Curse

Burton2000 · Jun 02, 2009, 04:00 PM // 16:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by psygnosis

...

Good point, was definatly the biggest mAT for a while I cant even remember the last time there was 7 rounds. The game is definatly not as active as it used to be but its far from dead.

Red Locust · Jun 02, 2009, 07:13 PM // 19:13

blast from the past

don't recognize anyone on the first 10 pages of the gvg ladder, other than iQ, who somehow ended up on the 8th page with half as many losses as wins

NaturesRenewal[Deer] · Jun 22, 2009, 02:35 PM // 14:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by psygnosis

What is with this the game is dead excuse train, the game really isnt dead at all. Yes many top players quit, yes no further Championchips and no Money and hardware prices made also some people quit and yes ofc that sucks that ncsoft/anet didnt put too much effort to establish Guild Wars as a real and wellknown esport title.

Then again just as much people quit out of other reasons, most players started to go to University or they just went on to other, newer games. There are so many people that quit out of several real life issues, and those are much more then the bubble of ppl that quit because they werent pleased with game balance or couldnt win money anymore... But just as much people moved up in their spots, the last mat had 7 swiss rounds with 65 participating guilds (only 1 or 2 forfeit right away, dont remember), what does that tell you? Enough people still like this game and play it on a regular and srs basis. So not all of these players were here since the start of Guild Wars, so? This doesnt make all of them bad just because they werent around when there was GWWC...

Well you admitted that a ton of people quit so I don't have to argue that point, but I think you may be a little misinformed that the people that "moved up" in their spots are just as good. From playing with a few unnamed top 100 guilds in the last month and watching on observer I really think that the average level of skill has decreased significantly. Not to say I'm way better then anyone because I'm playing like shit too, but there is very, very few organized teams that make me say dang those guys are actually good.

Also I get to use the "game is dead" arguement because I'm an american player. I dont want a usa vrs europe but the fact of the matter is is that for some reason tons of europeans still play and pretty much no americans play. Guild wars is a team based game and even if people wanted to come back its pretty difficult to field a team together.

Motoko · Jun 22, 2009, 08:39 PM // 20:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaturesRenewal[Deer]

Well you admitted that a ton of people quit so I don't have to argue that point, but I think you may be a little misinformed that the people that "moved up" in their spots are just as good. From playing with a few unnamed top 100 guilds in the last month and watching on observer I really think that the average level of skill has decreased significantly. Not to say I'm way better then anyone because I'm playing like shit too, but there is very, very few organized teams that make me say dang those guys are actually good.

Also I get to use the "game is dead" arguement because I'm an american player. I dont want a usa vrs europe but the fact of the matter is is that for some reason tons of europeans still play and pretty much no americans play. Guild wars is a team based game and even if people wanted to come back its pretty difficult to field a team together.

Guild Wars is a totally different game from when you were in a considerable guild compared to now. There are a good majority of players that did improve and did move into those spots based on skill. The whole thing is just a hard concept to prove and can only be proved if you had players from now and back then competing as hard as they both would in their primes.

There will always be bad top 100 teams, the game isn't competitive enough for that to be unavoidable. Of course, how good is the ladder at determining skill level?

There is also a different criteria when judging a guild now as opposed to back then. There are so many things going on in a match its really hard to be able to assimilate all the knowledge like that. Consistency against variety is pretty much the best indiciator of skill at this point.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Jun 22, 2009, 09:20 PM // 21:20

I'm pretty sure [Deer] was a prime example of a bad top 100 team..

Ex Death · Jun 22, 2009, 11:11 PM // 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaturesRenewal[Deer]

From playing with a few unnamed top 100 guilds in the last month and watching on observer I really think that the average level of skill has decreased significantly.

If by 'skill' you mean 'innovation' then yes, otherwise you are badly misinformed. Skill level of players or guilds can only be measured in a relative context based on the game's overall maturity. One thing is for sure: you don't become progressively worse the longer you play a game. There is far less innovation in the present game since all the regular strategies/plays are all pretty much widely known. It is also quite important to note that the expansions and skill balance has led to an overall dumbing down of the game where the most powerful builds will most likely not portray the same skill intensity of builds played 3 years ago.

To illustrate my point, I would consider any warrior playing right now who doesn't switch to elemental when attacking other warriors bad at the game. 3 years ago it would, in my opinion, still be possible to be good at the game without doing this since it wasn't fully established general game knowledge.

Red Locust · Jun 30, 2009, 05:49 PM // 17:49

Of course you don't become progressively worse, but the better players might leave and the overall skill level drops. It's happened in other games.

sir hepe · Jul 01, 2009, 03:41 PM // 15:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by [DE]

Confirm/Deny? I've heard mixed answers about whether or not he sold his account. Regardless, the account is currently sitting in [Gogo] which is a RenO 'smurf.'

I talked with some guys from [Gogo] a while back, and they told me Danjang is the original Danjang.

Ensign · Jul 03, 2009, 09:59 PM // 21:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ex Death

One thing is for sure: you don't become progressively worse the longer you play a game.

I most certainly got worse at GW for the year or so before I quit playing. You need pressure from several directions to really keep your game up in PvP. Once the game started to go, that pressure started to, and it became impossible to keep the level of play up.

The game is different now. Different skills are rewarded, and the bar is generally lower; the skills you need now are easier to learn.

I guess the argument is something like 'the game is now checkers, and current checkers players are better at checkers than the chess players of 2006 are at checkers!' How do you really compare these things when the glass is getting smaller faster than it's getting filled?

Reverend Dr · Jul 04, 2009, 12:26 AM // 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

You need pressure from several directions to really keep your game up in PvP.

Exactly this. I used to play competitively (or at least that was the attitude we held at the time, feel free to say that we were never good, we weren't) during prophecies and early factions. I watched my performance more, practiced required skills even when not in a match, watched more obs games. Hell after we were done for the night I'd watch our last match three times, once from each team's perspective, then once from my own.

Comparing that attitude towards my current apathetic attitude and it should be common since that any edge I may have once had, has long since slipped. Though in all fairness my trashtalking and words per minute has increased over the years.

Iotan · Jul 04, 2009, 01:24 AM // 01:24

I always look at it this way; is it more difficult to be in the top 5 when there are 20 competitive guilds or when there are 100 competitive guilds? No that doesn't help a whole lot about comparing different eras, but thinking that some famous guild from the past would not have stayed at the top if they continued playing doesn't make sense to me. These guilds changed with the competition during the times they were active so they could probably do the same now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

Comparing that attitude towards my current apathetic attitude and it should be common since that any edge I may have once had, has long since slipped. Though in all fairness my trashtalking and words per minute has increased over the years.

This is exactly where I am. If I can get through an RA match without saying "F you" to some moron using a terrible build then it's a miracle.

Ec]-[oMaN · Jul 04, 2009, 02:45 AM // 02:45

There's no comparison. What the game requires/demands now from the players back then and today is totally different.

I will say though back then with more simplistic skill sets, tactics and overall "mesh" mattered way more then, than today. Frankly everyone is entitled to their opinion. I've seen and played against it all, maybe not as often as the high ranks did back then, but I still played against them. Today I'd consider the game junk compared to then imo, the players, builds, and what the game requires for you to be successful.