Endgame? [Video]

[Deleted]

they actually are. you can be skilled but because the game "plays" for you through your gear you actually need less skill for a successful result. in all honesty stat progression just allows you to make more mistakes, hence the reason why you can be less skilled but because you have better gear than the encounter you still win and at that point skill doesn't become a deciding factor, just a bonus affecting the speed at which you are successful, not whether or not you will even be successful in the first place.

By that logic everyone in WoW/Rift/etc. would perform equally well if they have equal gear. But we all know that ain't true.

[Blznsmri]

By that logic everyone in WoW/Rift/etc. would perform equally well if they have equal gear. But we all know that ain't true.

There's a difference between skill and competency.

In WoW all you have to know is your priorities (DPS Rotations, Tank Priorities, Who to heal and what spell to use), and what hurts you (fire, falling, cleaves, tail whips, gimmick mechanics (fucking atramedes...)). Once you know that, the game practically plays itself.

[Odeezee]

By that logic everyone in WoW/Rift/etc. would perform equally well if they have equal gear. But we all know that ain't true.

i don't see how you came to that from what i wrote. what i said was you need equal gear to actually show player skill, which is the only thing that matters in games as it is the only input gamers have into the game world that the game does not provide. otherwise why not just bot and let the game completely play for you?

[ddsad2212]

What about 10 dungeons with 30 different "hard modes?"

Sounds interesting, by 30 different hardmodes i really hope thats not each dungeon haha :P, but ya if theres a good proper hardmode thats in the right direction for me, but id personally like one or 2 hardmode dungeons only, it mite sound greedy but ive never liked the idea, do one mode - do a bit harder of a mode with the same general idea on every boss, thats to me lazy . But ya we will see how it turns out

[Blznsmri]

Sounds interesting, by 30 different hardmodes i really hope thats not each dungeon haha :P, but ya if theres a good proper hardmode thats in the right direction for me, but id personally like one or 2 hardmode dungeons only, it mite sound greedy but ive never liked the idea, do one mode - do a bit harder of a mode with the same general idea on every boss, thats to me lazy . But ya we will see how it turns out

Each dungeon will have 3 different explorable "paths" after you complete the story mode. Each one of those are fundamentally harder than the story mode (Story mode is puggable, Explorable modes require group cohesion and planning).

You're not running the same dungeon with just an increase in damage and health, you're running four different dungeons really.

[ddsad2212]

Each dungeon will have 3 different explorable "paths" after you complete the story mode. Each one of those are fundamentally harder than the story mode (Story mode is puggable, Explorable modes require group cohesion and planning).

You're not running the same dungeon with just an increase in damage and health, you're running four different dungeons really.

A kk that sounds very very good, ty for the info i dont no where people get it half the time lol i looked but never seem to find any worth while info:P

[Blznsmri]

A kk that sounds very very good, ty for the info i dont no where people get it half the time lol i looked but never seem to find any worth while info:P

4 years of following this game helps...

[Deleted]

-10 for that silly laugh and mockery of the PandaREN and the Monks.

Don't promote your opinions on downing something else, and downing those that enjoy that "something else".

I'm allowed to laugh over the current state of WoW. If you're getting worried about that I think you've landed in the wrong forum.

My videos aren't exactly catered towards the common wow fan anyhow... if you didn't guess that already.

[Deleted]

There's a difference between skill and competency.

I'd love to know how one can be competent without being skilled.

In WoW all you have to know is your priorities (DPS Rotations, Tank Priorities, Who to heal and what spell to use), and what hurts you (fire, falling, cleaves, tail whips, gimmick mechanics (fucking atramedes...)).

And yet a huge amount of the population fail even on those things, which just reinforces what I said: gear doesn't make players good nor does it make content trivial if the players don't even know what buttons to press. And there's more to skill than just that, like e.g. reacting to unexpected occurrences is something that separates average people from the more-skilled ones. Just as an example an average person does his or her role well, avoids the usual stuff, does reasonable enough DPS or healing for their gear and all that, but doesn't pay any attention to how the other people in their group are doing because that's not their job. A more skilled person on the other hand is ready to pop combat ress when needed, or can throw an additional Lay on Hands/Hand of Sacrifice/PW:S/whatnot to people that are on the edge of failing, and similarly they're also ready to assume make-shift role of another player should that player suddenly die.

That is my point and you can argue it all you like, the fact remains that gear simply doesn't do everything for you and your actual skill and preparedness can possibly play a very large role in the outcome.

[Fencers]

a goal is the only thing required to "keep" a guild together be it for a illusory stat increases (WoW, SWTOR, Rift) or cosmetic choice (GW1, GW2).

And the latter gets old. GW1 endgame was run it once or twice and forget about it. Totally anemic compared to running Ssra Temple or Hammerknell, as examples.

I enjoy the raid experience and progression path a lot. Don't jump to the conclusion that means I don't enjoy non-raiding as endgame. What I am specifically concerned with is how well Anet can provide robust PVE endgame content on par with AAA MMOs such as WOW, Rift and SWTOR. In design and incentive.

ummmm, what?!!! having 50% emphasis on the content in a game being PvP oriented and having "enough" PvE content in a game to satisfy people are NOT mutually exclusive.

Here let me clarify this. If I am playing an MMO, I am not interested in the PVP aspects. To that end, such an MMO will need to provide frequent, well designed PVE content with a long term hook and sense of constant progression to satisfy me.

At no point am I interested in being at endgame and saying, "Well, I ran all those missions/dungeons and got my upgrades/toys. Guess I will PVP a little since there is nothing else."

the nature of their PvE content is different from most other games as it is designed for HIGHER replayability (side-kicking up and down, scaling) and the devs have already stated that they will add new content to the game right after launch and some DEs they will not be put in patch notes as they want people out in the game world exploring.

Sounds great. Hope they can deliver.

secondly please explain to me how a DE can devolve into a mindless zerg-a-thon when the event ACTUALLY scales in difficulty with the number of players participating? people need to stop with thinking GW2 will be zerg friendly, zerging is a way to overwhelm and trivialize content through sheer numbers in traditional MMOs like WoW, SWTOR, *Rift* as their content DOES NOT SCALE.

Simple. Hit the thing(s), respawn, do it again. As 10, 20, 30,... players do the exact same thing whittling down the DE by attrition. Some times, players might have to click a thing(s) instead of hit them.

Also Rift's DEs do scale within the zone. A level 30 invasion doesn't scale to 50 when a endgamer walks over- true. However, DE density, mob HP and damage output scale based on the number of players and average level of the zone.

That said, the way Rift's open world content works out in actual practice is a total failure, IMO. Rift claimed their invasions and rifts were gonna be complex things but the truth is they are just hack-n-slash nonsense. Easily overpowered by gear or respawn parade. Hope GW2's DEs live up to the hype and aren't trivial or simplistic affairs.

I am totally suspicious of all open world content since Vanguard/FF11. Most of it has been trash.

Open world content can only practically be designed in such a way that only non-participation can cause failure. DEs have to be designed with the assumption 20,40,60... players in the area are incommunicado. To some extent they have to bank on the fact the goals and sub-goals are simple and straightforward enough players do them by a matter of course if nothing else.

In open world, encounters tend to be slapdash. With Sally the Elementalist running over there, Josh the Warrior standing in fire and Tim the Thief pulling trash mobs. Yet it all doesn't mean a wit because Sally can't wipe the zone through non-awareness, Josh's incompetence doesn't eat valuable resources in the encounter and Tim pulling those extra mobs doesn't overwhelm the entire raid/public group.

In a controlled and instanced encounter, the actions of each person are responsible for the collective success or failure of the group. You have to play well and smartly. Not just show up to smash baddies, so to speak as in open world.

Open world as endgame? I doubt DEs as a practical mechanic of meaningful, challenging and complex gameplay for the end of game in an MMO.

so basically you are saying that Explorable Mode versions of the Story Mode dungeons are akin to Expert Modes in Rift? did you even read about what they are? or read the numerous game reviews of the experiences game writers had in dungeons back in June of this year?

Yes. But it doesn't change the fact I'm still in the same dungeon zone with variations.

There might be 20 variations of Catacombs. But without progressive upgrades or new zones, I am simply running Catacombs. I can get that in Vindictus or Diablo 3 with more intriguing possibilities to the metagame.

32 dungeons is marketing. I doubt 8 dungeons are enough for a robust endgame if say undead burst through a wall on run #100 vis-a-vis lizard men bursting through a wall on run #99. You are still in Catacombs and there is no upgrade cycle.

the content GW2 is offering actually has no competition at the moment so your comparison is flawed. the way in which it's content is consumed and the replayability of said content is different from any other MMO out or coming out so you have to use different criteria to make an objective comparison. endgame in traditional MMOs has to be structured a specific way as it follows a specific set of rules and mechanics, GW2 endgame does not.

This is a lot of nonsense really.

GW2 is competing for the dollars and time of players just as SWTOR, Rift and Mist of Pandaria will be. What makes up their endgame and it's potential to hold on to players long term is really my only concern. It's fine that GW2 are following a different scheme for their endgame.

I understand GW2 will likely get the time & dollars of those not (or less than) enamored with the endgame of the WOWs and Rifts out there. Question is; will GW2 offer enough awesome content for players such as myself; hardcore PVE players who look to their endgame to be content rich w/ progression cycles and emphasis on solid team (guild) dynamics?

people should remember that end game is only prevalent in it's current "raid or die" form as it is something people have grown/learned to expect because it was popularized by WoW and then adopted by subsequent MMOs. that does not mean that it is the only form of end-game content or even the "best" form of end-game content. GW2 may not be perfect, but it is laying the groundwork through innovative mechanics and game design the lend themselves to a different end-game experience that may end up being what people now refer to as "the end-game" content when looking at current and future MMOs.

We shall see.

I would like to see more of a EQ1/2 style of endgame in a modern MMO which had VERY high end raiding and lots of PVE progression outside of that as well. Waiting on EQ Next, I suppose.

[Odeezee]

And yet a huge amount of the population fail even on those things, which just reinforces what I said: gear doesn't make players good nor does it make content trivial if the players don't even know what buttons to press. And there's more to skill than just that, like e.g. reacting to unexpected occurrences is something that separates average people from the more-skilled ones. Just as an example an average person does his or her role well, avoids the usual stuff, does reasonable enough DPS or healing for their gear and all that, but doesn't pay any attention to how the other people in their group are doing because that's not their job. A more skilled person on the other hand is ready to pop combat ress when needed, or can throw an additional Lay on Hands/Hand of Sacrifice/PW:S/whatnot to people that are on the edge of failing, and similarly they're also ready to assume make-shift role of another player should that player suddenly die.

That is my point and you can argue it all you like, the fact remains that gear simply doesn't do everything for you and your actual skill and preparedness can possibly play a very large role in the outcome.

in your examples you are showing how skill plays the most important part in encounters, because if you actually look at what you are saying you are basically arguing for us in that skill and not gear should make the player. we're just saying since that is the case what's the point of gear progression after the level cap since it does not make you more skilled it just allows you to make more mistakes and still be successful?

and stat progression, for any players skilled or not who figure out the fight mechanics, leads to trivialized content as when they get new gear they become more powerful hence making success alot easier. in GW2's system everything you earn will be a hard fought fight as your power stays the same even after you figure out the mechanics of a given fight and get the new cosmetic gear, you won't be able to afk or relax and let your gear pick up the slack.

[Barrowmore]

What I am specifically concerned with is how well Anet can provide robust PVE endgame content on par with AAA MMOs such as WOW, Rift and SWTOR. In design and incentive.

The incentive for doing the content is...to do the content. Isn't that common sense, considering it's a game? As for design, we've been shown proof that the game is difficult. Even in purposely undertuned demos people were 2-3 shot in normal DEs, let alone the world bosses.

such an MMO will need to provide frequent, well designed PVE content with a long term hook and sense of constant progression to satisfy me.

There is a fluid story between all the dungeons planned thus far. That could be a sense of "progression", but if stat progression is what you're looking for than GW2 is not for you.

Simple. Hit the thing(s), respawn, do it again. As 10, 20, 30,... players do the exact same thing whittling down the DE by attrition. Some times, players might have to click a thing(s) instead of hit them.

As far as we know, DE scaling in GW2 consists of mobs hitting for more damage, additional mobs spawning, and mobs gaining additional abilities. The more players that participate in the event, the harder it becomes. Simply put, it will never be a zerg.

Open world content can only practically be designed in such a way that only non-participation can cause failure. DEs have to be designed with the assumption 20,40,60... players in the area are incommunicado.

Wrong. GW2's DE system is confirmed to account for players that aren't participating enough when scaling and removes them from the equation. What exactly "participation" means is unconfirmed at this point.

[ddsad2212]

4 years of following this game helps...

haha aye suppose i cant hope to hear much in the 4 months ive been following it:P , but ya it looks great just pray for beta to be given a date soon

[Odeezee]

And the latter gets old. GW1 endgame was run it once or twice and forget about it. Totally anemic compared to running Ssra Temple or Hammerknell, as examples.

I enjoy the raid experience and progression path a lot. Don't jump to the conclusion that means I don't enjoy non-raiding as endgame. What I am specifically concerned with is how well Anet can provide robust PVE endgame content on par with AAA MMOs such as WOW, Rift and SWTOR. In design and incentive.

first, GW1 != GW2 . second, if the experience is fun then the content can be replayable regardless of the "prize" at the end. third, raids in GW2 are out in the open world for anyone to experience. fourth, GW2 uses a completely different design philosophy and mechanics compared to other AAA MMO titles. however, this does not mean that GW2's way of doing things is inferior to the others, it is just different.

now let me ask you people who want stat progression through gear a question, after you have all your gear for a given tier do you stop playing the game and do you wait to have your "power" reduced just so you can get it back with acquiring "new" gear when there is a new patch/content update? and if that is the case what about this system actually makes you feel more powerful if the so called power is only an illusion (Skinner Box)?

Here let me clarify this. If I am playing an MMO, I am not interested in the PVP aspects. To that end, such an MMO will need to provide frequent, well designed PVE content with a long term hook and sense of constant progression to satisfy me.

At no point am I interested in being at endgame and saying, "Well, I ran all those missions/dungeons and got my upgrades/toys. Guess I will PVP a little since there is nothing else."

you act as though PvP is mandatory. if you don't want to PvP, then don't. and just because the game has PvP does not mean that it infringes on the amount of PvE content you have i don't get how one has anything to do with the other, especially in GW2 where they are completely separated. /shrug

Simple. Hit the thing(s), respawn, do it again. As 10, 20, 30,... players do the exact same thing whittling down the DE by attrition. Some times, players might have to click a thing(s) instead of hit them.

i think you do not get what it means to zerg. that is not zerging and the fact that they are dying and ressing to try and complete the mission should show that the encounter is too difficult for them to complete in the first place.

Open world content can only practically be designed in such a way that only non-participation can cause failure. DEs have to be designed with the assumption 20,40,60... players in the area are incommunicado. To some extent they have to bank on the fact the goals and sub-goals are simple and straightforward enough players do them by a matter of course if nothing else.

In open world, encounters tend to be slapdash. With Sally the Elementalist running over there, Josh the Warrior standing in fire and Tim the Thief pulling trash mobs. Yet it all doesn't mean a wit because Sally can't wipe the zone through non-awareness, Josh's incompetence doesn't eat valuable resources in the encounter and Tim pulling those extra mobs doesn't overwhelm the entire raid/public group.

In a controlled and instanced encounter, the actions of each person are responsible for the collective success or failure of the group. You have to play well and smartly. Not just show up to smash baddies, so to speak as in open world.

Open world as endgame? I doubt DEs as a practical mechanic of meaningful, challenging and complex gameplay for the end of game in an MMO.

haha, alot of assumptions made to try and validate your point don't you think? how do you know how DEs "have" to be designed? just because people are not on vent does not mean they cannot figure out how best to effect the DE to bring about success it's called adapting to the situation, what are you even basing this on? please, how can you say how DEs are when we have only seen very few of them in action, do you have an inside scoop the rest of us are not privy to?

Yes. But it doesn't change the fact I'm still in the same dungeon zone with variations.

There might be 20 variations of Catacombs. But without progressive upgrades or new zones, I am simply running Catacombs. I can get that in Vindictus or Diablo 3 with more intriguing possibilities to the metagame.

32 dungeons is marketing. I doubt 8 dungeons are enough for a robust endgame if say undead burst through a wall on run #100 vis-a-vis lizard men bursting through a wall on run #99. You are still in Catacombs and there is no upgrade cycle.

what? haha, wow. ok so let me get this straight, just because the instance you are in is called Catacombs even though the part that you are in looks distinctly different from the other 3 and also has unique mobs and boss mechanics it is not a different experience because it's still in the same instance as the others? but if they were to add "progressive upgrades" then that part of Catacombs would feel different? and there is an upgrade cycle as you say, it is just a cosmetic upgrade instead of a stat one.

This is a lot of nonsense really.

GW2 is competing for the dollars and time of players just as SWTOR, Rift and Mist of Pandaria will be. What makes up their endgame and it's potential to hold on to players long term is really my only concern. It's fine that GW2 are following a different scheme for their endgame.

I understand GW2 will likely get the time & dollars of those not (or less than) enamored with the endgame of the WOWs and Rifts out there. Question is; will GW2 offer enough awesome content for players such as myself; hardcore PVE players who look to their endgame to be content rich w/ progression cycles and emphasis on solid team (guild) dynamics?

wow, what do you not understand by GW2 is not competing with other MMOs out now or coming out soon as far as content is concerned? let me break it down for you, if i was a player and i wanted a stat progression instanced raiding experience i have WoW, SWTOR, Rift, etc to pick from. now if i wanted a completely different experience from that what are my options? yes you guessed its just GW2. GW2 like i have said before has progression it is just a different type of progression, just like EQ had a different end game from WoW which took the outdoor encounters of EQ and put them in instances instead and that has become the norm, GW2 is just trying to change that convention.

[Fencers]

The incentive for doing the content is...to do the content. Isn't that common sense, considering it's a game?

I won't be playing the same Catacombs for a cosmetic item 20,50,100 times. Even if there was a lizard man who cast a fireball instead of a ice missile on run #75 or a giant showed up to toss a rock on run #20 but was nowhere to be found on run #105.

You either have to have an incentive to get me back to the same zone for the 50th time or give me a stream of new zones.

As for design, we've been shown proof that the game is difficult. Even in purposely undertuned demos people were 2-3 shot in normal DEs, let alone the world bosses.

Taking these claims of challenge with a grain of salt until the game is being run by serious guilds/players who know what they are doing and have the goal of smashing that content on live.

PUGs thrown together made up of some press and fanboys dying to trash mobs doesn't mean a thing. Let's see what happens when the Vodka, Paragon, Violent Impact caliber players of GW2 get in there on live.

As far as we know, DE scaling in GW2 consists of mobs hitting for more damage, additional mobs spawning, and mobs gaining additional abilities. The more players that participate in the event, the harder it becomes. Simply put, it will never be a zerg.

You truly believe if super DE mob showed up if 5 players began beating on him, 2 died / 3 are still whittling his HP down, 2 run back, 2 more die, run back, etc-- that attrition won't eventually defeat those DE super mobs?

Now multiply that by however many players are beating on these mobs. Open world encounters are often just attrition matches. Now matter how inflated those mob HP scales.

Wrong. GW2's DE system is confirmed to account for players that aren't participating enough when scaling and removes them from the equation. What exactly "participation" means is unconfirmed at this point.

There is no "wrong" until we see it on Live. I am aware of what Anet claim. Rift claimed the same things as well- and even had betas were it was so. Not so much in actual practice though.

Open world encounters are often attrition fights, hack-n-slash mob waves or zergs. It has never worked in any game I played except... FF11, kinda.

I highly doubt DE mobs are suddenly going to turn into C'thun or Alsbeth mechanics in open world when the 151st player joins/leaves the fray. Open world encounters HAVE to be defeat-able by random PUGs regardless of role and skill. As designers they can't create encounters in any other reasonable sense. The only way to truly fail at these encounters is by; A. doing nothing about it or B. failing to collect/click the thing(s); non-participation.

Hit things/respawn/hit more things again * #players. Changing "Hit things" to "collect things" on the fly is not going blow my mind.

DEs as endgame... raised eyebrow.gif

[Deleted]

you are basically arguing for us in that skill and not gear should make the player.

I think you've misunderstood me somewhere. I never said anything different, I've always said skills matter and they should matter.

we're just saying since that is the case what's the point of gear progression after the level cap since it does not make you more skilled it just allows you to make more mistakes and still be successful?

The point is simply that it FEELS like you are progressing, ie. it feels like you're getting atleast some tangible reward for your effort. Of course it only matters until the next patch hits, but until then you're one step closer to having the best stuff you can get. It doesn't matter if it's an illusion, it's just basic human psychology.

[Valeron]

If you don't like not having constant gear inflation as progression then you probably won't be happy with GW2. If you want to enjoy the game you are going to have to get over it. It's a different game than WoW/Rift/EQ2/*insert typical gear progression model mmo here*. It's the same with instanced raiding. If that's what you think of as endgame then go play one of those games, god knows there are a million of those types of games. I, for one, appreciate that there is a game that doesn't have that gear grind crutch to try and maintain their playerbase so they can get their monthly sub.

[Muzjhath]

This is me speaking from what I believe, not facts based. But from how I've gathered things DEs may have a time limit. If you can't finnish it before a said time, the non player side wins. And starts the next advance of their chain.
As for the "Super Bad" DE's, well, maybe five players can beat them, but those I know of now have a "minimum" scale of 10 people, so it would be basicly doing a 10 man raid with 5 people since the fight I've looked at has lots of elements to keep up with. From what I understood of it a group of 50 that forgets every objective but "hit the bad guy" will have major problems since he might one shot five or more people at the same time if you're not careful. (If a dragon puts his foot down on you, well toast).

As for doing content again. Specificlly speaking the Exploration mode 5mans. I much rather run them for the sole purpose of seeing how fast I can beat them, compared to others, and maybe getting some nice looking gear at the end, maybe a title etc. Than do it only so that I can get bigger numbers. Bigger numbers is a boring illusion.
Same as I generally enjoy the Pen and Paper Roleplaying games that have Charcter Advancement be more important than gear advancement (WoD compared to D&D for example).

I think the best PvE playes from WoW might enjoy running dungeons to see how fast they can do it compared to the other people might be more fun than the a race just to see who can kill a boss the first time.
WoW raiders say it all the time, once a Boss is on farm it's hardly relevant and you just do it for more gear. People hardly seem to care for what speed they clear in, just who gets the first, second, etc.
The whole "speed run" doesn't really exist in WoW since when you know a place better you also, generally, have far better gear than the first time. So just "Look, I can run it <time> faster than two weeks ago!" Doesn't say much at all. Unless you for that specific run took away all the gear you'd gained from that tire and did it in your old gear. Which goes a bit against what most people in woW are raiding for.

I might be repeating myself here. But I am extremly happy that GW2 is not adopting the "Skinner Box" gameplay that is the standard MMO style. Since due to this you can litterally take a break whenever you want for a few months and come back and just pick the game up. You don't get "left behind" becaue of it.

[Odeezee]

The point is simply that it FEELS like you are progressing, ie. it feels like you're getting atleast some tangible reward for your effort. Of course it only matters until the next patch hits, but until then you're one step closer to having the best stuff you can get. It doesn't matter if it's an illusion, it's just basic human psychology.

that's the point, in every situation with gear progression through stats you are trying to reach the power plateau before the next expansion hits, correct? so GW2 just cuts out the middle man and gives it to you straight up. you are basically saying you want the game to con you to give you a sense of purpose. GW2 is just saying "ok, you will no longer get any more powerful through gear, now show us what you are made of!".

[Barrowmore]

I won't be playing the same Catacombs for a cosmetic item 20,50,100 times. Even if there was a lizard man who cast a fireball instead of a ice missile on run #75 or a giant showed up to toss a rock on run #20 but was nowhere to be found on run #105.

Then that's your preference and the dungeons will unfortunately not be designed for your enjoyment.

PUGs thrown together made up of some press and fanboys dying to trash mobs doesn't mean a thing. Let's see what happens when the Vodka, Paragon, Violent Impact caliber players of GW2 get in there on live.

The demos included many players from the Alpha testers, playing from Anet's offices. They'd have more experience with the game than anyone else.

You truly believe if super DE mob showed up if 5 players began beating on him, 2 died / 3 are still whittling his HP down, 2 run back, 2 more die, run back, etc-- that attrition won't eventually defeat those DE super mobs?

Ah, but there's more than 2 ways that DEs can end. It's not just whether the players die or the boss dies. DEs in GW2 can start and finish on their own, having other conditions completely independent from what the players do. Confirmed example: Tequatl the Sunless will summon zombies to attack nearby villages, causing other events to occur. These events must be finished before he can be fought again.