Curse

You can't see me · Jan 05, 2008, 09:05 PM // 21:05

Fril, Strat, you are basically asking Arenanet to reward you for liking the color blue more than the color red, and then admitting that the game needs encouragement to like the color blue, even after your knowledge that others like the color red. You then cover this statement by saying that no one needs to like the color blue if they like the color red, but those who like red will get a smaller reward.

That's all this idea will ever amount to. There's no reason to support unless you just like blue, and want a reward because you don't like red. That's idiotic if not several things on top of that.

Woop Shotty · Jan 05, 2008, 09:45 PM // 21:45

All you people talking about the idea punishing players that want to play alone or in small groups, with or without heroes - are you blind or what?!

Ask yourself: Does the fact that a cross-campaign PvE player can craft a moa chick mini pet pet punish PvP-only players and folks who don't have different campaigns? NO, and moa chicks aren't even customized. The OP made a suggested end chest reward of a special customized mini pet. Not having such a thing would not be "punishment" for anyone.

Bunch of cry babies, I say.

The guy suggested something that would be fun for a good while and that would give a fair reward that doesn't even affect the economy. Why sit and be jealous and act like if it's a terrible idea just because you don't think you'd want to participate?

Stormlord Alex · Jan 05, 2008, 10:05 PM // 22:05

/notsigned.

I agree with Isileth instinctively.

... what's this thread about?

Vinraith · Jan 05, 2008, 10:48 PM // 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by You can't see me

Fril, Strat, you are basically asking Arenanet to reward you for liking the color blue more than the color red, and then admitting that the game needs encouragement to like the color blue, even after your knowledge that others like the color red. You then cover this statement by saying that no one needs to like the color blue if they like the color red, but those who like red will get a smaller reward.

That's all this idea will ever amount to. There's no reason to support unless you just like blue, and want a reward because you don't like red. That's idiotic if not several things on top of that.

You neglected the part where they imply there's something fundamentally wrong with the people that prefer red, and further imply they'd be happier if all the red-lovers would go away. After all, there's no other way to interpret:

Quote:

This can encourage a bit more co-operation and may make anti-social people fail.

from where I'm sitting.

PUGers are a nasty bunch, really. They claim to be more social than those of us that prefer to play alone or with real friends, but in general it seems to me that even if I liked playing with strangers I wouldn't like playing with these people. "Play the game my way or get out" and "my fun is more important than your fun" seem to be their guiding principles.

You can't see me · Jan 05, 2008, 11:13 PM // 23:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woop Shotty

All you people talking about the idea punishing players that want to play alone or in small groups, with or without heroes - are you blind or what?!

Ask yourself: Does the fact that a cross-campaign PvE player can craft a moa chick mini pet pet punish PvP-only players and folks who don't have different campaigns? NO, and moa chicks aren't even customized. The OP made a suggested end chest reward of a special customized mini pet. Not having such a thing would not be "punishment" for anyone.

Bunch of cry babies, I say.

The guy suggested something that would be fun for a good while and that would give a fair reward that doesn't even affect the economy. Why sit and be jealous and act like if it's a terrible idea just because you don't think you'd want to participate?

Did you actually read any of this?

Vinraith- Yeah, I was just trying to be nicer than I usually am though. Thanks for pointing that out.

Fril Estelin · Jan 05, 2008, 11:15 PM // 23:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

from where I'm sitting.

PUGers are a nasty bunch, really. They claim to be more social than those of us that prefer to play alone or with real friends, but in general it seems to me that even if I liked playing with strangers I wouldn't like playing with these people. "Play the game my way or get out" and "my fun is more important than your fun" seem to be their guiding principles.

I agree with you. A lot of the currently PUGging people are a nasty bunch (apart from my Imperial Sanctum PUG, I was lucky to find a few nice people). But they're not the only one, because those that want to keep the game to their exclusive group are not better, just different. We're doomed, let's now bang our head on the impenetrable wall where we were stuck 6 posts ago.

You can't see me · Jan 05, 2008, 11:17 PM // 23:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

I agree with you. A lot of the currently PUGging people are a nasty bunch (apart from my Imperial Sanctum PUG, I was lucky to find a few nice people). But they're not the only one, because those that want to keep the game to their exclusive group are not better, just different. We're doomed, let's now bang our head on the impenetrable wall where we were stuck 6 posts ago.

Then we agree that this idea has failed.

strat_53711 · Jan 06, 2008, 05:32 AM // 05:32

Wow, I opened a huge can of worms.

I would not agree that this idea has no merits.

My main point is that for a lot of players that have finished/tried almost everything, ANET should introduce SOMETHING to encourage more gameplay.

I just picked an example that would encourage PUG play and non cookie cutter team formation.

The facts are that Guild Wars growth rate has decreased, the economy is broken, many players are getting bored because of lack of content.

Sure GW2 will someday be released. But ANET could easily add content to existing areas and offer some kind of reward.

freekedoutfish · Jan 06, 2008, 01:17 PM // 13:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by strat_53711

Wow, I opened a huge can of worms.

I would not agree that this idea has no merits.

My main point is that for a lot of players that have finished/tried almost everything, ANET should introduce SOMETHING to encourage more gameplay.

I just picked an example that would encourage PUG play and non cookie cutter team formation.

The facts are that Guild Wars growth rate has decreased, the economy is broken, many players are getting bored because of lack of content.

Sure GW2 will someday be released. But ANET could easily add content to existing areas and offer some kind of reward.

Anet has introduced something to keep us playing. Its called hard mode, but hardly anyone does it except in GWEN for the end elite dungeons.

Your idea is fine, aslong as your not giving materialistic rewards for PUGing. As I said, give extra exprience points if you have a full human team or for each human in the team and its a fine idea.

But if you are giving weapons or gold then its a bad idea. That just makes it unfair on players who like to go solo or have no choice but to solo.

But the bottom line is that there is NOTHING Anet can do is keep GWs going for ever. They could only keep releasing new content, but they have to focus on GWs2.

They cant just keep adding tiny little things like this to keep us playing, or its just a gimic and not well thought out. Just play something else or make do with the game as it is, and play wth guildies if you want to pug.

You can't see me · Jan 06, 2008, 03:53 PM // 15:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by strat_53711

Wow, I opened a huge can of worms.

I would not agree that this idea has no merits.

My main point is that for a lot of players that have finished/tried almost everything, ANET should introduce SOMETHING to encourage more gameplay.

I just picked an example that would encourage PUG play and non cookie cutter team formation.

The facts are that Guild Wars growth rate has decreased, the economy is broken, many players are getting bored because of lack of content.

Sure GW2 will someday be released. But ANET could easily add content to existing areas and offer some kind of reward.

Pardon, but I'm not sure how increasing the encouragement level of teaming together accomplishes any of this, as we've already made out that teaming together encourages people to do one thing 90% of the time: Stop teaming together.

I won't deny it. Guild Wars is losing growth and suffering economic depression. Is this suprising? The game is about to be over shadowed by a new and better sequal. Why would it attract new long term players if the sequal is advertized already? Those players will either wait until GW2 will comes out and not waste effort in a game that will mean nothing in a year or so, or go on to play other games that are still living prosperously. Aside from this, two years is plenty for some people to accomplish all they wanted. I personally am aproaching this point, and, yeah, I'll probably be waiting for GW2 and only dropping on occasionally after that.

Trying to keep a game at its height of glory and growth is impossible. You can only slow down the degradation, just as cyrogenics slows down the degradation of the human body. Hard mode slowed it down significantly, as did GW:EN. We can only hope that Arenanet is not out of ideas.

Though if there's one thing I don't see it, it is how encouraging one playstyle over another is supposed to slow down this degradation. People who enjoy H/Hing will be missing out, try for the reward, realize it's not worth it failing 90% of the time, and then wither deal with the fact that non-social gaming (As it's been quoted as) has less rewards, which is not a good thing, or just quit and move to a game that encourages their playstyle, but either option isn't a good idea to increase the activity in guild wars.

I'm all in favor of prolonging the life of Guild Wars, but saying one playstyle is more valuable than another is not the solution by a longshot. I'm sorry, it's just plainly not.

I believe it is safe to say that this idea has failed.

BlackSephir · Jan 06, 2008, 04:03 PM // 16:03

Someone fails hard with h/h and thnk that if AN forces others to play with them, he will succeed.
What a nice idea, rewarding players who like failures which PUGs are.
Let's reward players who don't use pve skills.
And then let's reward players who don't have 8 skills on their skillbars.
More fail = more fun, so it seems

Alicendre · Jan 06, 2008, 04:48 PM // 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

What a nice idea, rewarding players who like failures which PUGs are.
Let's reward players who don't use pve skills.
And then let's reward players who don't have 8 skills on their skillbars.

Either you never PuG or it's for Fort Ranik in NM, because most PuGs have okay builds...

You can't see me · Jan 06, 2008, 05:02 PM // 17:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alicendre

Either you never PuG or it's for Fort Ranik in NM, because most PuGs have okay builds...

The ability of PuGs in general isn't the issue here. If we're going to start

At least let's stay on topic doing it.

Alicendre · Jan 06, 2008, 06:04 PM // 18:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by You can't see me

The ability of PuGs in general isn't the issue here. If we're going to start

*snip*

At least let's stay on topic doing it.

I was just pointing something.
But anyway, while I PuG, I agree in the fact that Anet shouldn't reward a certain kind of play. So /notsigned

Liberations · Jan 06, 2008, 08:27 PM // 20:27

Lets just simplify this:
A group that completes something with an all people party should be granted a bonus. Maybe 7 or more if its that difficult to find a pug. I don't think this would really encourage people to take part in PvP but rather create frustration in the long run. Maybe I'm wrong, but I do agree that there should be more incentive to PUG, without any disadvantages to have a Hero/Hench group. And yeah, there is a problem with Guild Groups abusing/ over using this feature.

anonymous · Jan 06, 2008, 11:16 PM // 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by strat_53711

I just picked an example that would encourage PUG play and non cookie cutter team formation.

How is encouraging PUG play good? You want to encourage me to play with bad players?(at least the majority) I'm not anti-social, I do things with my friends. But what if my friends are busy or don't want to do that? Then I should have to group with morons to get a reward?

How does it encourage non-cookie cutter formation? If by some chance I got in a PUG where I didn't know their skill level, I would have them all run cookie cutters that take no skill to run. If they refuse? Kick.

Meat Axe · Jan 07, 2008, 01:36 AM // 01:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woop Shotty

Ask yourself: Does the fact that a cross-campaign PvE player can craft a moa chick mini pet pet punish PvP-only players and folks who don't have different campaigns? NO, and moa chicks aren't even customized. The OP made a suggested end chest reward of a special customized mini pet. Not having such a thing would not be "punishment" for anyone.

Promoting sales for different campaigns is entirely different from promoting a certain playing style over another. In my mind, the only thing stopping people from buying the other campaigns is a monetary factor. Either they can't afford to spend more money on games, or they don't want to afford it. All the campaigns offer the same styles of play: solo with heroes and henches, and with human players. However, creating a "reward" for PuGing, whether it be simply cosmetic or not, is discriminating against those people who enjoy simply playing with friends, people that they have established a connection with and trust, or with AI.

Quote:

The guy suggested something that would be fun for a good while and that would give a fair reward that doesn't even affect the economy. Why sit and be jealous and act like if it's a terrible idea just because you don't think you'd want to participate?

It would only be fun for that section of the player base that likes to play with random people. That's what this thread is trying to establish. Some people do not like that style of play, and therefore should not be any less rewarded.

The fact of the matter is that, even if it is simply cosmetic, even if it does not affect the economy at all, it will affect the people who prefer to play solo or with friends. The only way to advance your character in any way after you have reached level 20 and completed the campaigns is with cosmetic things, whether that be with elite armour, or with titles, or with minipets. And it's not just a matter of jealousy, it's not a matter of wanting to show off. Sure, there are some people who get the nice cosmetic stuff to do try to prove something, but a lot of the players just do it so that they can improve their characters. That is the downside of having a low level cap.

I think the OP had some good intentions in mind, trying to find a way to prolong the life of the game. I don't think it's possible, but I also don't think it's particularly needed. I think there will be a large number of people playing until GW2 is released, and even after. Unfortunately, the game is slowly dying. I don't think it's quite dead yet, and I don't think it will be until closer to the release of GW2.

BlackSephir · Jan 08, 2008, 01:43 PM // 13:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alicendre

Either you never PuG or it's for Fort Ranik in NM, because most PuGs have okay builds...

Sure they do.
"tank lfg"
Oh, and what do you mean "ok build" ? Build that works in pve?

freekedoutfish · Jan 08, 2008, 04:02 PM // 16:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

Sure they do.
"tank lfg"
Oh, and what do you mean "ok build" ? Build that works in pve?

From my experience its usually that "any and all" builds work in pve. People in PUGs get miffed because they dont work the way "they want".

If you dont kill the big bad monster the way they want you to, then it means you build sucks. Regardless of whether that build can still kill the monster!

Uber Mass · Jan 08, 2008, 04:11 PM // 16:11

You just said one of the things i hate about pugging.... Shortsighted people who can only play wiki builds.

anyway ontopic why should we reward people who pug? seriously are you kidding me? Is pugging considered another sort of Hard Mode?

/sonotsigned