Curse

Longasc · Jan 16, 2008, 11:51 AM // 11:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

I remember those "good ol' days" in beta when we didn't have heroes and hench and could never find a full party

Exactly.

Heroes have advantages. And they are not responsible for the lack of grouping.

If we had no heroes or henchies at all... we would have to mess with PUGs. We would have troubles to find people for many quests and missions. We could not fill up with heroes.

GW1 would not work without henchmen. Heroes are nothing else, just better henchmen.

I am perfectly fine to play with 2-3 friends and not having to socialize with every random person that would be needed to fill up a group.

Lonesamurai · Jan 16, 2008, 12:12 PM // 12:12

The only time I have people in my group i don;t know is GvG guests or newbies in presear

jezz · Jan 16, 2008, 12:29 PM // 12:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vilaptca

I work full-time, sometimes 7 days a week. I don't have the time to waste sitting around making a group, when I can go right out and just do what I need to do with H/H. Or to redo every mission 5 times because of the incompetence of most PUGs. Seriously, I went through every storyline way faster than I would have if I spent it all in PUGs.

If there isn't some sort of hench system in GW2, I'll probably uninstall and move on to something else that works better with my life.

yes totally agree with you...the amount of time wasted forming groups..oh the painful memories..i only party now with real if it is friends or guildies..
jury is out on GW2 until they release info on it..may or may not get it...depends on this companion system..
if it werent for H/H i would of quit GW a long time ago..

nightwatchman · Jan 16, 2008, 01:00 PM // 13:00

Good old days = a dozen 6/8 teams moaning that there weren't any monks around.

They weren't all that good.

Lord Feathers · Jan 16, 2008, 01:09 PM // 13:09

If GW2 was set up so you had to group with folks in-order to play it, I'd stop playing. I enjoy my guild mates and that's as far as I would go grouping. The game goes to the " MUST HAVE " this in-order to play and mentality of most PUG groups then I'm done playing. Friends, guild mates, or my heros the rest can do whatever they like so long as they don't bother me. 95% of every PUG I've ever been in was a complete failure

Bryant Again · Jan 16, 2008, 02:32 PM // 14:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

In solo games you always need to cover everything, a little bit of healing, a little bit of damage and a little bit of support. Never interests me.

That never really popped into my mind playing Diablo, or Oblivion, or Morrowind, or Hellgate: London. It all depends on how the game is set up: If the combat and skill set up is taken straight out of GW then yes it will be boring. Of course, having that would be a bad idea because it adds less incentive to go from GW1 to GW2. From what ANet has stated, things are going to be a lot more interesting, especially with the "special moves" and what not.

I understand the fun in making team builds, but it's not so hot starting out with expectations that ANet would make us have to play some sort of nasty hybrid.

Dkraftwerk · Jan 16, 2008, 04:31 PM // 16:31

The only reason I enjoy having heroes/henchman now is that it gives me the ability to solo. I don't really care for having them along and would rather play completely solo or with a friend or two along. In essence, if GW2 gives me the option to play totally solo (which right now it states they will) or play with a group, then I'm happy.

On another note, what I would love is if this sidekick henchman you can take along could be customizable in the same way a hero is. Meaning you could make him/her any profession you'd like and put any skills you'd like into their bar.

lyra_song · Jan 16, 2008, 04:39 PM // 16:39

They should build a game with no reason to WANT to play solo, but still leave the option there.

Feurin Longcastle · Jan 16, 2008, 05:13 PM // 17:13

Perhaps I'm the only one who actually laments the loss of PuGs. I used to do it very frequently, and my experiences ranged from pleasant to downright frustrating. Regardless, the interaction was always interesting. There was a very interactive environment that died suddenly with Nightfall's release, and I do miss that.

Some of my more memorable experiences have been with PuGs. I can't really remember a particularly memorable H/H run.

Horus · Jan 16, 2008, 05:29 PM // 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

They should build a game with no reason to WANT to play solo, but still leave the option there.

couldnt agree more

Loviatar · Jan 16, 2008, 05:37 PM // 17:37

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by icedutah

I really hope that Guild Wars 2 does not have hero's/hench system. It has really killed grouping.

grouping was dead due to asshats long before heroes and even the brain dead henchies were better.

1 companion according to multiple interviews NOT taking up a group slot and yes solo friendly as well

Vinraith · Jan 16, 2008, 05:37 PM // 17:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

That never really popped into my mind playing Diablo, or Oblivion, or Morrowind, or Hellgate: London. It all depends on how the game is set up: If the combat and skill set up is taken straight out of GW then yes it will be boring. Of course, having that would be a bad idea because it adds less incentive to go from GW1 to GW2. From what ANet has stated, things are going to be a lot more interesting, especially with the "special moves" and what not.

I understand the fun in making team builds, but it's not so hot starting out with expectations that ANet would make us have to play some sort of nasty hybrid.

The problem is that, without the party dynamic to make it different, they have to compete (in my mind anyway) with Morrowind, Oblivion, Diablo etc. GW is a great game because it's different from any other action RPG I've played. The more they make it like other games I adore, the more flawed it looks, simply because it's trying to do what they do only not as well. To my mind, what makes GW unique is:

1. Instancing across the entire game
2. Hero/Henchmen dynamic
3. The Skill system
4. A low level cap with the bulk of the game set beyond max level

Lose any of those things and it becomes more like the other games in the genre, and consequently easier to dismiss in favor of something else. They're removing at least the first two, as well as four, and altering three in a way that doesn't sound at all good to me. That spells "run of the mill MMORPG" to me, a genre I don't play and a mediocre one at that.

Gli · Jan 16, 2008, 05:38 PM // 17:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

They should build a game with no reason to WANT to play solo, but still leave the option there.

I'd rather have a game with no reason to WANT to play teamed up, but still having the option.

The Great Al · Jan 16, 2008, 05:43 PM // 17:43

I'd also rather not have an emphasis on H/H. I'd get rid of heroes entirely, and just have henchmen. That way, if towns are empty, or people can't find a party for a specific quest, they can use henchmen, but if people are able and willing, they should be looking towards using humans first. It's ridiculous how elitist the people here are. Yes, there's a lot of bad PUGs, but there's a lot of good ones, too.

lyra_song · Jan 16, 2008, 05:53 PM // 17:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

I'd rather have a game with no reason to WANT to play teamed up, but still having the option.

But that defeats the purpose of being:
-Multiplayer
-Online
-Team based combat

You may as well be be playing a 1-player RPG offline.

MMOGs have a richer (positive and negative) experience with the added dimension of community, socialization, with a world populated by players, and not just mindless NPCs.

I know people have had bad experiences with PUGs, but that shouldn't be a factor when designing a game where social interaction is important.

tmr819 · Jan 16, 2008, 05:55 PM // 17:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

I'd rather have a game with no reason to WANT to play teamed up, but still having the option.

Actually if they make a game with no reason to HAVE to play solo or HAVE to play in a group, I'll be content with that. That way, you, the player, gets to play the way you WANT to play.

I find it strange that people lament the loss of the PUG. What has been happening in game is that players have a choice between PUG-ing, soloing, or leaving the game altogether for something else. That people are opting for soloing or small guild/friend groups versus PUGs in vast numbers should make -- ding! -- a light bulb go off for ArenaNet's GW2 developers and designers.

If GW2 ends up looking just like WoW, GW2 will fail. I cannot imagine GW2 will look like WoW, however. It's looking more like a hybrid mutant GW1-marries-WOW-and-has-a-baby kind of thing. Kinda scary, actually. Brrr.

Mordakai · Jan 16, 2008, 06:34 PM // 18:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

If GW2 ends up looking just like WoW, GW2 will fail. I cannot imagine GW2 will look like WoW, however. It's looking more like a hybrid mutant GW1-marries-WOW-and-has-a-baby kind of thing. Kinda scary, actually. Brrr.

LOL. I actually think it would be quite cool: there are things I love about GW and hate about WoW, and vice versa.

If they can make a game better than WoW, but with no monthly fee:

Happy!

Gli · Jan 16, 2008, 06:45 PM // 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

But that defeats the purpose of being:
-Multiplayer
-Online
-Team based combat

You may as well be be playing a 1-player RPG offline.

MMOGs have a richer (positive and negative) experience with the added dimension of community, socialization, with a world populated by players, and not just mindless NPCs.

I know people have had bad experiences with PUGs, but that shouldn't be a factor when designing a game where social interaction is important.

I do play multiplayer, exclusively with RL friends, family and acquaintances though. And when there's no one available, I play solo. If playing solo wasn't an option though, I wouldn't be playing GW at all. That's the type of game I meant when I posted what you quoted. Team-based combat doesn't interest me in the slightest. As for community and socialization, those aren't things I look for in computer games. I venture into the real world for those.

I've never considered GW to be anything more than a very advanced Diablo II clone with a GUI chatroom. I played Diablo II for quite a while, exclusively with RL friends in passworded games. GW can be played exactly the same, without even the need to put a password on your game. Party up in the guild hall, travel to an outpost where a lot of weird characters with silly names in blue text run around for some obscure reason, locate your exit or mission trigger, and off you go! Or completely alone with competent AI support, if no friends are online. I don't actually have any bad experiences with PUGs. The few times I tried, it wasn't too bad. It's just not my thing though. I wouldn't make a good PUGger either, because I'm liable to walk away from the keyboard at the drop of a hat. Because, almost everything happening around me at home is much more important than some silly game I happen to be playing. People would hate me if I PUGged with them.

And the good thing about GW is, that approach actually works just as well a going for the social interaction and community. It would be a shame to throw that away.

Sparda · Jan 16, 2008, 06:58 PM // 18:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

The problem is that, without the party dynamic to make it different, they have to compete (in my mind anyway) with Morrowind, Oblivion, Diablo etc. GW is a great game because it's different from any other action RPG I've played. The more they make it like other games I adore, the more flawed it looks, simply because it's trying to do what they do only not as well. To my mind, what makes GW unique is:

1. Instancing across the entire game
2. Hero/Henchmen dynamic
3. The Skill system
4. A low level cap with the bulk of the game set beyond max level

Lose any of those things and it becomes more like the other games in the genre, and consequently easier to dismiss in favor of something else. They're removing at least the first two, as well as four, and altering three in a way that doesn't sound at all good to me. That spells "run of the mill MMORPG" to me, a genre I don't play and a mediocre one at that.

Well i agree fully with ya your 4 points are the same as why i love GW and play it over all the others MMO.
GW isn't the next clone look alike in the world.
It was and still is a strong new concept, we wil not see another of GW course it's to new oldschool MMo's are fixed in our heads it makes money and that is what most game studio's want.
WoW is sure of it's monthly Tax GW on the other hand is without tax so Anet hasn't such a big income as Blizzard.

Master Knightfall · Jan 16, 2008, 06:58 PM // 18:58

Thing is I can solo without henchies in my OFFline rpgs like Oblivion and Morrowind and Daggerfall and Diablo 2 and those likes. In these online games soloing is boring and GW is the first game that made soloing fun to me and I've played them all. I remember the many hours just sitting there with only my pet wolf as a shaman in Everquest killing Ice Giants over an over. While the loot was good the fun value was nill.

Before heroes I had henchies and I used them just as much as I use my heroes now, but, my heroes are my pride and joy. They are my extention and synergy of the four of us is awesome. Even sometimes in hard mode areas I don't even have to fight I've built my heroes up so well and that is FUN to me building the ultimate combination of heroes.

I will not be happy with just a companion or having to pug in GW2 if that is all they offer. My preference would be to continue to have heroes and henchies and your instances difficulties would be based on how many you brought instead of static like it is now. Sort of a Nightmare and Hell level of difficulty depending on the number of heroes and henchies/companions you brought with you an of course the normal difficulty being just you by yourself.

Anet you better listen, don't take our heroes and henchies away or you're going to see a great loss of sales because you didn't listen to the majority of us.