Curse

Reverend Dr · Dec 01, 2009, 02:25 PM // 14:25

If that is not grind, then grind is completely subjective. If grind is completely subjective then there is no way to talk about reducing something that is completely subjective.

Zahr Dalsk · Dec 01, 2009, 02:49 PM // 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

No, people like grind.

Read the damn post I linked, it's not about grind, it's about showing off. Grind is just the means by which showing off is achieved. In every one of these games, grind is rewarded with things you can show off. People don't like grind, they do it because they want the rewards.

BlackSephir · Dec 01, 2009, 03:12 PM // 15:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

If that is not grind, then grind is completely subjective. If grind is completely subjective then there is no way to talk about reducing something that is completely subjective.

No, it's not subjective. Your definition of grind is broken.
But that's okay, since GWWiki and Wiki surprisingly have the definition of grind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grinding_%28gaming%29

Quote:

Grind is a term used in video gaming to describe the process of engaging in repetitive and/or non-entertaining gameplay in order to gain access to other features within the game. In Guild Wars, these features are usually optional and include titles, armour (through crafting materials or gold), or other prestige items. Since the level cap is relatively low, level-grinding is uncommon; however, the Survivor and Defender of Ascalon titles do involve grinding in order to level up and gain experience points.

While some of these features do not provide a gameplay advantage to players, there are exceptions; for example, some Factions, Nightfall and Eye of the North titles improve PvE-only skills and allow the buying of armour, consumables, or weapons.

Progress != grind.
RPGs != grindfest
MMOs = grindfest
Know the difference, it might save your life.

Shadowspawn X · Dec 01, 2009, 03:21 PM // 15:21

/not signed

This has already been addressed in the great title rebalance of 2008.

Nechrond · Dec 01, 2009, 03:22 PM // 15:22

People grind either because they like the rewards for grinding, or because it's their only alternative to quitting a game and "throwing away all that effort". I don't think anyone really likes grinding.

Arduin · Dec 01, 2009, 04:37 PM // 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

So ... you are free to disregard them, the same way you are free to not take SF into your instance if you don't like it?
And if that is reason enough to not change titles, is that reason enough to not change SF?
AKA don't like it, don't use it?

I am not getting that analogy.

SF at the moment enables a mechanic that, in my opinion, shouldn't exist in Guild Wars.

I don't consider titles grind, and for me those fit perfectly well in the 'added fluff' section, alongside Voltaic Spear and Obsidian Armor. For me, none are needed to max to give a tangible benefit when playing Guild Wars.

In other words:

SF, can indeed be disregarded in instances, broken in GW as a whole
Titles, can indeed be disregarded in instances, not broken in GW as a whole

I'm talking about the bigger picture here.

daraaksii · Dec 01, 2009, 04:48 PM // 16:48

Wait, people are complaining about grind in Guild Wars?

Lol.

Abedeus · Dec 01, 2009, 04:56 PM // 16:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

City of Heroes/Villains
Diablo
Ragnarok
Warhammer online

Okay, I like "grind" in those games. Know why?

CoH/V - A lot of quests that hide the grind.

Diablo - Oh come on, it's just silly fun. Slash slash slash. Even more fun in 8 people, when it's harder.

Ragnarok - Motivation? PvP is really good, especially the sieges.

WO? I could PvP to level 15 without visiting PvE once, except to buy new skills and rarely buy some gear.

Quote:

No, people like grind. Just because you don't like grind, doesn't mean everyone agrees with you. (or you are one of the many people where what you want and what you think you want are two different things)

I like grind, when it's a bit harder than smashing buttons with your head. Try doing that in Ragnarok Online, you won't get past your second class. Diablo 2, when not caring about equipment optimization or skill synergies? Good luck. IN HELL! Literally.

Quote:

This has worked well for games such as Starcraft, Warcraft (& DotA), and a number of FPS's, but in case you haven't noticed those games are just much different and attract a different crowd from RPG players.

I always treated GW as a PvP game where teams of 8 players fight against other 8 players. Like an FPS (Enemy Territory, Team Fortress 2), or a DotA-esque game.

My point is - grind is good when it's fun. I could play Diablo 2 for 5-6 hours in a row. Doing what? Grinding monsters. In Aion, it bored me after 2-3 hours. It just wasn't that fun.

Axel Zinfandel · Dec 01, 2009, 06:09 PM // 18:09

The trouble with Anti-grind as that I believe a majority of people that play these sort of games need that rewarding feeling. There's simply little motivation, at least in PvE, to play the game all the way through. The only things that particularly change are the enemies are more difficult, and there's better rewards.

At least in my view, the problem titles are Sunspear to some extent, Lightbringer, Kurz/Lux title, and EOTN titles. Ideally, they should require a bit more then one play through their campaigns to max the title. That way, the easiest way to max the title is to ACTUALLY PLAY THE GAME. Other titles like LDoA, Sweet Tooth, ect, that have NO impact on the game other then for show are not a problem because they are not necessary.

To me, the problem with PvE isn't the grind anyway, it's the lack of reward in playing the game past level 20. I could care less about 'Aesthetics' which is the SOUL drive of people playing PvE to end-game, so once I get to level 20, get a good build, get max armor and weapons (which is very, very easy to do), there's little point to playing the game all the way through, because I just got max everything before I even started. For some, that may be all fine and dandy, but for me at least, it's the reason I stopped playing.

upier · Dec 01, 2009, 06:22 PM // 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arduinna

I am not getting that analogy.

SF at the moment enables a mechanic that, in my opinion, shouldn't exist in Guild Wars.

I don't consider titles grind, and for me those fit perfectly well in the 'added fluff' section, alongside Voltaic Spear and Obsidian Armor. For me, none are needed to max to give a tangible benefit when playing Guild Wars.

In other words:

SF, can indeed be disregarded in instances, broken in GW as a whole
Titles, can indeed be disregarded in instances, not broken in GW as a whole

I'm talking about the bigger picture here.

Considering that titles are becoming all there is left to do in GW, you do not have issues that the only content left now requires 100s of hours of play?
You find that to be acceptable for a game such as GW?

Nechrond · Dec 01, 2009, 07:25 PM // 19:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abedeus

I always treated GW as a PvP game where teams of 8 players fight against other 8 players. Like an FPS (Enemy Territory, Team Fortress 2), or a DotA-esque game.

THIS.

The good thing about GW is you don't have to grind, you can always take your "finished" char into PvP.

Reverend Dr · Dec 01, 2009, 07:38 PM // 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abedeus

My point is - grind is good when it's fun.

I have never said grind wasn't good or fun; its the general colloquial and lossy definition of grind that says that.

I also am not trying to be smart and quote wikipedia's definition of "non-entertaining" gameplay which is so RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing subjective that it is uselsss. Take any individual and you are going to get a different interpretation of what is "non-entertaining" gameplay. To one person, merely going through several groups of monsters proceeding linearly through a mission is going to be non-entertaining, while to another killing the same group of spawns for 6 hours in a row to gain 1/3 of a level is going to be entertaining. Such a definition of "grind" is useless for any real type of discussion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axel Zinfandel

The trouble with Anti-grind as that I believe a majority of people that play these sort of games need that rewarding feeling.

This is what I have been trying to get at. People want the rewards of grinding (more powerful character/gear, seniority over newer players, individuality) and yet so many of these people don't realize that the only way to achieve these things is to have grind, no matter how fun and entertaining that grind may be. These rewards are inseparable from the RPG archetype, so the whole talk of "I don't like grind, but I like RPG's" is just hogwash.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

Read the damn post I linked, it's not about grind, it's about showing off.

I read your post. It was irrelevant. You wanted to remove some of the carrots. Remove all of them and there will be no more (PvE) game. Leave just the story and there is still grind, let me tell you that my 2nd-4th time through the game I definitely felt that I was "engaging in repetitive and/or non-entertaining gameplay in order to gain access to other features within the game."

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

I guess your definition which is full of 4cham memes are cutting edge internet comedy, saying that RPGs are full of grind, that people like grind and that grind equals progress is so much better than the one on wiki.

see

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

let me tell you that my 2nd-4th time through the game I definitely felt that I was "engaging in repetitive and/or non-entertaining gameplay in order to gain access to other features within the game."

BlackSephir · Dec 01, 2009, 07:53 PM // 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

I also am not trying to be smart and quote wikipedia's definition of "non-entertaining" gameplay which is so RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing subjective that it is uselsss.

I guess your definition which is full of cancer and stupidity, saying that RPGs are full of grind, that people like grind and that grind equals progress is so much better than the one on wiki.

Holy balls, I'm wasting my time with this one.

Tenebrae · Dec 01, 2009, 08:37 PM // 20:37

Dont think GW stated a fact like "youll never have to grind in this game" . Things that still matters to your stats/equip/weapons/access have nothing to do with grind so i dont see the point here.

PS: Reverend dont waste time on that one , is worthless.

Zahr Dalsk · Dec 01, 2009, 09:45 PM // 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

It was irrelevant.

It is relevant insofar as proving that people do not like grind itself, solely the rewards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

You wanted to remove some of the carrots. Remove all of them and there will be no more (PvE) game.

True. And this is a problem how? If a community that's doing nothing but farming titles, rather than playing the campaigns (and that gets old really, really fast) leaves, you lose nothing. It's not like they were playing anyways. No big loss. And it's not a subscription based game. ArenaNet has their money, and has no need for them until the next bunch of content (expansion packs, or in this case GW2). All they're doing right now is wasting bandwidth and not playing the game.

This is what the game was originally based on, you play the campaign once, and maybe go back sometimes, but at that point, really, PvP is meant to be the focus of the game when you reach that point.

Anyways, point being, take out the fancy rewards for grind and you won't lose players. None of them were playing the game anyways.

Reverend Dr · Dec 01, 2009, 10:22 PM // 22:22

My misunderstanding, I thought you were wanting to get rid of all the carrots and somehow magically have the same if not larger PvE game/community.

I have also said before that they should completely remove titles.

Arduin · Dec 02, 2009, 05:50 AM // 05:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Considering that titles are becoming all there is left to do in GW, you do not have issues that the only content left now requires 100s of hours of play?
You find that to be acceptable for a game such as GW?

Issues, issues... I'd rather have a new god area than the Drunkard title. But people are forcing themselves to max those titles. You don't need 100 of hours to progress a title to such an extent that PvE-skills become viable.

What do you qualify as grind in GW?

It might be a sad thing Anet isn't releasing any new content, and the only thing to do for longtime players is titles, but that's the way things go now. Wouldn't making those titles easier be counter-productive for Anet?