be brutal and time consuming tasks, and I don't really think allowing them to be hero'd could really help you're problem. If you don't have the time to set up for an elite mission with a group, I don't know if you'd have the time to complete one (unless, as I've stated, you've been through it a *numerous* amount of times and can complete with no hands.)

I can't really comment about Hard Mode. I've vanquished about only 30 areas so far (only so few because, well damn I'm bored) only with heroes and henchies. Experiences vary.

Ut oh, in before close?

Isileth · Nov 28, 2007, 06:23 PM // 18:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Point is he didn't have a problem pugging before. It's okay to play how you want, but adding alternative methods and playstyles when there's not much of a problem in the first place can alienate a lot of players. Not to mention that some playstyles restrict the playstyles of others.

I used to be happy with vanilla ice cream. I thought it was fantastic.
Then I tried chocolate and now vanilla just doesnt do it for me.

Should we ban chocolate ice cream to keep vanilla sales up?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

That's a risky assumption to take, and part of the problem.

I dont think it is. People who choose to PuG over going solo are suprise suprise, chosing to PuG over going solo. Adding 7 heroes doesnt take that choice away. People who play for social interaction, who enjoy the random nature of PuGs etc still will carry on if that is what they prefer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Firstly, h/h players are not at a disadvantage in the slightest. Since the main concern is simply being able to play through the areas successfully and not with "missing out on the game", that point is moot.

Really have to disagree here as well. Are you suggesting that having to have 4/8 of your team not using 8 skills, using extremely poor builds, using fixed builds isnt a disadvantage?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Secondly, the bolded part is the unknown. How reduced will pugging become? How harder would pugging be? We don't know, ANet doesn't know, no one knows. Part of the reason ANet will make no move to increase hero size: We don't know what will happen.

Yes we dont know how reduced it will be. But it will still be a viable form of play.

Just as I purchased the game to play solo, others purchased it to play with others.
Just as I wont suddenly start pugging, they wont suddenly start playing solo.

Besides just because you dont know what exactly will happen is no reason not to change something. Look at the addition of heroes for example.

They couldnt have known how many people would use them but they put them in anway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Many of these improvements have been suggested ever since Prophecies. By now, I think it's safe to assume that these additions are as possible as an auction house.

Well considering a party search feature was added. All it needs is improving.
Also think about extra storage, extra char slots. All these things got added, all of them asked for by the players. Just because something isnt added instantly doesnt mean it cant and wont be added.

*Edit to include Bryants above post*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

The elite missions can be brutal and time consuming tasks, and I don't really think allowing them to be hero'd could really help you're problem. If you don't have the time to set up for an elite mission with a group, I don't know if you'd have the time to complete one (unless, as I've stated, you've been through it a *numerous* amount of times and can complete with no hands.)

Because some players like myself have to go afk quite often. With a group of players I cant expect them to sit and wait 10-15 mins while I go do whatever I need to do.
With heroes they dont quit if I go afk suddenly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Ut oh, in before close?

No reason to close this thread. Its a good discussion, good points from both sides, no flaming etc. This is exactly the sort of thing that is meant to be discussed.

Vinraith · Nov 28, 2007, 06:36 PM // 18:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

For the same reason people with tough schedules don't complain about WoW being too inaccessible: It's just how the game is.

But WoW's an MMO, Anet's always maintained (and I've always agreed) that GW isn't. I'd never buy an MMO, and this is one reason why, but there's no reason an action RPG that is supposed to be able to be played SP should have the same scheduling problems as an MMO.

As to set up time, I can find quite a few hours to play, I just can't find the same hours as my friends that have the game (at least not without a great dealing of schedule finangling).

Bryant Again · Nov 28, 2007, 06:50 PM // 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Should we ban chocolate ice cream to keep vanilla sales up?

Depends on the budget, and this isn't really a fair comparison since you eating chocolate ice cream doesn't really affect someone eating vanilla. If someone uses heros and hencies (eating chocolate), that lessens the chance for people pugging (eating vanilla.) It doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

I dont think it is. People who choose to PuG over going solo are suprise suprise, chosing to PuG over going solo. Adding 7 heroes doesnt take that choice away. People who play for social interaction, who enjoy the random nature of PuGs etc still will carry on if that is what they prefer.

It's just not as simple since people PUG for numerous reasons, some believing it to be how you're supposed to play, others doing it because it could be more effective for them, or because they're inexperienced. Not only just because they enjoy social interaction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Really have to disagree here as well. Are you suggesting that having to have 4/8 of your team not using 8 skills, using extremely poor builds, using fixed builds isnt a disadvantage?

I guess I can't really comment as I've had little problem with them. Sure the builds suck, but the builds of my heroes more than make up for it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Yes we dont know how reduced it will be. But it will still be a viable form of play.

How reduced it will be lessens its viability.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Look at the addition of heroes for example.

They couldnt have known how many people would use them but they put them in anway.

Actually, ANet included them due to the reason that henchmen just weren't enough for the huge and expansive world that was becoming Guild Wars. At this point, they knew that many places were going to be deserted, places where certain roles were needed where henchmen weren't available.

Well considering a party search feature was added. All it needs is improving.
Also think about extra storage, extra char slots. All these things got added, all of them asked for by the players. Just because something isnt added instantly doesnt mean it cant and wont be added.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Because some players like myself have to go afk quite often. With a group of players I cant expect them to sit and wait 10-15 mins while I go do whatever I need to do.
With heroes they dont quit if I go afk suddenly.

You'd be surprised how lenient people can be towards multiple AFK's. Generally, if people have the patience and will to do a 4 hour elite mission they probably wouldn't mind if someone had to go use the bathroom suddenly.

As to other reasons for going afk, I can only say *shrug*. I can only say limit what happens and set aside some time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

No reason to close this thread. Its a good discussion, good points from both sides, no flaming etc. This is exactly the sort of thing that is meant to be discussed.

I only said that because Unienale was observing the thread...and it *is* starting to go in circles.

Again to sum up my point: You can complete any of the campaigns with the heroes and henchies as it stands. The only reason do add 7 at this point is to increase the enjoyment for a few people. But we do not know how that could affect people who enjoy pugging. We can only assume and predict, nothing concrete - and that's what ANet wants: something with proof. If they don't have that proof, they won't do anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

But WoW's an MMO, Anet's always maintained (and I've always agreed) that GW isn't. I'd never buy an MMO, and this is one reason why, but there's no reason an action RPG that is supposed to be able to be played SP should have the same scheduling problems as an MMO.

The players asked for elite and hardcore dungeons, and ANet delivered. Even though GW isn't an MMO, it does have a lot of relations to one (elite dungeons being one of the many.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

As to set up time, I can find quite a few hours to play, I just can't find the same hours as my friends that have the game (at least not without a great dealing of schedule finangling).

Same here, really. My friends have much different school schedules that I have. If I really wanted to, I could probably post a tread here somewhere on Guru telling people my schedule and seeing who I could play with. But I'm not terribly excited about having to go in those dungeons again.

Mineria · Nov 28, 2007, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Where do you see the solo?

And as for those saying their box says different, screen-shot/scan or it never happened.

Isileth · Nov 28, 2007, 07:30 PM // 19:30

Ok well I have a different box to you then Mineria.

Although I still purchased mine in England so I assume there are different ones floating around. I dont own a scanner so hopefully someone else will post it here for you.

But your comment made me chuckle. Because you can dismiss a whole argument by pretending there is only 1 box GW comes in

*Edit*

Found this on another site

Quote:

I think the reasons against it are unrealistic and not even worthy of discussion, I am shocked that Anet will not consider putting it in the game any time soon.

I leave you with a quote I find noteworthy when considering this feature:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azinna Videl
On the Prophecies GW game box, behind the warrior-pictured flap, on the right hand side in the section titled It's Your Adventure, it clearly states "Join with friends or play solo with a band of skillful henchmen." So if some players are not interested in teaming with real people, then they don't have to... it says so on the box itself.

http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...light=box+flap

So

Vinraith · Nov 28, 2007, 07:42 PM // 19:42

Mineria,

It's on the US retail box. I'm not going to bother to scan mine, your opinion simply isn't important enough for me to go to the trouble to find the box in question. You can believe me and the dozens of others who've posted the quote from the US retail box or you can live in "the Euro version is the only version, pics or America doesn't exist" fantasy land, I really don't care. People like you are exactly why I don't PUG in games like this.

unienaule · Nov 28, 2007, 08:02 PM // 20:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

why I don't PUG in games like this.

Where's another game "like this"? A "MMOG" (quotes because we're discussing the issue of soloing here) where you can play by yourself if you want to? I am not aware of other games "like this" where you can play 95% of the game by yourself, even though it's an online-only game. Nitpicking about the box wording aside, this is pretty much uncharted territory in the history of online "multiplayer" games.

Furthermore, what makes one box's version of the game better than another? So the boxes are in conflict? That doesn't mean the one that supports your point of view automatically wins.

Loviatar · Nov 28, 2007, 08:04 PM // 20:04

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

You want to group, we don't, I really never will understand why your preferred style of play should take precedence over ours. Fortunately, by and large, it doesn't. This game is a fantastic SP experience but for the elite zones and HM. If they'd just get around to that, everyone could be happy and play the game as they please.

i have told you this several times before now actually read it.

I......H/H......ONLY

SINCE EARLY BETA

I H/H........ME/MYSELF/AND I........SOLO

is it finally clear that i am not pushing or even participating in group play ?

Anet tested how many heroes was the limit and 3 was decided on.

since you can still fill a full party with 4 henchies it is not trying to force people together.

the on;y places that does not work is elite farm areas and HM.

most of the player base will never get to the elite areas and get squashed in HM

T. Drake · Nov 28, 2007, 08:12 PM // 20:12

My game box states that I can either play with other player or use “skillfull” henchmen, too.
I could scan post a picture here, it is however written in German so I’m not sure if that would help anyone here.

Though I am for a 7 hero party, I think we should stop discussing what the Prophecies box says and what not. Somebody is going to write “Yeah ok, you can run around with 7 henchmen, but that doesn’t mean you should be allowed to have a 7 hero party as well” anyway …
Besides, the game changed heavily over the past years and everything the box says is more or less outdated.

I’d like to play with seven heroes, because GW offers me over 1000 skills but limits me in they way I can use them, because I have only 3 heroes available and additional henchmen with rather bad skill bars.

Now try to create a whole team build and ask a PuG, if they could give it a try. Good luck.

Isileth · Nov 28, 2007, 08:16 PM // 20:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

most of the player base will never get to the elite areas and get squashed in HM

Because we have to drag the henchmen through it.

I find NM to be very easy, I play with less than 8 members to try and make it harder.

I want to do HM, but while im forced into taking a charge warrior with less than 8 skills or a monk with no condition removal, monks with no energy management etc its just not going to work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by unienaule

Furthermore, what makes one box's version of the game better than another? So the boxes are in conflict? That doesn't mean the one that supports your point of view automatically wins.

They dont conflict, one mentions it the other doesnt. If the other box had said "Play with others all the time with no AI" then it would be in conflict.

Quote:

Originally Posted by unienaule

Where's another game "like this"? A "MMOG" (quotes because we're discussing the issue of soloing here) where you can play by yourself if you want to? I am not aware of other games "like this" where you can play 95% of the game by yourself, even though it's an online-only game. Nitpicking about the box wording aside, this is pretty much uncharted territory in the history of online "multiplayer" games.

I have to say thats one of the annoying things about it. Its the only game I know of like it, yet it gives a half hearted effort towards delivering it. Which is a shame.

unienaule · Nov 28, 2007, 08:20 PM // 20:20

What I think I'm trying to get at is that a game like this has never before been done. By having the 3 hero limit, they are trying to help people who would rather do the game solo (it could be a 1 hero limit, after all) but at the same time they are trying to keep the people who like to group happy by not having a full team of AI.

One thing that should be obvious to people who have been playing Guild Wars is that they really didn't know what they were doing when they started. There wasn't a long-range plan in place as far as skills, classes, skill text, game mechanics, etc. Anet is making up the rules/restrictions as they go along, and as a result, they aren't always completely sticking to what appeared to be "core beliefs" in the beginning.

Mineria · Nov 28, 2007, 08:23 PM // 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

Mineria,

It's on the US retail box. I'm not going to bother to scan mine, your opinion simply isn't important enough for me to go to the trouble to find the box in question. You can believe me and the dozens of others who've posted the quote from the US retail box or you can live in "the Euro version is the only version, pics or America doesn't exist" fantasy land, I really don't care. People like you are exactly why I don't PUG in games like this.

My opinion? I ask to see how the other boxes look alike, since its not printed like that on the versions we get here in the local shops.

About the 7 Heroes, I couldn't care less if you get them.
I just find some of the points written here claiming why you need them are misleading and wrong.
If you write something is impossible when it is not, your simply making a fake statement or?

About the last thing in your comment, don't worry, you wont find people like me pugging. I play with guild, alliance and friends.

Isileth · Nov 28, 2007, 08:28 PM // 20:28

@unienaule (Because im to slow typing)

I of course fully appreciate that, the problem really seems to stem from the fact Anet is trying to please both camps. But going halfway is never really a good thing to do. You end up annoying both sides while failing to please neither.

Currently PuGing is viable all over the game (Given enough people wanting to pug that specific area).

Solo play is much less viable due to enforced limitations.

While PuGing can be done everywhere, with enough time to get a team together, no matter how long a solo player stands in an outpost looking for more heroes to join its not happening.

At the end of the day I really dont see that adding 7 heroes would be the death of pugging. To many people enjoy pugging for it to go away.

Mineria · Nov 28, 2007, 08:45 PM // 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Solo play is much less viable due to enforced limitations.

While PuGing can be done everywhere, with enough time to get a team together, no matter how long a solo player stands in an outpost looking for more heroes to join its not happening.

I got a question to this.
What exactly do you mean with less viable?

As for missions in normal mode, all can be done with h+h, without it being to hard.

As for quests, well there are some end game quests that can be hard with the henchmen, not because they are henchmen, but simply because their level is to low. As example the titan quest at Lions Arch.

Vanquishing in hard mode can be hard to at the places where you can take more then 4 in a party, and the henchmen lack in levels.

Elite missions, well they require 2-3 players (some require a 12 man party), and I don't think that is something that should be changed.
Reason for me disagreeing on the elite part is simply because it is something implemented for teaming up.
And that it is elite, not a casual solo go to play place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

At the end of the day I really dont see that adding 7 heroes would be the death of pugging. To many people enjoy pugging for it to go away.

Quoted for truth.

One more thought about the 7 hero thing, if it ever should be implemented.
If they will work like the current 3, the Hero bars should be made resize-able

Isileth · Nov 28, 2007, 08:53 PM // 20:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mineria

I got a question to this.
What exactly do you mean with less viable?

As for missions in normal mode, all can be done with h+h, without it being to hard.

As for quests, well there are some end game quests that can be hard with the henchmen, not because they are henchmen, but simply because their level is to low. As example the titan quest at Lions Arch.

Vanquishing in hard mode can be hard to at the places where you can take more then 4 in a party, and the henchmen lack in levels.

Well you pretty much summed it up for me there, but then add to it the fact that not all henchmen have 8 skills, most run awful builds. Even the good ones are unlikely to fit into your team build so you have to change to fit the henchmen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mineria

Elite missions, well they require 2-3 players (some require a 12 man party), and I don't think that is something that should be changed.
Reason for me disagreeing on the elite part is simply because it is something implemented for teaming up.
And that it is elite, not a casual solo go to play place.

When the mechanics require other players obviousely not much can be done. But its only a small part compared to what is gained from adding 7 heroes.

I do have to disagree with elite areas should be for players only however. There is no reason someone who plays solo should be considered less of a player.