Curse

Bryant Again · Jan 17, 2008, 04:37 AM // 04:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

Nope. Actually not. I'm still too much in therapy from my LFG WoW days. If they made henches/Heroes available for those areas, I'd be there in a heartbeat to at least give them a try, though.

Granted. Needing 5 people is better than needing 12, but needing no (other) people? Ahh, sweetness.

The problem is not that I don't like playing with other players -- some of my best online times EVER were running instances in WoW, particularly. I just hate being dependent on other players to play certain parts of the game.

Basically, in GW you can pretty much ignore the relatively few player-group-only areas (e.g., Urgoz) if you want to. Those elite areas in GW are just icing on the cake for "groupies", so I don't feel terribly deprived. I don't like PvP either, but I am not unhappy that PvP is a part of Guild Wars. However, if major chunks of GW2 are structured that way, i.e., requiring player groups for instance content, I'm gonna be majorly bummed.

I just don't think ArenaNet would do that, however. Virtually everything I've read from Jeff Strain leads me to believe GW2 will be very solo/casual player friendly. I sure hope that means keeping my uncomplaining, always-ready-to-go AI pals, but we'll see.

I think one of Guild Wars' folly was that you needed a party for everything. And especially in later campaigns the required number of people is 8. When you think about it, that's quite a lot. The first few raids in WoW need 10, and that's high-end!

Granted, you do have henchmen and heroes. But most henchmen are remarkably subpar and heroes won't be much better than them if you're a newer player.

I probably could've just took a sentance of your post to take up less space, but you post good stuff. So I quoted it for people to read again!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens

When I did the WoW trial no one ever responded on the global lfg channel. In fact when I used the party seeker thing I sat for 20 mins waiting before just giving up and logging off. In the end I just camped near the boss(the infamous Hogger) and waited for someone who needed to kill him too.

Ah, Hogger. No other mob has killed as many players as he has : )

That said, you won't find a whole lot of people for early quests and the like. Not much of a problem since most (if not all?) of the group quests and group areas can now be done alone. So no longer a biggie ; )

Cacheelma · Jan 17, 2008, 06:20 AM // 06:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by cellardweller

Correction: In the elite missions you need 3 people all of whom can bring their own ai.

Good luck doing the Deep with that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens

When I did the WoW trial no one ever responded on the global lfg channel. In fact when I used the party seeker thing I sat for 20 mins waiting before just giving up and logging off. In the end I just camped near the boss(the infamous Hogger) and waited for someone who needed to kill him too.

WoW's trial account CAN'T USE LFG function. You can't even TALK in any of the public chat channel. (1. General, 2. Trade, or 4. LookingForGroup)

FAIL. Try again, without lies.

Lonesamurai · Jan 17, 2008, 10:40 AM // 10:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

Nope. Actually not. I'm still too much in therapy from my LFG WoW days. If they made henches/Heroes available for those areas, I'd be there in a heartbeat to at least give them a try, though.

Granted. Needing 5 people is better than needing 12, but needing no (other) people? Ahh, sweetness.

The problem is not that I don't like playing with other players -- some of my best online times EVER were running instances in WoW, particularly. I just hate being dependent on other players to play certain parts of the game.

Basically, in GW you can pretty much ignore the relatively few player-group-only areas (e.g., Urgoz) if you want to. Those elite areas in GW are just icing on the cake for "groupies", so I don't feel terribly deprived. I don't like PvP either, but I am not unhappy that PvP is a part of Guild Wars. However, if major chunks of GW2 are structured that way, i.e., requiring player groups for instance content, I'm gonna be majorly bummed.

I just don't think ArenaNet would do that, however. Virtually everything I've read from Jeff Strain leads me to believe GW2 will be very solo/casual player friendly. I sure hope that means keeping my uncomplaining, always-ready-to-go AI pals, but we'll see.

You know no offense intended here, but considering you prefer not to play with others, why are you playing MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAMES???

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cacheelma

WoW's trial account CAN'T USE LFG function. You can't even TALK in any of the public chat channel. (1. General, 2. Trade, or 4. LookingForGroup)

FAIL. Try again, without lies.

You can't?
I never noticed as i just bought it and played it with my guild... that sucks

Isileth · Jan 17, 2008, 11:07 AM // 11:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

You know no offense intended here, but considering you prefer not to play with others, why are you playing MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAMES???

Thankfully GW is not a MMORPG.

GW is a CORPG.

And just because people dont want to group with random players does not mean they dont want to play online with others.

Many play with guilds members and friends. When they arent on they go solo.
Then people who came for the PvP and when in PvE like to go solo.
Those people that do pug but when they dont have time or no one else is on go solo.

I know several of my friends purchased GW because they could play with their friends when they are on and if not grab AI. They would not have purchased it had taking AI not been an option.

And then yes, there are those who purchased it with the sole purpose of taking AI.
Why did I purchase an online game where I could do that? Because GW is advertised as a game where you can do that.

Holly Herro · Jan 17, 2008, 12:34 PM // 12:34

I hope they don't change GW too much.

Guildwars is get in, bash some skulls, get out. Total time used: 2 hours

World of Warcraft is get in, wait 2 hours for a raid group, have 12 wipes, a healer leaves, get a new healer, wipe 20 more times, then you finally kill him, then some one steals all the loot and shards. Total time wasted: 7 hours

Cacheelma · Jan 17, 2008, 02:05 PM // 14:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

You can't?
I never noticed as i just bought it and played it with my guild... that sucks

Nope. No auction house. No mailing. You can't even send a whisper to someone unless he/she starts it first.

All the more reasons why I upgraded to full in just a few days (the trial play time I had left were added on top of the free month though, so it's all good).

Mordakai · Jan 17, 2008, 02:36 PM // 14:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

You know no offense intended here, but considering you prefer not to play with others, why are you playing MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAMES???

Believe it or not, some people play online games just because they are a cool experience. Since there are other people playing, the gameplay experience changes, even if you don't ever actually group with someone!

I have a level 20 Hunter in WoW, and I haven't been in a group once (although that will have to change for the Deadmines).

I think most sucessful MMORPGs don't require you to group with other people. Of course, you'll miss out on some content, but where is it written you have to experience everything in a game to enjoy it?

tmr819 · Jan 17, 2008, 03:13 PM // 15:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

You know no offense intended here, but considering you prefer not to play with others, why are you playing MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAMES???

The multiplayer part is a real plus, my friend, because it gives me the option of playing with other players. In Guild Wars, you can make that choice virtually whenever and wherever you want to; in WoW, you are required to group in order to access the instances. Period.

I think that is a very fundamental difference between the two games, and it is why I prefer Guild Wars.

As for "Massive", let's get real for a moment. Most players in any MMORPG are still in small groups of players for most of the content. WoW may be a "massively multiplayer" game, but it still breaks down to very small groups and solo most of the time you are playing. The advantage of the "massive", to me anyway, is that the player pool is large when you want to find a group. Somehow the advantage of the "massive" eluded me in WoW; I would sometimes wait for 30 to 45 minutes in "LFG Limbo Hell" for a group to form for some instance or other before finally giving up in complete exasperation. Not fun.

In Guild Wars, I can pop online, ask my guild/alliance if anyone wants to go to ABC dungeon or do XYZ mission. If no one does or if I just feel like going on my own, I can proceed anyway and complete said mission or dungeon in the time it would take my WoW alter ego to even find a group, let alone complete that dungeon or quest.

--WoW says: "STOP. WAIT. You MUST have 5 human players in a BALANCED group or you CANNOT complete said instance."
--Guild Wars says: "You MAY complete this instance with any combination of 1 to 8 players and BALANCE is never an issue because of the Heroes you can bring along. HAVE FUN."

--WoW says: "NO. WAIT. You CANNOT play now; you must MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, dude."
--Guild Wars says: "You want to play now? Well, of course you may!"

You know the old saying, "When Mom says 'No,' ask Grandma"? Well, Guild Wars is Grandma, and Grandma has spoiled me rotten.

Bryant Again · Jan 17, 2008, 04:34 PM // 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holly Herro

World of Warcraft is get in, wait 2 hours for a raid group, have 12 wipes, a healer leaves, get a new healer, wipe 20 more times, then you finally kill him, then some one steals all the loot and shards. Total time wasted: 7 hours

If you're pugging a raid than yeah, you will have wasted a lot of time. I rarely ever see that, thankfully. I think I can safely say that 99.9% of raids are guild groups.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

Somehow the advantage of the "massive" eluded me in WoW; I would sometimes wait for 30 to 45 minutes in "LFG Limbo Hell" for a group to form for some instance or other before finally giving up in complete exasperation. Not fun.

At least it ain't like the Guild Wars party search where you have to stay seated in one place. In WoW if I need an instance or something I'll put it in LFG, say what I am and what I need a couple times in the LFG chat channel, and then proceed to farm, do dailies, whatever I want.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

You know the old saying, "When Mom says 'No,' ask Grandma"? Well, Guild Wars is Grandma, and Grandma has spoiled me rotten.

"But a lot of people hate Grandma's soup"...What I mean by that is essentially why I'm worried about who I'm recommending the game to.

Guild Wars is nearly the polar opposite of WoW on a large number of levels - mainly in terms of gear, progression, and people requirement. That's generally what most MMO's are all about: Leveling up, getting some cool gear, and playing with a bunch of people as you kill a big beastie. Guild Wars just has the big beastie part, really.

What I've said quite frequently in the past is this: I don't want people coming to Guild Wars with the expectations that it'll be WoW-lite.

That aside, what Lonesamurai said confuses me. I remember him fully agreeing that Guild Wars wasn't an MMO at sometime awhile ago.

Balan Makki · Jan 17, 2008, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

"But a lot of people hate Grandma's soup"...What I mean by that is essentially why I'm worried about who I'm recommending the game to.

Again, Bryant you hate it. Saying that your friends hate it, especially having never played GW, is just you being transparent and dancing around you personal feelings for GW.

Quote:

Guild Wars is nearly the polar opposite of WoW on a large number of levels - mainly in terms of gear, progression, and people requirement. That's generally what most MMO's are all about: Leveling up, getting some cool gear, and playing with a bunch of people as you kill a big beastie. Guild Wars just has the big beastie part, really.

Strange, but I found just the opposite. While in WoW I would recommend GW to many friends who just couldn't keep up with the grind-curve, and were always complaining about being left behind, because their real-life required more attention--WoW needing to be played like a job for the most part, fun for some, but just mind-numbing for others. Or I'd recommend it to friends who loved to PvP, but just couldn't handled the borked PvP WoW hand to offer. GW has benefited from WoWs popularity in that most casual players who play it, and enjoy it to a point, then realize that GW is a much better option for their busy Real-Life schedules. Seems WoW tastes more like grandma's soup with an ole smelly shoe thrown in.

The friends that are asking for another game because they're burned-out on WoW are going to find their way here, regardless of how much you don't what them to be. You're delusional if you think you know what's best for them, I certainly don't, but those I did recommend to GW are still here.

Quote:

What I've said quite frequently in the past is this: I don't want people coming to Guild Wars with the expectations that it'll be WoW-lite.

Thank god for that, and lets hope Arena Net has no intention of making it such. Although many WoW burn-outs are wanting GW2 to be WoW lite. And wouldn't it just be horrible if you recommended it as the first alternative to the Evercrack Level Grind? Suggested they give it a try and see what they think? What are you afraid of? Afraid they may actually like GW?? Having a hard time grasping that concept??? Or afraid, the industry will turn towards a better system and your Evercrack will be No more?

Quote:

That aside, what Lonesamurai said confuses me. I remember him fully agreeing that Guild Wars wasn't an MMO at sometime awhile ago.

I think you are definitely delusional on this point, most of us feel GW is an MMO. It's your opinion that it's not.

Vinraith · Jan 17, 2008, 05:39 PM // 17:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

You know no offense intended here, but considering you prefer not to play with others, why are you playing MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAMES???

Why are people forever trying to claim that an entirely instanced game is massively multiplayer (and yes, that's massively, not massive, get your terminology straight)? It's as though they have no idea what the words mean, or something. GW is an online action RPG, GW2 will be an MMOG. Speaking as someone that doesn't waste their time with MMOG's, I won't be bothering with it.

Bryant Again · Jan 17, 2008, 05:47 PM // 17:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balan Makki

Again, Bryant you hate it. Saying that your friends hate it, especially having never played GW, is just you being transparent and dancing around you personal feelings for GW.

Of the four friends I *have* recommended it to (who used to play WoW), they haven't been very forgiving to me for recommending it. There's other reasons I'm cautious. Since Fileplanet's been advertising the free campaign trials I direct them to there, instead (which is something I told you awhile ago). I don't know a whole lot who have stayed with it.

And please stop saying I hate or am "spiteful" of Guild Wars. That's a terribly disgusting assumption and just damages your credibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balan Makki

Strange, but I found just the opposite. While in WoW I would recommend GW to many friends who just couldn't keep up with the grind-curve, and were always complaining about being left behind, because their real-life required more attention--WoW needing to be played like a job for the most part, fun for some, but just mind-numbing for others. Or I'd recommend it to friends who loved to PvP, but just couldn't handled the borked PvP WoW hand to offer. GW has benefited from WoWs popularity in that most casual players who play it, and enjoy it to a point, then realize that GW is a much better option for their busy Real-Life schedules. Seems WoW tastes more like grandma's soup with an ole smelly shoe thrown in.

It lacks a grind-curve which is good, yes. But it lacks many other things, as I've stated, as well: Gear progession, longer/higher level progression, and end-game. WoW, and hell RPGs in general, are popular because of these things. My friends like them. People like them. That's why Guild Wars 2 is going down that similar direction: it's giving people what they want while still providing a solid and different game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balan Makki

You're delusional if you think you know what's best for them.

Um, they're my friends. I know much more about them than you do. I'd appreciate it if you weren't so assumptious.

Silly Warrior · Jan 17, 2008, 05:51 PM // 17:51

I've showed Guild Wars to a few of my good friends, only a couple stuck with it. I hope that changes with GW2.

Balan Makki · Jan 17, 2008, 05:56 PM // 17:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

Why are people forever trying to claim that an entirely instanced game is massively multiplayer (and yes, that's massively, not massive, get your terminology straight)? It's as though they have no idea what the words mean, or something. GW is an online action RPG, GW2 will be an MMOG. Speaking as someone that doesn't waste their time with MMOG's, I won't be bothering with it.

But WoW is an entirely instanced game, having hundreds of separate servers. What's the difference? One instance being larger than the other? Can you meet up and play with anyone with a WoW account? No. Can you in GW, yes. How many can join an instance in WoW 40ish? in GW? not as many. Arguing semantics is nothing more that mental masturbation--It's a personal experience, and most of us try not to notice.

To many of us GW1 is an MMO. Aguing that it isn't won't change that fact.

Regarding the OP, this is old news, so old in fact, that the last time something like this appeared a few weeks back, Arena Net stated that much has changed since those early press releases.

Vinraith · Jan 17, 2008, 06:13 PM // 18:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balan Makki

But WoW is an entirely instanced game,

Words have meanings. You can choose to ignore that and call it "opinion" but no one's going to know what you're talking about. I stopped reading when you called wow "entirely instanced" because it's clear you have no honest interest in discussing the matter.

Isileth · Jan 17, 2008, 06:20 PM // 18:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balan Makki

But WoW is an entirely instanced game, having hundreds of separate servers. What's the difference? One instance being larger than the other? Can you meet up and play with anyone with a WoW account? No. Can you in GW, yes. How many can join an instance in WoW 40ish? in GW? not as many. Arguing semantics is nothing more that mental masturbation--It's a personal experience, and most of us try not to notice.

To many of us GW1 is an MMO. Aguing about it isn't going to change the facts.

Regarding the OP, this is old news, so old in fact, that the last time something like this appeared a few weeks back, Arena Net stated that much has changed since those early press releases.

You misunderstand what is meant by instanced.

Its the fact that when you leave an outpost or enter a mission you head into your own instance. Only your team is there and no one else can join.

Thats an instance. Not having seperate servers.

So the fact that GW uses fully instanced areas stops it from being a massively multiplayer game.

Lonesamurai · Jan 17, 2008, 06:30 PM // 18:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

Why are people forever trying to claim that an entirely instanced game is massively multiplayer (and yes, that's massively, not massive, get your terminology straight)? It's as though they have no idea what the words mean, or something. GW is an online action RPG, GW2 will be an MMOG. Speaking as someone that doesn't waste their time with MMOG's, I won't be bothering with it.

I didn't say Guild Wars in my post anywhere did i? No, i was reffering to MMO's in general

Balan Makki · Jan 17, 2008, 06:30 PM // 18:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

Words have meanings. . .

In context they do. Let me rephrase my first point. So it's not taken out of context. "Because WoW has hundreds of Servers it is an Instanced Game. Having many copies/Instances of the same environment. ." Semantics give words meaning, and agruing their differences is just white-noise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Its the fact that when you leave an outpost or enter a mission you head into your own instance. Only your team is there and no one else can join. Thats an instance. Not having seperate servers. So the fact that GW uses fully instanced areas stops it from being a massively multiplayer game.

Everytime I take a group of 8 players from a large outpost instance in GW, to a smaller PvE instance in GW it's as if Arena Net has just given me my own server, in fact they have given me my own server, a server I only have to share with the people I choose to share it with. . . Semantics anyone?? Grilled or Fried?? Sauce or ketchup??? Seems you actually have to pay real cash to Blizzard to to play with friends on another instance of WoW.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Of the four friends I *have* recommended it to (who used to play WoW), they haven't been very forgiving to me for recommending it.

Sorry for being so presumptuous, first time I've heard you say this, I'll try and read more carefully, my apologies. You're usually stating that you won't recommend GW to WoW friends. Glad to see you've actually tried, albeit unsuccessfully.

tmr819 · Jan 17, 2008, 06:50 PM // 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

So the fact that GW uses fully instanced areas stops it from being a massively multiplayer game.

I actually still like to think of GW as an MMORPG, a "marginally multiplayer online RPG."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balan Makki

Regarding the OP, this is old news, so old in fact, that the last time something like this appeared a few weeks back, Arena Net stated that much has changed since those early press releases.

What struck me as mildly interesting about the text was that, old or not, (i) it appeared in PC GAMER UK in January 2008 and (ii) it stated/intimated a couple of things I had not read elsewhere before (i.e., players having the option to join up with an "AI party"). It may not be accurate, as you say, but it was interesting to me nonetheless.

Let's face it, ArenaNet has been awfully silent about whatever it is that "has [greatly] changed since those early press releases". I find that rather peculiar, frankly, but I'm sure they are just being careful. At one point I had been interested in an online game in development called "Gods and Heroes." They had a polished website and beta, etc., and yet that game went right down the tubes. I'm sure ArenaNet would not want to repeat a fiasco like that.

With so little "official" information, one is left to sift through scraps to see whether or not there's anything new to be found.

Bryant Again · Jan 17, 2008, 06:54 PM // 18:54

The instancing, for me, makes it feel less like a gameworld and more like Diablo. Each outpost just feels like a chatroom on Battle.net. Of course other people may be more immersed than I get, but it always feels pretty desolate in an explorable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balan Makki

Sorry for being so presumptuous, first time I've heard you say this, I'll try and read more carefully, my apologies. You're usually stating that you won't recommend GW to WoW friends. Glad to see you've actually tried, albeit unsuccessfully.

I've been recommending like this for awhile now. Not a whole lot have been terribly inclined to pick it up.

And I don't just "not recommend it to WoW friends", it's that I "don't recommend it to WoW friends because x, y and z."