Who makes up the Majority of GW players? PvP or PvE?

Hmmm.... so you're playing the trick where you take everything I say and serve it right back at me? Curiously your last two posts were exactly that.

Obviously we can't have a conversation. However if you don't see the condescending tone in your replies, even from the first and if you don't think that your first reaction to a constructive idea was: "if you don't like it go play something else" (must I really quote you again?), so if you don't think that is a problem... Could you do me a favor and go back to reading it all once more, from my initial post and your reply to the last. I beg of you, yes I genuinely beg of you to do so. If at least I manage to get this single point across to you, then all the posts I've made in this thread may not be in vain.

That is the last thing I have to say about this very welcoming attitude I found both here on the guru and in-game in PvPs area. People don't understand that I don't come here to post ideas or go to play in PvP areas because I'm looking to get "owned". Yes the PvP game is a fight with others in many ways and yes people want to win. But to take that mentality here on the forum or in outposts or when your forming parties... it's totally silly. But it is what's currently happening.

---------------------------------------
The main and only idea that I wanted to express in this post (as I thought it was clear): GW does not offer any reward whatsoever for playing the game, it offers a reward only for *teams that excel*.
(Also there is no incentive to get better, the little rewards that are there are not better based on how well you played, you either get something -the rare case- or you get nothing -the common case-).

And many little evils derive from that:
- forming a team with people you don't know is undesirable because you can't trust them to excel and help you achieve what you want to do
- all of us have experienced the huge frustrations of being so close when member X or Y of the party became inactive/disconnected/or just quited. And it isn't the *lack* of your gaming skills that caused you to fail in these kinds of situations. And when you spent several hours playing and get nothing at all, though you played perfectly and excelled all time... it sucks. I have 2 friends that quited just for that.
- frustration of failing in GW > feeling good about winning most of the time
- random/casual play is not favored - GW seems to be made for people that like to grind and/or invest a huge chunk of their time into the game, and all at once. There is no way to play 10 mins, get in a battle achieve some minor things, get out, leave. There is no way to answer the phone while you're playing. If you're playing an instance with a party size of 8, you basically have 8 people that are sequestrated by the game that can't do anything else at all. Since some zones/missions/battles can take a long time even a toilet break is out of the question. However you can't really tie people to their computers (which I sometimes think the designers of GW wanted to do since they added content to the game that requires 3h or more of commitment from 8 people), so people *will* take breaks no matter. And suddenly you see that the Mo is unresponsive and idle, cause he took a toilet break without saying a thing. And the party fails and possibly over 2h of each of the 8 involved people were wasted on absolutely nothing (except experience points for PvE which is irrelevant in gw).

So I've offered some possible solutions to make the game more casual:
- one solution could be: allow people to put an instance on hold/break/pause if one of the members of the team is lost and most importantly allow them to replace the lost member with a new one - yes that would mean allowing people to jump in and out instances - needed to bad
- if that is too hard to implement (probably is) then at least offer people at least some partial rewards for the partially completed objectives.

Most of the reward systems in GW are just badly thought and/or absent. It's black and white, with a 90% chance to come out black. So of course people get frustrated and want to play solitaire instead. And of course PvPers become elitists cause they look at minimizing liabilities instead of looking at maximizing rewards. And so on.

I wonder if what I'm saying here is really that hard to understand. So ANet, just make the game fun even if you fail and you'd have gone a long way.

and that is the best advice anyone can hope to give you. you are looking for a game that is not guildwars. you can try to do the stupid thing and try to TURN guildwars into such a game which rewards you just for participation and one you cannot possibly fail with no regards to your ability (and there are such games), or you can do the smart thing and much more effective thing and go look for such games.

do keep in mind such suggestions are not made with a condescending "tone", but with an exasperated "tone". you are looking for a game to basically coddle you, and give you a free treat even if you epicphail. guildwars was not designed to be such a game, and trying to make it into such a game is just dumb.

Still playing the game where you serve me back my words I see.

Just so you possibly, maybe, miraculously somehow get it:
1) I am playing GW for almost 3 years now and I am not looking for another game, nor am I looking into turning GW into something else. And I am still playing.

2) A person that is making a suggestion to improve something is not looking for something else, he's just looking for improving the something he's suggesting. Unless you think that GW is perfect (which seems to be true!?), then there is definitively room for improvements.

3) GW rewards are at one extreme currently.

4) "try to TURN guildwars into such a game which rewards you just for participation and one you cannot possibly fail with no regards to your ability" is another extreme.

5) Who was talking about extremes besides you? I was looking for the better combination between 3 and 4, so that GW changes from being extreme to a more middle ground position.

6) Being able to hold 8 people active for 3h so you can complete a game goal has nothing to do with "your ability". Although you seem to believe that failing because one person suddenly decided to rage quit/disconnect/answer the phone is miraculously connected to your gaming skills. Forgive me for failing to see the connection.

7) "trying to make it into such a game is just dumb" - therefore I as the person who suggested it must be dumb as well. I've tried to get back from personal affronts (although your initial reply was way insulting and over the line) and give the conversation a second chance and I'm "dumb". Well thank you!

I'm sorry, but you really aren't worth my time. All the best.

1) i've been playing it for just as long, and i'm still playing. the game, aside from certain balance issues, is fine.

2) a person making suggestions is one thing. a person trying to change game fundamentals is another. you are effectively trying to turn a bicycle into an airplane.

3) there's nothing wrong with that reward system.

4) that's the extreme you are looking for.

5) you are looking for #4 exclusively.

6) taking 3 hours to do something kinda speaks badly about your ability to play. even if you are talking about one of the "elite" zones, then you should get all parties prepared for the time/effort it takes. to me, failures based on those seems to indicate the inability to prepare, which also is a facet of gaming ability. after all, the game is partially based on preparation.

7) i'm not saying YOU are dumb, i'm saying that the SUGGESTION is dumb. things won't sound so personal if you stop taking everything so personally.

of course i'm not worth your time, you're wasting it all by trying to do 3 hour instances (or somehow making otherwise shorter instances into 3 hour ones) when you don't have the right people for the job.

its already too late for that .___.

r.i.p. the guild wars we once knew and loved


it is quite clear that most ppl prefer superficial gameplay experiences

Glad you sorted my mind out. I had no clue I was looking for that. I feel much better now that I know

This thread was trying to uncover some of the reasons why this game is played so much in solitaire mode. You, in your perfect little world where people you play with prepare ahead and have perfect little gaming skills will never get it why the majority doesn't play in the perfect little way you do.

I for one have a job, I can't afford to prepare 2h for a 1h gaming round. So if I like it or not, I solitaire most of the time. But obviously there is nothing wrong with that. Or so would one say if one listened to you.

PS: And yes, I was talking about DoA HM. Last I played it was when the Mo left right in front of the chest (at the last group of the forge) "because he wasn't resurrected first" after a couple of party members died. Because you know, the Mo must be res first or else you're a noob. And so we failed after investing time in it that I could have invested in doing something else (as I don't have unlimited time at my disposition as school kids do). And so I've never went back there, and I will only go back there if I would solo it (or with heroes). Which I can do btw. But that is besides the point. The is exactly why I am not in PvP as well. Similar incidents, and I've just never bothered to go back and waste my time. And since I don't believe I am so unique, it's a reason why some people PvE and usually avoid other people. But you don't seem to understand this aspect of the game.

Your ignorance is bliss. Really.

How about fun?

I or someone more interesting than I am, should start a poll:

How does guild wars feel?
1) Like fun?
2) Like a second job?

Would be curious of the outcome. And fun doesn't mean superficial gameplay experiences. I had tons of fun playing StarWars Lego. And wasn't at all superficial. It was a fun game. So was GW in times I can barely remember now.

thats exactly the problem test
the gw community has problems functioning together

what is anets solution?
make it easier to play solo so u dun even have to bother to try to function as a community


edit: to be more clear
all communities will face problems
in this particular case, anet went bout the wrong way to deal wit it
well not wrong, if u -want- ur game to be a solo experience...which i think most ppl do
but to me, this is not wut gw originally was, and definatelly not wut i wanted it to turn out to be


edit #2: regarding ur poll and my intention of "superficial"
the poll is flawed because many will say "fun" when really the only "fun" part is the "reward" -- hence, its a "superficial" kind of gameplay
aka ur doin it for the 'ends', not for the 'means'

a good example is ursan (oh noes, not again o__o)
ursan was used a lot
but if u really aks ppl...did they use it because they really thought ursan was fun to play?
or did they do it because it got them their $$$$ even faster than before? (which results in it, seeming more "fun")

superficial

I have played so many computer games in my time that I have lost count.
Never, before I started playing Guildwars, have I heard people loudly arguing that the game should be changed to be more this or less that.
A few years ago you accepted a game as it was or moved on. There was no third option.
I believe that we have all been spoiled into demanding more and more.
Unfortunately, we cannot agree on what we want less of and what we want more of.
So, even if there was an army of programmers with unlimited resources standing by to take our requests, I doubt the result would be much better than what we have now.

An example:
In Pv (one of the two) a skill is found to be overpowering in a certain combination, so, after complaints from the community the skill is changed.
Unfortunately the skill is now completely useless in Pv (the other) and so again the community wants it changed.
After changing skill back and forth for a long time, it occurs to the dev's that they can divide the skill into effectively two skills, tweaking them separately so they will now be to everybody's satisfaction.
Now both groups complain that it is too hard to move back and forth between the two groups making an even wider gap between the two styles of game play.

It stands to reason that the people who have a vested interest in this game would try to make it the best game they can.
But, listening to some of the arguments here, it sounds as if they are suspected of being either incompetent or of have stopped trying. Personally, do not think either is true.
Balancing all of our combined wishes into one game is simply put harder than creating lasting peace in the Middle East.

Almost forgot: play nice children!

I agree with you. But I think the problem is more in the game design than in the community. One cannot expect people to "prepare" before playing a game, or being available not even for 10 continous mins. The would have provisioned the instance system from the very start with a system to get in or out.

They also shouldn't have made it so much of an all or nothing. Shades of gray are very welcomed here and would keep people interested. When it's all or nothing you need to decide: do you take the risk of adding another person to your party or just go solo?

Also the reward system could have been so that it rewards better gameplay better, over still completing the goal but sucking at it. Now you just quest rewarded for completing goals, no matter how.

Can things be drastically improved? No. Can they address some of the issues? Probably. They should try making playing with other people less of a liability, however I've seen nothing in their updates in that direction.

Seriously.

------------


Anyway, without reading the entire thread:


The majority of players play PvE.
This is quite obvious. Most PvPers do not just play PvP, despite what alot of people think, they play PvE aswell.

So yeah.


ANet catering to the PvE'ers makes sense, since that is their largest playerbase and they want to keep them.

I think this is the natural direction in which games evolve. And will so. And it's not without precedent. StarCraft caused huge discussions as well, and wasn't even an mmo.

With this I disagree. I am a programmer myself, and I've ofter heard colleagues or users of our software that it is impossible to do things better or please anyone or etc. And most of the time it was proven to be wrong.

However they've got you thinking that the only way to solve issues is to nerf. That isn't true, it's just what they are doing. They could introduce new monsters or new skills or new content to counter overpowered skill combinations. Probably there are many other things they could do.

But at the very least, and what they don't seem to understand, is that they need a sociologist on their team. This is not a solo game you play alone at home anymore, they need qualified people to tell them how to design their software so that people enjoy an online multiuser experience. They can't ignore how humans behave online or when playing games or when playing games online with other millions of people. They must learn to accommodate for that.

At the very least they must learn to accommodate with one guy out of a party of 8 needing to respond to nature's call. At the very least. Probably too late for GW, but hopefully will be considered in GW2.

I mostly play pve as my guild is more centred that way although I do some RAing.

I think the problem is that a lot of people want this game to be what it originally was. It isn't that we are demanding more, it is that we don't want the game to cave in to the demands of others. Unfortunately it has already mostly done that.

Somebody above brought up an excellent point. When Guild Wars first came out it was a highly skill oriented team game. Over time Anet changed their game to a more fail-safe solo game. The philosophy of the game is completely different now. Yes games go through changes, but I consider these radical changes. I literally consider Guild Wars a different game today...essentially unplayable to me compared to Prophecies/Factions. To me it is a tragedy among games...but fortunately for Anet they still have a lot of PvE players who won't care or even see the tragedy that occurred.

Anet's biggest mistake was pandering to what people wanted for short term gain. Inscriptions were good and useful for a while, but it quickly took away the joy of id'ing and finding weapons. At least before a high req weapon with 15>50 was still treasured by a lot of ppl. Same goes for pvp. People complained that pvp was too hard to get into, so they did the 6v6 crap for a while. What happened? Lots of people quit. GvG's mechanics got changed so many times it became ridiculous. People wanted better henchmen, so they got heroes which effectively killed what GW started as (a brilliant cooperative rpg. Now it is just a shitty single player rpg that just so happens to take place online)

Sadly, I must agree.

They had to implement heroes, there was no choice there. Consider a new player coming in. Most of them don't know anyone, would probably not get a guild soon, so they start up by soloing or PUGing. Well PUGs are not an option anymore, and without being able to solo most of the new people would have probably quited the game before they would even end one single chapter.

Heroes were a try to lower the insane game requirements: you need 8 active people that can commit to 1h or more of uninterrupted gameplay to play anything. Very few people can meet this requirement, so we got heroes.

Had they designed things so that only parts of the content would be so demanding and most of the content would be accessible to much smaller parties (or on a come and go when you like basis), things would have been different. (I guess that's why they implement a persistent world in GW2, because it allows just that. But they could've done better even with instances by allowing people to get in and out an instance or launch party invites from within the instance to people outside it.)

pvp in gw 2009?

isnt killing AI called pve? lawl, i just burned norgu and gwen. gg

I knew that Gwen was a Witch [Savannah Heat] <3

The post of Inde,thats just Epic go Inde

Make this poll in theguildhall and you will get a very different result. This isnt really a fair poll, since this forum is mainly being used by PvE players..

Thats is not true Gladiator's Arena

I PvP, or used to anyway. Don't really play the game much anymore.

I was way into PvE when I first got into the game, but before Factions came out I got bored with it. For each of the expansions I played through them once or twice, but that's about it.

What's the point of that link? It doesn't prove anything.. just look at the people viewing that and compare it to the people viewing Riverside or The Campfire.

You know I'm right.

TGH has been dead for years as far as being go-to pvp forum (glad arena has been better).

He is some what right although half of them would say both.The Guild Hall is more dedicated and has always been towards PvP as this board is more PvE.The Guild Hall is the one the campaigned for Balthazar Faction but they wanted more than that complete UAX.I even helped.

Ever since I started GW, I'd pretty much been a PvE person. With the introduction of the Gamer title and having most things done on my main PvE character, I've recently moved more into doing PvP, although not to such a professional extent as GvG.

I'd say I play both right now fairly evenly, even though I used to consider myself as a 100% PvE player.

PvE > PvP always. I like pvp but i find it way too repetitive and dull after a few months.

Which is exactly what many people say about PvE...

Heh, may I blame my inactiveness in Guild Wars for the past year and a half for that?

I play more PvE than PvP because I find it more relaxing, and, being a casual player, suits me very well. I'm playing PvP from time to time, but tends to be quite frustrating for me, sometimes.

My experience with PvP: I'm casting Se... [skill]Concussion Shot[/skill]. Usually followed by the sound of daggers and my scream of death.

No, I rather play PvE. With the only exception for Aspenwood, Jade Quarry and AB where I focus on quickly eliminating (nuking) enemy NPC's.

both for me.

I do lots of JQ and AB along with some RA/TA
but not high end PvP. its no fun.
"r2 glad or r5 HA req" blah blah blah" is too frustrating.

Most PvE i do is helping guildies/alliance members, farming, and some titles

Poll is pointless, everyone knows it's PvErs. Otherwise Anet wouldn't have taken the direction they took.

pvp is more fun and challenging. pve is mind numbing.

PvP is largely dead (even in non-organized RA and AB where population is usually big), lot's of people running around with GWAMM or high rank KoaBD.

You do the math, or listen to this guy:

since everyone knows pve makes up the majority of gw players who gives a crap what people at guildhall would vote for

Because if people at guildhall voted mostly PvP it would make it true obv.

3+ years in and I still haven't PvP'd to any discernable amount.

I got roped into TA once with my former guild and was told I'd have to monk - a profession at which I truly suck. Went in, tried to cast my first heal and wham! - knocklocked for the entire (brief) match. Didn't get a single spell off. Never went again.

Did wander into HA with a competent team once (well, competent minus one, obv.) - that was a blast. I'm too aware of my shortcomings to do it any more though, which is a shame really - I feel like I'm missing out on half the fun of GW.

hmm i always thought anet would nerf things because there trying balance pvp and nerf cheap farming builds xD....

i pvp and im r10... everytime i go on this website most of the threads here are pve related or about gw2, TBH i think pvp players are better in the game due to the fact they know the skills better whether pvp or pve