What Makes a Guild Wars Player Good?
M @ T
The first step in my opinion is to understand that Guild Wars is actually a game, meaning it is built to provide fun. Then comes the rest
Burst Cancel
Well, glacial, what do you think of the post below yours?
What's interesting to me is that this sort of attitude often (but not always) prevents people from taking the game seriously enough to actually be any good at it.
Again, more fuzzy, warm ideas that have absolutely nothing to do with being good at GW.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M @ T
The first step in my opinion is to understand that Guild Wars is actually a game, meaning it is built to provide fun. Then comes the rest
|
Again, more fuzzy, warm ideas that have absolutely nothing to do with being good at GW.
Devika
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
What's interesting to me is that this sort of attitude often (but not always) prevents people from taking the game seriously enough to actually be any good at it.
|
To keep on track however I would say battlefield awareness, communication skills, and being efficient at your role, all of which can be a trait of a casual or hardcore player.
M @ T
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
What's interesting to me is that this sort of attitude often (but not always) prevents people from taking the game seriously enough to actually be any good at it.
Again, more fuzzy, warm ideas that have absolutely nothing to do with being good at GW. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Devika
What's interesting to me is that people take a video game so seriously that they will waste their life away trying desperately to be good at it.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Devika
To keep on track however I would say battlefield awareness, communication skills, and being efficient at your role.
|
gerlin
Warriors in FoW armor with chaos gloves, tormented shield and tormented/destroyer weapon. And are W/Mo.. Everyone else is just bad. Maybe Assassins in labia.. eh.. Vabbian armor with chaos gloves that are A/E.
But now seriously, any player that understands that other people are on the other end and welcomes comments on his or her build and listens to them and maybe asks questions of why that skills is better then that skill.
But now seriously, any player that understands that other people are on the other end and welcomes comments on his or her build and listens to them and maybe asks questions of why that skills is better then that skill.
Burst Cancel
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Devika
What's interesting to me is that people take a video game so seriously that they will waste their life away trying desperately to be good at it. Just because someone likes to have fun, and not take a game so seriously that doesn't mean they cannot play the game or are unskilled. To make that stereotype is pointless because it is inaccurate.
|
What you consider to be worth your time and energy is frankly no one's business but yours.
Devika
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
Who is likely to be more skilled: the guy who takes the game seriously, or the guy who thinks it's "just for fun"? How many tournament-level players in any competitive activity are there that don't take it seriously - versus how many that do? The reality is that, with few exceptions, the guys that practice harder and think more are going to be better players. While relatively few people make it to the top tiers in the first place, failing to take something seriously is a good way to guarantee that you will never be good enough at it to matter - and that's true for pretty much anything in life.
|
You don't need to put thousands of hours into this game to be good at it. You just need to have a mind of your own and be able to apply key principles correctly.
mage767
A good player (in PvE) is one:
1) Who can provide his share of 'resources' to the benefit of the team? He knows how his build will impact his team. This also means all runneers are lazy and bad players.
2) Who can lead a bunch of pugs into treacherous missions (Frostmaw HM, etc), bonding them together with his advice, and crushing bosses without the need of cons, but sheer will-power alone.
3) Who creates the next-gen builds for pve related content to make it easier for everyone, and then shares it with others. He understands that pvx is not the Bible, and so does not follow it to the word.
4) Who has played through all professions and has experiemented with most of the skills. He constantly modifies his bar to adapt to his surroundings.
5) Who understands that heroes are a valuable resource and knows how to command them correctly. He equips them well with proper runes and weapons before battle to improve his chances of success.
6) Who doesn't believe in the concept of 'main' character or 'gwamm'.
1) Who can provide his share of 'resources' to the benefit of the team? He knows how his build will impact his team. This also means all runneers are lazy and bad players.
2) Who can lead a bunch of pugs into treacherous missions (Frostmaw HM, etc), bonding them together with his advice, and crushing bosses without the need of cons, but sheer will-power alone.
3) Who creates the next-gen builds for pve related content to make it easier for everyone, and then shares it with others. He understands that pvx is not the Bible, and so does not follow it to the word.
4) Who has played through all professions and has experiemented with most of the skills. He constantly modifies his bar to adapt to his surroundings.
5) Who understands that heroes are a valuable resource and knows how to command them correctly. He equips them well with proper runes and weapons before battle to improve his chances of success.
6) Who doesn't believe in the concept of 'main' character or 'gwamm'.
Burst Cancel
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Devika
Thinking that the only good player is one who plays in top flight PvP screams narrow minded. You don't need to be competitive to be good.
|
At least my judgment of good is based on an actual objective metric - tournament performance - rather than some handwaving about "applying key principles". So what are these key principles? How well do they have to be applied for someone to be considered good? How do you know?
Short
People who listen.
Devika
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
If what you say is true, that makes "good" pretty arbitrary, doesn't it? What makes your definition of "good" more reasonable (or, in your terms, more "open minded") than mine? Or is "good" just whatever you say it is?
At least my judgment of good is based on an actual objective metric - tournament performance - rather than some handwaving about "applying key principles". So what are these key principles? How well do they have to be applied for someone to be considered good? How do you know? |
Tournament play doesn't mean a thing. A player might be good in one aspect but that doesn't mean he is good at other aspects.
I've seen a R11 Hero from a top 50 guild fail horribly at PvE, not just once, but in several times in succession (I shall keep names out of this however). This isn't to say all PvP players are bad at PvE, but a point being made that being good at one thing doesn't mean you are good at everything and this should be taken into account accordingly.
As for my examples I have already given them, read back a bit and you will find them. If you disagree that they seperate the good from the bad, in pretty much any aspect of the game, then I would like to know why.
Destro Maniak
a good player is someone who reads wiki before doing something
Pepe El Telefonista
A good player is who can play with his guildies joking and laughing, who can investigate new builds and alternatives. And the last and more important thing....the good player is who can do all that i have wroten before and have social live!!!
Rocky Raccoon
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by glacialphoenix
(To be absolutely frank, I get most frustrated with the really nice players who have a terrible skillbar. You're really nice, it would be a joy playing with you IF ONLY YOU WEREN'T USELESS... frustrating.)
|
Burst Cancel
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Devika
snip
|
I don't see any examples from you in this thread (you have three posts in this thread, and all three were replies to me). Regardless, whatever attributes you could name are subjective and arbitrary. I'll give you an example. Suppose I said that good ranger players are those that can interrupt 3/4s casts on reaction (i.e., not guessing) >95% of the time at <150ms ping. Is this a necessary condition for being a good player? Is it a sufficient condition? Why or why not? There's no question that, all else being equal, a ranger player with quicker reaction times is more effective - but how quick is quick enough to be "good"? Similarly, more consistency is always good, but how consistent do you have to be to be "good"? You can apply the same thinking to any other attribute.
Ultimately, "good" is just a fuzzy term - in most cases it means whatever you want it to mean, and as Ensign said several months ago, people like to define "good" to include themselves.
Devika
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
You're missing my point. Tournament play is an objective metric - good players are players that win more. There isn't any way to fudge or spin this kind of metric. Who are the best Street Fighter players? Who are the best Starcraft players? Who are the best chess players? Who are the best tennis players? Invariably, it's the guys out there winning tournaments, setting records, etc. We can say, definitively, that Player A is better than Player B because A beats B, or A wins more than B. In fact, determining the best players is exactly what a tournament is designed to do.
I don't see any examples from you in this thread (you have three posts in this thread, and all three were replies to me). Regardless, whatever attributes you could name are subjective and arbitrary. I'll give you an example. Suppose I said that good ranger players are those that can interrupt 3/4s casts on reaction (i.e., not guessing) >95% of the time at <150ms ping. Is this a necessary condition for being a good player? Is it a sufficient condition? Why or why not? There's no question that, all else being equal, a ranger player with quicker reaction times is more effective - but how quick is quick enough to be "good"? Similarly, more consistency is always good, but how consistent do you have to be to be "good"? You can apply the same thinking to any other attribute. Ultimately, "good" is just a fuzzy term - in most cases it means whatever you want it to mean, and as Ensign said several months ago, people like to define "good" to include themselves. |
However I can agree with most of the rest though.
Oh and you'll find my example of what I think makes a good player (in any format) here on this very page:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Devika
I would say battlefield awareness, communication skills, and being efficient at your role.
|
glacialphoenix
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Risky Ranger
If they are truly nice people, I am sure if you were to suggest some changes here and there with an explanation on how to use them, they would be only too willing to listen.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
You've been citing tournament play, which I agree is an objective metric, but GW isn't just tournaments and PvP, and there are barriers to PvP entry besides ability of player. If your connection was erratic, you probably wouldn't PvP. If your connection is slow, you probably won't PvP, either - at least not in organized formats, much less in tournaments. It doesn't prevent you from wanting to play as well as you can and learning to compensate for limitations - these are things that can be done in both PvE OR PvP, and not just tournament play. IMO you can 'take the game seriously' in either format, and it's not fair to claim that playing purely in one makes you somehow less serious than the other.
(Those who want to win and are willing to think to win do do better than those who aren't, generally. But don't tell me winning isn't part of the fun.)
slowerpoke
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.
moriz
i've seen what it takes to be successful at PvE. let me tell you: it doesn't take much. apparently, a good PvE player, plays about as good as i can with one hand. this is purely from a mechanical execution point of view btw.
given above, it should be obvious why many people use PvP accomplishments as a metric for judging whether a player is good at guild wars or not. 'cause frankly, it doesn't take much to be good at PvE.
given above, it should be obvious why many people use PvP accomplishments as a metric for judging whether a player is good at guild wars or not. 'cause frankly, it doesn't take much to be good at PvE.
Burst Cancel
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by glacialphoenix
Those who want to win and are willing to think to win do do better than those who aren't, generally. But don't tell me winning isn't part of the fun.
|
I cite tournaments because they're a solid and conventional measure that are pretty much impossible to argue with. You can use objective measures for PvE too, but the community seems to think the bar is simply too low. For instance, the most obvious objective measure is beating the game; anyone who beats the game has succeeded in completing the normal content. Most people (or at least, most gurus posters) would find this to be a ridiculous metric. So let's increase the difficulty: beating every mission in the game in hard mode with bonus/masters reward, vanquishing every area, and clearing every elite area in hard mode. That's probably still not good enough, but we're starting to run out of non-arbitrary conditions. If clearing all of the content in the game isn't hard enough, all you're left with is artificial, player-imposed restrictions like "without consummables" or "without Shadow Form", etc. And really, you can just keep tacking those on until it fits whatever definition you were looking for.
Kook~NBK~
A skilled player will look for answers to problems.
A skilled player will be creative in character set up (Skill bars, runes, weapons, the whole she-bang) and can recognize when and why things will not work.
A skilled player will look for alternatives when skill updates happen and require changes to the meta instead of coming on Guru and QQing about things. (constructive criticism =/= QQ)
A skilled player has situational awareness. Recognizing methods of using terrain to one's advantage, enemy strengths & weaknesses, what and where other party members are doing, etc.
A good player has a fair degree of skill, may or may not be "1337" but won't be a burden to the rest of the team.
A good player will be courteous when discussing strategy & setting skill bars and stuff.
A good player won't give newbies grief when the newbie asks questions in Kamadan, AC, or anywhere else.
A good player will know what I mean when I tell beggers (in All Chat) "FREE MONEY!!!" See Ipillu Whupwup in Whitman's Folley!" (Bad players will think that I am Ipillu Whupwup!)
A good player will have a sense of humor and not throw a tantrum if something goes wrong.
A skilled player will be creative in character set up (Skill bars, runes, weapons, the whole she-bang) and can recognize when and why things will not work.
A skilled player will look for alternatives when skill updates happen and require changes to the meta instead of coming on Guru and QQing about things. (constructive criticism =/= QQ)
A skilled player has situational awareness. Recognizing methods of using terrain to one's advantage, enemy strengths & weaknesses, what and where other party members are doing, etc.
A good player has a fair degree of skill, may or may not be "1337" but won't be a burden to the rest of the team.
A good player will be courteous when discussing strategy & setting skill bars and stuff.
A good player won't give newbies grief when the newbie asks questions in Kamadan, AC, or anywhere else.
A good player will know what I mean when I tell beggers (in All Chat) "FREE MONEY!!!" See Ipillu Whupwup in Whitman's Folley!" (Bad players will think that I am Ipillu Whupwup!)
A good player will have a sense of humor and not throw a tantrum if something goes wrong.
glacialphoenix
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
However, competitive players don't see "fun" as the goal, in-and-of-itself. Improving or winning is the goal, and fun is the side effect. In competitive activities, not having fun is okay as long as you win; for casual players, not winning is okay as long as you're having fun.
|
I suppose we can definitely both agree that if you're going to play to win, play to win, and not hide behind excuses of 'it's just a game' to shield yourself against criticism.
Quote:
| You can use objective measures for PvE too, but the community seems to think the bar is simply too low. |
Quote:
| And really, you can just keep tacking those on until it fits whatever definition you were looking for. |
maxxfury
Someone who understands WHY things happen the way they do and how to react to situations correctly and effectively, and understands the reasons behind their skill choices and reasons a bar works or why it doesnt for the area/situation.
king swift
A good player is one who realizes that the game he is playing is a waste of life. So he quits.
Snow Bunny
before this turns into a PvP vs. PvE argument, I shall settle that -
the best pvp players in the world can do whatever pve they wish and be successful at it (dR showed us this)
the best pve players can't beat anything close to top pvp teams.
the best pvp players in the world can do whatever pve they wish and be successful at it (dR showed us this)
the best pve players can't beat anything close to top pvp teams.
Eskimoz
A good player shuts up, listens to the battle plan, and doesn't jump into the middle of an enemy group and spam aoe attacks until they die (3 seconds).
cataphract
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Island Guardian
What Makes a Guild Wars Player Good?
|
doomfodder
good GW players - are TEAM players (either PvP or PvE)
the best players in the game play as part of a team...
friendly & helpful attitude...
filling tactical roles in a timely manner...
incorprating ALL UI - radar, visual battle field, effects monitor, status bars...
timing skills instead of spamming...
NOT rushing in solo to try to spike...
focussing when targets called...
kiting to reduce damage pressure...
USING ints wisely !!!!
the best players in the game play as part of a team...
friendly & helpful attitude...
filling tactical roles in a timely manner...
incorprating ALL UI - radar, visual battle field, effects monitor, status bars...
timing skills instead of spamming...
NOT rushing in solo to try to spike...
focussing when targets called...
kiting to reduce damage pressure...
USING ints wisely !!!!
bugallnot
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dbulger
how fast they are in rollerbeetle racing.
|
Man, I won 8 out of the 10 i ever played. I must be godlike
A good player has to have a cool minipet!
bugallnot
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kook~NBK~
A good player won't give newbies grief when the newbie asks questions in Kamadan, AC, or anywhere else.
A good player will know what I mean when I tell beggers (in All Chat) "FREE MONEY!!!" See Ipillu Whupwup in Whitman's Folley!" (Bad players will think that I am Ipillu Whupwup!) |
I like these two, good players like to help out
king swift
A good player is someone who understands the game at a higher level than most and uses this understanding to build their knowledge and skills.
M'Aiq The Liar
Apparently in HA, it involves being able to tolerate listening to 7 total strangers work themselves up into a lather as soon as pressure starts to build. Which is why I'm not a good HA player. :P
therangereminem
a good player is somone thats full of his self thast right his not her lol j/k
a good player is somone that can listen and be envloved
a good player is somone that can listen and be envloved
Jecht Scye
Good players realize when they are not good at something, and make an effort to change for the better rather than making the same mistake over and over again. This is closely linked to stupidity.
In nature, the Dodo went extinct because it was:
A.) Delicious (apparently)
B.) Too dumb to move when the Dodo next to it was shot point blank with a gun
This is an example of stupidity, or not learning from yours, or another individual's mistakes. The same holds true in Guild Wars. You can take a perfectly viable build like a N/A Suicide Bomber build in Jade Quarry, and be absolutely useless to your team with it if you keep attacking a quarry guarded with a Mo/P, that is throwing Protection Spirit and the occasional Word of Healing and Dismiss Condition on one of the Quarries inhabitants. All this results in, is a wasted player slot for your team as you continuously throw yourself against NPC after NPC with no change in outcome. Instead, what said N/A Bomber should do, is find another quarry or point that is not being guarded quite as tightly, and try their luck there, or (quickly) notice the habits of the monk and strike when they are least suspecting.
To recap: learn from your mistakes, and you'll be fine.
In nature, the Dodo went extinct because it was:
A.) Delicious (apparently)
B.) Too dumb to move when the Dodo next to it was shot point blank with a gun
This is an example of stupidity, or not learning from yours, or another individual's mistakes. The same holds true in Guild Wars. You can take a perfectly viable build like a N/A Suicide Bomber build in Jade Quarry, and be absolutely useless to your team with it if you keep attacking a quarry guarded with a Mo/P, that is throwing Protection Spirit and the occasional Word of Healing and Dismiss Condition on one of the Quarries inhabitants. All this results in, is a wasted player slot for your team as you continuously throw yourself against NPC after NPC with no change in outcome. Instead, what said N/A Bomber should do, is find another quarry or point that is not being guarded quite as tightly, and try their luck there, or (quickly) notice the habits of the monk and strike when they are least suspecting.
To recap: learn from your mistakes, and you'll be fine.
Darth The Xx
I don't even know why people even brought PvE up in this thread, its like being able to beat computer players at WC3, it doesn't really mean anything. Anybody can beat a predictable, static and unchanging opponent, so seriously just stop posting about skill in PvE, cus it simply doesn't exist.
In terms of PvP, you know your good when you can consistently carry your RA team to 10 wins
In terms of PvP, you know your good when you can consistently carry your RA team to 10 wins
DreamWind
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Devika
I don't agree with you about Tournament play, because as I have already stated there is more to Guild Wars than Tournament PvP to be "good" at. Just because there are no tournaments for PvE it doesn't mean players don't strive to be good at PvE (and believe me there is a difference between a good PvE player and a bad one).
However I can agree with most of the rest though. |
dunky_g
blonde hair + nice legs = win.
Smarty
Maybe PvP has the only objective measure of comparative goodness of players, but there sure as hell are bad players in PvE. I therefore think it's relevant to say what makes a good player different from a bad player in PvE, even if you can't say which of the good players are the best when comparing them with other good players. If the OP had meant "What makes a Guild Wars player good at PvP?" then they should have stated that.
DreamWind
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mister Smartypants
If the OP had meant "What makes a Guild Wars player good at PvP?" then they should have stated that.
|
Dallcingi
In PvE a good player is someone that can find an excellent working build on PvX wiki vouched by the community and know how to run it.
In PvP a good player is someone that can find an excellent working build on PvX wiki vouched by the community and know how to run it.
In PvP a good player is someone that can find an excellent working build on PvX wiki vouched by the community and know how to run it.