An Open Letter to ANet - Part 2 - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

Targren

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Aug 2007

Primeval Warlords[wuw]

R/

17 Jun 2008 at 17:43 - 721

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Stop being idiots with DLDU arguments.

the thing is that most players are going to use it because it's available.

Manitoba, if you're not doing a damned excellent job of trolling on purpose, you're quite apparently an idiot.

Here's the thing everyone - judging by what we've seen ANet do with their current game, there are no indicators that they will deviate from that course with Gw2 and make it a stale WoW-lite with no replayability and imbalanced bullshit. It won't be fun, pvp will suck, and it will be yet more money wasted that could have been better spent on a dozen jamba juices.

So for manitoba and all the other fools arguing with Avarre, keep that in mind.

Reader's Digest condensed version: "If the way things are going doesn't bother you as much as it does us, you're an idiot because we are always right, and here is some unfounded speculation to prop up that point."

Get over it.

Abedeus

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Jan 2007

Niflheim

R/

17 Jun 2008 at 17:46 - 722

Get over it = watch one of your favorite games turn into a crapfest? No, thank you. Go away.

sph0nz

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2005

none.

W/

17 Jun 2008 at 17:52 - 723

Quote:

Originally Posted by Targren

(emphasis mine)

Look at your own reasoning.

YOU want to do FoW/UW a certain way.
OTHERS want to do it a different, easier way.
So YOU want to force THEM to change THEIR playstyles to suit yourself.

If your friends/guildies aren't available to do what you want, your way, when you want to, then either get more friends/guildies, or just grow up and realize that it's not all about you.

Disclaimer: None of my chars even have UB, but this QQing is ridiculous.

lulz.

Either way you're being "forced to change your playstyle" bawwwwwwwwwww. The difference is that ursan is terrible for the game, and any other real build is not. The norn blessings are extremely absurd skills in the way they function; no other skills allow you to take one elite skill with that has 5 other skills attached, and still allows you to take seven other skills along.

So instead of making a build with real skills, you're imposing that everyone must grind to rank 10 norn to do UW/FoW/etc. Because imposing title discrimination is so much better than imposing profession discrimination, mirite?

People need to learn to take criticism instead of crying about somebody "changing the way they play their game" whenever somebody imposes a better idea on another player.

kostolomac

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2008

Serbia

Me/

17 Jun 2008 at 17:59 - 724

Heroes and pointless pve titles ruined the game for me. It's nothing more than a single player game that is played while you are online. That's sad. It's even sadder than ursan , I would rather PUG my way through a campaign rather than H/H it , it seems that almost everyone else uses H/H. At least ursan made us make 8 man groups like in the proph/fact days.

zwei2stein

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Jun 2006

Europe

The German Order [GER]

N/

17 Jun 2008 at 18:03 - 725

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

...

An alternative, though impossible now:

With EotN you should have increased the level cap in PvE to 30, working retroactively so most people would hit it right away. Keep the cap on attributes at level 20 to 12, but raise it to 20 or higher at 30.

You can then have these skills balanced for PvP at an attribute level of 12 (excluding runes), but they can go nuts after that. This effectively splits the skills in a way that doesn't add any extra garbage to the game and is very intuitive.

...

While agreed with other stuff, this thing: NO F WAY!

power creep wars is what made PvE joke to begin with.

Rocky Raccoon

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2007

Massachusetts, USA

Guardians of the Cosmos

R/Mo

17 Jun 2008 at 18:07 - 726

"No matter what side of the argument you are on, you always find people on your side that you wish were on the other."
Jascha Heifetz
Russian-American violinist (1901 - 1987)

This post will go on forever and no one will convince anybody of anything.

Kyuzo_Kujii

Ascalonian Squire

Join Date: Jan 2007

Ascalon Arena Champions [AA]

Mo/

17 Jun 2008 at 18:38 - 727

Ignoring what people have posted lately on this post, I have to express my support for the initial letter in this thread. I agree being that I have played guild wars, not since the very beginning, but since Factions, before Nightfall came, and before the destruction was completed. I have two cents to put in, but it is summed up in the above letter. Good post, ANet take notice, please read this and take it into consideration. I do want to love GW2, i love GW1 and I wish to continue this unique form of gameplay and enjoy what you have created. But please, take this into consideration.

/signed

imnotyourmother

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Mar 2008

in a house

The Knitters Guild

W/R

17 Jun 2008 at 18:39 - 728

I am convinced that GW2 will either be the BOMB or will be a BOMB.

Kyuzo_Kujii

Ascalonian Squire

Join Date: Jan 2007

Ascalon Arena Champions [AA]

Mo/

17 Jun 2008 at 18:47 - 729

Agreed, they will either take our concerns into consideration, or ignore them. One will create an amazing game that can rule the mmo market, and the other will fall into normalcy. We will see, honestly im excited for beta testing, i want to give my two cents

sph0nz

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2005

none.

W/

17 Jun 2008 at 18:59 - 730

Quote:

Originally Posted by imnotyourmother

I am convinced that GW2 will either be the BOMB or will be a BOMB.

Same here. Especially with the way Anet is currently handling things; I've already lost some hope for GW2.

Yawgmoth

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Apr 2005

17 Jun 2008 at 20:00 - 731

I still have high hopes in GW2, it should be safe up to the moment they will start working on GW3.

Crom The Pale

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Nov 2006

Ageis Ascending

W/

17 Jun 2008 at 20:16 - 732

GW can't be "fixed" since the flaws are fundametally integrated into almost every aspect of it.

To go back now and rebalance each profession, the AI for all monsters as well as monster skills/bars.....just not going to happen and we all know that.

GW2 gives them an oportunity to restart the game with a better designed set of professions, better ballanced both internally and externally as well as creating a new environment that has the proper balance that will allow more creative players to integrate thier own ideas into the characters they play rather than just grabing a single template that others found works best and running it.

GuildWars is now only a testing ground for some ideas they haven't decided upon yet for GW2.

Yawgmoth

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Apr 2005

17 Jun 2008 at 20:41 - 733

GW1 doesn't seem like a testing ground for GW2 stuff, they don't test anything here, they barely change anything at all.
But there may be 1 thing they test - how the community will react if they don't address any important issues for a very long time.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

17 Jun 2008 at 20:53 - 734

GW1 isn't much of a testing ground - there's been little in regards to "testing", from what we've seen, in relation to GW2 - but something that contains a lot of things ANet can learn from.

Shakti

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Sep 2006

Home...

Vier Reiter [Vier]

17 Jun 2008 at 21:06 - 735

This is the post that never ends
It just goes on and on my friends..

Some people started arguing
Convinced that they were right
And they'll continue endlessly
with Trolls who like to fight...

This is the post that never ends
It just goes on and on my friends..

Martin Firestorm

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Dec 2005

Louisiana

E/Me

17 Jun 2008 at 21:06 - 736

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

GW1 isn't much of a testing ground - there's been little in regards to "testing", from what we've seen, in relation to GW2 - but something that contains a lot of things ANet can learn from.

Changing the functionality of some key skills for pvp and pve would be one example.

Crom The Pale

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Nov 2006

Ageis Ascending

W/

17 Jun 2008 at 21:17 - 737

Not all tests are going to be obvious or easy to spot, they could be changing the code for AI's and we would never really know unless it had a major impact on the way monsters acted or used thier skill bars.

The changes to skills in PvE, now that its split will most likely be a test of how to balance each profession, rather than buffing/nerfing skills just for the sake of it.

Add to that we have very little idea of what GW2 will be like, so anything could be a test for it. The simple little buff they give low lvl chars, first in the Consulate Docks mission and later in GWEN, could be a test for a feature in GW2.

DreamWind

Forge Runner

Join Date: Oct 2006

E/Mo

17 Jun 2008 at 21:23 - 738

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manitoba1073

So in other words you want one of these. They are fun to play with at times but not really my style. More power to you as it wouldnt effect me at all. or if you wanted to use the lower one wouldnt bother me at all because that would be your choice and decision, Instead you want to force everyone to use the lowest one.

You mean look there for a worse picture. See heres the problem once again. You are wanting to force your playstyle on others, its your way or noway. So finally afterall the posts in this thread you finally admit its nothing more than a QQ on the PvP side of the game.

Do you realize how ridiculous what you are saying actually is? DLDU is a retarded argument on so many levels. I could sit here and type an entire essay on how garbage it is. Honestly I think you are borderline trolling to induce flames from people at this point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kostolomac

Who said ursan is a problem? You said that , for me it's not. It's a solution to mask the unbalance before ursan , however that attempt failed miserably , we can all see that.

Therein lies the problem. If you don't agree with what Avarre originally stated, than you need to give legit reasons why. There have been plenty of legit reasons for agreeing with it. Saying "don't like it don't use it" is not a legit reason in the slightest, and that is what 90% of the people that don't agree are going with.

Quote:

Originally Posted by targren

Reader's Digest condensed version: "If the way things are going doesn't bother you as much as it does us, you're an idiot because we are always right, and here is some unfounded speculation to prop up that point."

Get over it.

Then get over this thread. This thread and forum is for fans of Guild Wars who have watched it go down the toilet. Get out of the thread if you don't want to add anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

GW1 isn't much of a testing ground - there's been little in regards to "testing", from what we've seen, in relation to GW2 - but something that contains a lot of things ANet can learn from.

It isn't a testing ground at all. Anet isn't testing anything...they are simply showing that they don't know how to run their game. Any decent company would not wreck their game like Anet has done, especially one as epic as Guild Wars used to be. I'm convinced that the SOLE purpose of Guild Wars 1 now is to keep people busy with grinding their HoM so they have incentive to buy Guild Wars 2. It has no other purpose at this point...and the way things are being managed is clear evidence of it.

Nightow

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Kindred Order of Souls [KOS]

17 Jun 2008 at 22:50 - 739

I'm kind of surprised this has not been mentioned yet but Regina posted a reply to section talking about this very thread. I thought I'd go ahead and put it up here for everyone to read.

Source: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User_...Letter_to_ANet

Quote:

The core philosophy behind GW design, which is "have fun now" was behind those decisions. The designers are well aware that they can't please everyone, and that trying to please everyone is an exercise in futility. Not all parts of the game will appeal to everyone. So what do the designers do? They look at how most players are playing the game. For example, they saw that people who liked PvP wanted to get in the game and play right away without having to spend too much time unlocking skills ("Have fun now" -- remember?), so they made changes accordingly. The devs have read that open letter thread on Guru. I've discussed what the OP was concerned about with James Phinney. He knows that there are facets of the game that could use some work, and there are also facts that will not change at this time. We haven't abandoned GW1. One of the main issues we are facing here, which I have talked about time and again, is resources. Our design and programming teams currently spend most of their time on GW2 and some people split that time with GW1 responsibilities. You all feel like no one is listening, and for example that's why I'm working with the developers to get more frequent and detailed Dev Updates so you get the explanations about game changes that you want. --Regina Buenaobra Image:User Regina Buenaobra sig.png 19:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Quote:

I don't think you actually understand the design underpinnings behind GW1. The game wasn't designed to be an MMOG. It's obvious that the storyline is linear -- it has a beginning and an end. This is in contrast to MMOGs, where there is no end. I think there is a problem about expectations. Because it is an online game, players expected the same depth as subscription MMOGs. You don't have that with GW1. Instead you have a very flexible game that allows players to become involved in a linear story and also allows for balanced, arena style PvP play. Guild Wars is not an MMOG and for you to expect the same things you expect from MMOGs or even traditional offline RPGs is a little unfair. The decision to add ranks and titles wasn't arbitrary; these decisions came from observing how players play the game. GW1 is a three year old game. Currently, there are no plans to add additional storylines or major content to it. We are working on making the sequel even bigger and better than GW1, and I do think that your desire for character development and storytelling will be addressed in GW2. --Regina Buenaobra Image:User Regina Buenaobra sig.png 18:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

RotteN

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jun 2005

W/

17 Jun 2008 at 23:04 - 740

Quote:

I don't think you actually understand the design underpinnings behind GW1. The game wasn't designed to be an MMOG. It's obvious that the storyline is linear -- it has a beginning and an end. This is in contrast to MMOGs, where there is no end. I think there is a problem about expectations. Because it is an online game, players expected the same depth as subscription MMOGs. You don't have that with GW1. Instead you have a very flexible game that allows players to become involved in a linear story and also allows for balanced, arena style PvP play. Guild Wars is not an MMOG and for you to expect the same things you expect from MMOGs or even traditional offline RPGs is a little unfair. The decision to add ranks and titles wasn't arbitrary; these decisions came from observing how players play the game. GW1 is a three year old game. Currently, there are no plans to add additional storylines or major content to it. We are working on making the sequel even bigger and better than GW1, and I do think that your desire for character development and storytelling will be addressed in GW2. --Regina Buenaobra Image:User Regina Buenaobra sig.png 18:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I find it funny that she actually states GW was never ment to be a MMO, yet all the changes pushed it that way.

I seriously hope they get back on their original design plan. Otherwise i'm aiming for other games than GW2.

Crom The Pale

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Nov 2006

Ageis Ascending

W/

17 Jun 2008 at 23:12 - 741

The split between PvP and PvE skills after 3years of people playing with united skill bars is all the proof that I need to know they are testing concepts in GW for GW2.

Now they can manipulate skills in PvE without having any effect upon the PvP players who have concerns about ranks and tournaments. They will guage the reaction of PvE players and make further adjustments as needed or leave the skill alone. Either way they will know how to tweek GW2 to best suit those who they expect to purchase it.

Edit: the original design for GW was a PvP game with an intro that was PvE. You were only meant to play PvE untillyou maxed out your level, which happend very near the end of the game, and then move onto PvP. Players forced them to rethink this design and they have been adapting it ever since.

Chthon

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Apr 2007

17 Jun 2008 at 23:25 - 742

Quote:

Originally Posted by [email protected] page

The core philosophy behind GW design, which is "have fun now" was behind those decisions.

Exactly which part of grinding up to R10 Ursan so that one can get into PUGs is having fun now?

Snow Bunny

Alcoholic From Yale

Join Date: Jul 2007

Strong Foreign Policy [sFp]

17 Jun 2008 at 23:31 - 743

Mmm....I really do hate to attack Regina on this...but...

"Have fun now", as marketed, stated to me that I wouldn't need Godslaying equipment to be any good at the game, and that my performance would rely on my skill.

"Have fun now" does not in any way translate to "LAWL BLOW SHIT UP"

I also have a very serious question - they state they will not alter certain things - Ursan and Hero allowance past 3, namely. They often cite technical impossibilities as their reason. In the past, they cited that same reason as protestation against the PvE/PvP split, and have since proven the ability to do so.

Where does that leave them credibility wise?

Nightow

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Kindred Order of Souls [KOS]

17 Jun 2008 at 23:34 - 744

No but I believe this "Have fun now" part is related to example from before.

Quote:

Because let's face it, No one likes being one of those 5 professions that's stuck in the outpost while the other 5 are in there, actually experiencing the game.

DreamWind

Forge Runner

Join Date: Oct 2006

E/Mo

17 Jun 2008 at 23:58 - 745

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

The core philosophy behind GW design, which is "have fun now" was behind those decisions.

Is that the new core philosophy of GW design?? Where was the official announcement of this change in philosophy? Where is it on the advertisements/boxes?

Looking at the Prophecies box and various interviews with founders, I see what was originally the core philosophy (skill>time and competitive). When did it change? Why did it change? These are the answers some people are looking for, because the change in philosophy is the sole reason overpowered crap like Ursan and inbalance exists. In some ways I like the change (if it helped fulfill your original philosophy), but all other ways I don't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

I don't think you actually understand the design underpinnings behind GW1. The game wasn't designed to be an MMOG. It's obvious that the storyline is linear -- it has a beginning and an end. This is in contrast to MMOGs, where there is no end. I think there is a problem about expectations.

I find this a bit hilarious. The game wasn't designed to be an MMOG (which I agree with), yet all the changes made to the game have pushed it that way? Makes perfect sense!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

Because it is an online game, players expected the same depth as subscription MMOGs. You don't have that with GW1. Instead you have a very flexible game that allows players to become involved in a linear story and also allows for balanced, arena style PvP play. Guild Wars is not an MMOG and for you to expect the same things you expect from MMOGs or even traditional offline RPGs is a little unfair.

Then players expected something from that game that it wasn't meant to be, and you gave it to them. You changed the entire core philosophy to meet the expectations of a group of people who bought the game, even though you had bigger goals in mind to begin with. That linear story was what kept a ton of people buying, but the PvP is what was supposed to keep people STAYING (at least until the next linear story release).

In other words...you say people shouldn't expect the same thing from Guild Wars as other games. I agree completely! So then WHY WHY WHY did you go and give them the same thing that other games offer instead of what made your game unique?!?!

Savio

Teenager with attitude

Join Date: Jul 2005

Fifteen Over Fifty [Rare]

18 Jun 2008 at 02:27 - 746

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightow

No but I believe this "Have fun now" part is related to example from before.

Quote:

Because let's face it, No one likes being one of those 5 professions that's stuck in the outpost while the other 5 are in there, actually experiencing the game.

The solution would be to design PvE areas where they do contribute significantly, or conversely not design PvE areas where the main goal is to LAWL BLOW SHIT UP. Also, design better professions.

Celestial_Kitsune

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jun 2006

Me/

18 Jun 2008 at 03:33 - 747

Here is why no change on Ursan so far:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

Regarding Ursan Blessing. We just had an informal meeting and the designers are currently evaluating what options they have to change the skill, whether to change it, and how much to change it. Why is there a question on whether to change Ursan Blessing, given the amount of vocal player hate of the skill? Isaiah ran a query to get a general estimate of how many people have the skill on their bars, and it was not an insignificant number. If the skill is changed, it will affect a huge number of players. The main issue being debated with regard to Ursan Blessing is the massive impact this will have on the playerbase. Sure, there are a lot of people on the wiki and on the forums decrying Ursan Blessing, but the designers have to weigh this feedback against hard numbers. Any change to this skill, no matter how small, will affect a large number of players. Having said that, they know this is an issue, and they are going to run some tests starting tomorrow. --Regina Buenaobra Image:User Regina Buenaobra sig.png 00:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User_...t_situation.3F

Here is the game Anet is playing:

Quote:

The game involves setting zones with level ranges, trying to keep them distributed so your servers don't overload ("due to the coding practices of ShadiSoft"), making sure there are enough towns and respawn points, and trying to keep monster and class stats on keel. Your primary metric for success is your forum buzz, you want more positive posts than negative, and the main factor for this is how hard or easy the game is. Here's where the punchline starts getting set-up: no matter how well you do a portion of players will complain the game is too easy, and a portion will complain the game is too hard. However, as long as you've got some content in, and you've got a half-competent balance, people will play, get addicted, and you'll grow, even though your churn rate might only be slightly lower than your growth rate. And you'll make money. You only have to get the basics down and then just let the game run. The implication is that you don't need a good game, you just need an addictive game. It smacks you in the face with a procedural resonance, the derivative names of the rival MMOs are just icing on the cake.

http://playthisthing.com/mmorpg-tycoon

manitoba1073

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2006

ManitobaShipyards Refit and Repair Station

(SFC)Star Fleet Command,(TDE)The Daggerfall elite,(SOoM)Secret order of Magi

18 Jun 2008 at 04:22 - 748

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Stop being idiots with DLDU arguments.

the thing is that most players are going to use it because it's available.

Manitoba, if you're not doing a damned excellent job of trolling on purpose, you're quite apparently an idiot.

Here's the thing everyone - judging by what we've seen ANet do with their current game, there are no indicators that they will deviate from that course with Gw2 and make it a stale WoW-lite with no replayability and imbalanced bullshit. It won't be fun, pvp will suck, and it will be yet more money wasted that could have been better spent on a dozen jamba juices.

So for manitoba and all the other fools arguing with Avarre, keep that in mind.

Haha funny post there SB. JFYI, I was playing PvP (GvG, HA) long before you had that twinkle in your eye about the game. I was there playing it before Anet went carebear on PvP. Keep this in mind there are players that know more than you do.

These changes have been the culmulation of what the QQ has been crying for in PvP.

They now have all the reason to be able to make any changes to PvP without having to even have any kind of second thought at all about PvE. You cant be serious in trying to play off as that is a bad thing. The split should have been done the day Anet made it possible to have PvP only character creation.

Buzzer

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Nov 2005

Australia

18 Jun 2008 at 04:27 - 749

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

Random Chance/Luck factor
40/40 sets, Catapults, probably more that don't immediately come to mind.

It adds very little to the game, and as far as PvP goes it's actually a negative. One of the more minor points, but worth mentioning.

Good post on the whole but I disagree here.

All RPGs need to have some randomness to artificially create interesting outcomes. Could you imagine your axe doing 20 damage on every hit with no crits?

Maria The Princess

Forge Runner

Join Date: Mar 2006

Aequitas Deis

18 Jun 2008 at 04:45 - 750

i agree with everything Avarre has said, i am sad to see so many of my friends being in offline status for months, and i get even sadder to see that the time i spend on this game lately isnt as satisfying as it was even 1 year ago, let alone 3 years.

this is the 1st online game i have ever played, and in the end it still is my favorite, since even after breaks i come back to it. it is just that lately the breaks have been longuer and the stay time shorter.

i know games change as they develop, but i miss that concept of knowing that if you dont know the area, dont expect to beat it at 1st time.

/signed

Avarre

Bubblegum Patrol

Join Date: Dec 2005

Singapore Armed Forces

18 Jun 2008 at 05:04 - 751

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzer

Good post on the whole but I disagree here.

All RPGs need to have some randomness to artificially create interesting outcomes. Could you imagine your axe doing 20 damage on every hit with no crits?

Luck is generally not a good thing to have in competitive gameplay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

For example, they saw that people who liked PvP wanted to get in the game and play right away without having to spend too much time unlocking skills ("Have fun now" -- remember?),

PvP edition was requested in 2005. It took until the release of NF to remove requirements for PvE characters and even longer to get something resembling purchasable unlocks (and they were ridiculously overpriced). That is not good response time to one of the most major concerns of part of the playerbase. In fact, it is downright embarrassing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

Because it is an online game, players expected the same depth as subscription MMOGs. You don't have that with GW1. Instead you have a very flexible game that allows players to become involved in a linear story and also allows for balanced, arena style PvP play.

Complete non-answer, ignoring just about everything regarding character design and tactical depth. Go Team CR!

As said, in that case why are you trying to MMORPG-ize PvE content while PvP stagnates? You don't need huge content or non-linear gameplay to create depth. Character design and tactical function is just as important - the fact that ANet doesn't recognize this is not good.

Sab

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Dec 2005

18 Jun 2008 at 05:52 - 752

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

One of the main issues we are facing here, which I have talked about time and again, is resources. Our design and programming teams currently spend most of their time on GW2 and some people split that time with GW1 responsibilities.

A bigger issue is the devs not having a clue what they're doing. They have the resources to roll out skill updates, but not the understanding to roll out skill updates that would be good for the game.

Buzzer

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Nov 2005

Australia

18 Jun 2008 at 06:50 - 753

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Luck is generally not a good thing to have in competitive gameplay.

Generally, but the game wouldn't work without, for example, hit chance modifiers.

Lord Sojar

The Fallen One

Join Date: Dec 2005

Oblivion

Irrelevant

Mo/Me

18 Jun 2008 at 07:01 - 754

You know what the arguing in this thread shows? That you all care a lot about Guild Wars and what is best for it. That is something pretty special I think. Arena Net should be proud they have fans like you guys, devoted to their game and its well being.

Do try and keep the personal flames down a wee bit okies? I would hate to see this great thread closed and devolve into a pile of Ursan bitching feces.

This thread is quite different from many other Riverside Ursan complaint threads. It doesn't mention Ursan as being a primary problem, and it is extremely well written, not rude or insulting, and is very mature. Statements such as the one you have written are the opposite of that. Please refrain from posting slander; you simply didn't read the thread or didn't bother to think of it on a deeper level. Most veteran players agree with this thread or have quit and don't care anymore. The truly devoted players commented and agreed.
'

manitoba1073

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2006

ManitobaShipyards Refit and Repair Station

(SFC)Star Fleet Command,(TDE)The Daggerfall elite,(SOoM)Secret order of Magi

18 Jun 2008 at 07:37 - 755

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

You know what the arguing in this thread shows? That you all care a lot about Guild Wars and what is best for it. That is something pretty special I think. Arena Net should be proud they have fans like you guys, devoted to their game and its well being.

Do try and keep the personal flames down a wee bit okies? I would hate to see this great thread closed and devolve into a pile of Ursan bitching feces.

This thread is quite different from many other Riverside Ursan complaint threads. It doesn't mention Ursan as being a primary problem, and it is extremely well written, not rude or insulting, and is very mature. Statements such as the one you have written are the opposite of that. Please refrain from posting slander; you simply didn't read the thread or didn't bother to think of it on a deeper level. Most veteran players agree with this thread or have quit and don't care anymore. The truly devoted players commented and agreed.
'

While other truely dedicated and veteran players also disagreed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sab

A bigger issue is the devs not having a clue what they're doing. They have the resources to roll out skill updates, but not the understanding to roll out skill updates that would be good for the game.

You mean that some people think would be good for the game and not necessarliy actually good for the game.

RotteN

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jun 2005

W/

18 Jun 2008 at 09:14 - 756

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzer

Generally, but the game wouldn't work without, for example, hit chance modifiers.

GW has TONS of skills/upgrades that have such chance modifiers. However, boldly claim they couldn't be replaced is bullsh*t.

TCoS ( http://tcos.com/ ) at least claims to have a full combat system that has no chance modifiers at all. I haven't been able to test it fully though since i'm waiting for my #@é#§# download limit to reset to re-install the closed beta client. And even then, i'm not allowed to say anything about it, damn NDA's ...

EPO Bot

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Aug 2006

Mo/N

18 Jun 2008 at 10:43 - 757

What if they allowed only one norn blessing of each type in any party? Still pretty cheapass, but allows/forces the use of other builds as well. I think it could be a good compromise: Let the least skilled players use blessing wile the gaming gods walking amongst hordes of noobs (i'm talking to YOU) can use their extremely advanced skilbars to outdamage them.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

18 Jun 2008 at 12:40 - 758

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Firestorm

Changing the functionality of some key skills for pvp and pve would be one example.

The skills in GW2 were stated to have different effects in different circumstances. Meaning that a skill would work one way when you jumped and used it and another way if you crouched and used it. The PvE/P split does little.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

I don't think you actually understand the design underpinnings behind GW1. The game wasn't designed to be an MMOG. It's obvious that the storyline is linear -- it has a beginning and an end. This is in contrast to MMOGs, where there is no end. I think there is a problem about expectations. Because it is an online game, players expected the same depth as subscription MMOGs. You don't have that with GW1. Instead you have a very flexible game that allows players to become involved in a linear story and also allows for balanced, arena style PvP play. Guild Wars is not an MMOG and for you to expect the same things you expect from MMOGs or even traditional offline RPGs is a little unfair.

Just wanted to say that I fully agree with this. The only problem is ANet went ahead and turned it more into an MMO anyways, and in a very bad sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by manitoba1073

While other truely dedicated and veteran players also disagreed.

I find it a bit hard to be consider a veteran "dedicated" when he thinks it a good idea to turn GW into more of a grindier MMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by manitoba1073

You mean that some people think would be good for the game and not necessarliy actually good for the game.

If those "some people" are players who play, converse, and observe how the game is played each and every day then I'd consider their input reliable.

Inde

Site Contributor

Join Date: Dec 2004

18 Jun 2008 at 13:50 - 759

Pumpkin, man I'm going to seem so bitter but I swear I'm just posting a response here:

Guild Wars was never "technically" marketed as an MMOG in Anet's eyes. They stated repeatedly that it was a CORPG. BUT... big but, they are riding the coattails of the MMOG market but still massiver multiplayer on-line game fits the description of Guild Wars (I would challenge someone to argue that Guild Wars is NOT a massive multi-player on-line game. Most people now days see this as a description for the interaction in the game and not a storyline). Guild Wars was trying to be very, very unique and they succeeded in the beginning in that regard. The gameplay, mechanics, were quite different from the other MMOG's on the market. But categorizing your game yourself (as Anet did) technically put it in a place all by itself.... with no competition. So it's a catch, is this either the best and the worst CORPG (thinking about it, it would be forced to be both if it's the ONLY game in this category)? Or you compare it to the games that it's remarkably similar to.

Personally, despite what Anet marketing says... everyone knew it would be compared to other MMOG's. Even Anet knew that. You can't self-categorize your own game and then complain when people try to compare it to similar games on the market today. Especially since no other games have come out into that category as well.

Edit: And... he deleted his response. Fine, I'll address it to Regina then :P

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

18 Jun 2008 at 13:57 - 760

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inde

Edit: And... he deleted his response. Fine, I'll address it to Regina then :P

Who, me? If so then dang, I thought it would've been considered off topic : (

edit:...which, interestingly enough, this post turned out to be...