1. #33041
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    In fairness, the reason people say you don't like MMOs isn't just because of the raiding thing, it's because you've said you don't like almost every aspect of every one of them you've commented on. =D
    The only person I consistently see saying that is you.

    It's not so much an attack on you as it is a simple observation. You don't seem to like the multi-player aspects, you don't seem to like grouping, you don't seem to like PvE content in general, you don't seem to like PvP, you don't seem to like anything that is typically featured in MMOs. And again, that's not an attack (you seem to take it that way whenever the topic comes up) it's just what you've said. The only thing I've seen you comment positively on in an MMO is exploring.
    *sigh* So much of that is incorrect I don't even know where to start. At the beginning, I suppose.

    Multi-player: When is this ever addressed outside of grouping?
    Grouping: This is my single biggest complaint, obviously.
    PvE: I enjoy every aspect of PvE outside of required grouping, so I can only assume you mean dungeons and raiding, which as far as I'm concerned falls under the banner of "grouping".
    PvP: I don't like being 'forced' to PvP, that is and has always been an irritant. Lately I've started doing WvW because I want to, but there have been many LS meta events that were 99% PvE and then had one final achievement that required you to go into WvW (which as you well know is an invitation to PvPers to camp the influx of carebears). I had similar complaints about Children's Week in WoW, which was a huge hindrance to a lot of non-PvPers in getting the What a Long, Strange Trip It's Been achievement. (Not to mention that the typical response to this is "find others to group with to get it done".)

    I've commented positively on quite a few things in MMOs, but apparently my criticisms are more memorable. Sometimes, yeah, certain aspects of MMOs aren't incorporated as well as they could have been. Using questing as an example, it's another area few MMOs seem to have improved upon (post-Cataclysm and GW2 seem to have made the most strides there so far). However, you appear to be confusing whenever I post how something could be improved with flat out disliking it as a whole, which isn't the case at all.

    I'm not sure why I wouldn't get defensive when I'm essentially being told I say things I haven't said or at the very least what I do say is obviously grossly misconstrued if not completely ignored.
    Last edited by Lane; 2013-10-05 at 05:37 PM.

  2. #33042
    I guess the "forced grouping" part is the most confusing thing to me.

    Playing an MMO and complaining about "forced grouping" is like playing Super Mario and complaining about "forced jumping" or playing Street Fighter and complaining about "forced fighting" or playing Gradius and complaining about "forced shooting".

  3. #33043
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    I guess the "forced grouping" part is the most confusing thing to me.

    Playing an MMO and complaining about "forced grouping" is like playing Super Mario and complaining about "forced jumping" or playing Street Fighter and complaining about "forced fighting" or playing Gradius and complaining about "forced shooting".
    Multiplayer doesn't mean in group though. It just means many players. A simple example would be a 2player game (multiplayer) one where you play co-op (in group) and the other you 1v1.
    In most cases, I understand the other side's viewpoint and how they came to it, but cannot tolerate their stubbornness to not see mine (the right one).

  4. #33044
    Multiplayer doesn't mean in group though. It just means many players. A simple example would be a 2player game (multiplayer) one where you play co-op (in group) and the other you 1v1.
    It's the difference between "a game with a multiplayer feature" and "a game almost entirely predicated on the idea of playing with other people", which is really what an MMO is.

    This entire thing about "single player MMO" is really a bastardization of the genre. Granted, in some ways it's a necessary evil because you can't expect people to do EVERYTHING in a group at all times. But the concept of group-play/teamplay/etc is as integral to the MMO genre as jumping is to a platformer.

  5. #33045
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    It's the difference between "a game with a multiplayer feature" and "a game almost entirely predicated on the idea of playing with other people", which is really what an MMO is.

    This entire thing about "single player MMO" is really a bastardization of the genre. Granted, in some ways it's a necessary evil because you can't expect people to do EVERYTHING in a group at all times. But the concept of group-play/teamplay/etc is as integral to the MMO genre as jumping is to a platformer.
    Well your first paragraph only deals with "playing WITH" other people. It's entirely possible to do that without grouping or having to be in a group. You can look at the other players like NPC's they wander in to help you and wander off again after w/e had to be done was done.

    I don't get why not being forced to play in a group is a bastardization of the genre. I agree that GW wasn't a real MMO (I basically played it as a PvP game with a PvE market) but that game didn't lose forced grouping at all, instead they gave you means to make your own group through the henchmen system.

    I can see a game that's based entirely around events work though, where the only form of grouping would all happen in a volatile state where it never is needed to group. Grouping ofcourse would still hold it's merits but people like Lane who don't like to have to be in groups can just do w/e they want. Or people like me who can't stand watching people in his party pop useless and bad skills like endure pain don't get forced to see that either.

    If you saw the anime: sword art online, that's still an MMO.
    In most cases, I understand the other side's viewpoint and how they came to it, but cannot tolerate their stubbornness to not see mine (the right one).

  6. #33046
    Elemental Lord Dezerte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    8,015
    It's about choice to me, I have the choice to play solo but I can also choose to play within a group. There's more to MMO's than just grouping, the persistent world & character is very valuable to a solo player, and the fact that the world you are playing in are inhabited by real players makes the world feel more interesting even if you're not grouping.
    To declare that a personal, inner experience gives certainty about the workings of the universe is to assign far too much value to one’s subjective sense of conviction.
    I’m not that arrogant.

    The brain, marvelous instrument though it is, isn’t infallible. It can misfire, seize or hallucinate, and it can do so in a way that’s utterly indistinguishable from reality to the person experiencing it.

  7. #33047
    Bloodsail Admiral SinR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    My Own Personal Hell
    Posts
    1,165
    GW2 has some really cool systems that I think WoW should adopt. the "quest" system is still "go kill XYZ and X number of ABC", but its presented differently, and with more variety than just "go kill boars". The world event system is also very cool and well done, and also adds a very nice variety to leveling. Also, the new content every 2 weeks helps deal with MMO burn out better than WoW has.

    Granted, GW2 has some work to do. It *NEEDS* proper end game (Raids, high-end group dungeons, etc), among other things. But, I still manage to log in at least a few times a day and mess around.
    We're all newbs, some are just more newbier than others.

    3DS FC 0920-0769-4582 Trainer: Y: SinR, OR: May. Safari: Wartortle/Octillery/Frogadier

    Just a burned out hardcore raider turned casual.
    I had Beta. Now I has WOD. Woo

  8. #33048
    Brewmaster Waervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Denmark/Netherlands/Finland
    Posts
    1,390
    Hadn't played GW2 for a while after I hit 80, but yesterday I did a lot of activities with the guild, and I must say I was very impressed. Had tons of fun! Even something stupid like the guild trek, which I didn't even know existed, was fun!
    Also the new TA path (haven't done many dungeons yet) was great! The bosses are fun and diverse, but I could see how they would totally break a pug.

    Sparky and Slick could be a full fledged raid-boss in WoW!

    Yesterday kind of reignited my GW2-spark
    My recently created science blog about ants: AntyScience

  9. #33049
    Quote Originally Posted by SinR View Post
    GW2 has some really cool systems that I think WoW should adopt. the "quest" system is still "go kill XYZ and X number of ABC", but its presented differently, and with more variety than just "go kill boars".
    I haven't played WoW since Cataclysm, but as I recall their quest system for 1-60 and 85+ was significantly improved. You can auto-complete quests much in the same way as hearts in GW2.

    It *NEEDS* proper end game (Raids, high-end group dungeons, etc), among other things.
    I don't agree. I'm not saying GW2 couldn't use some improvement for what it does offer end game, but I really don't want to see it follow the same route as every other MMO incorporating raids and hard mode dungeons because they (and players alike) lack the creativity to come up with anything else.

  10. #33050
    Don't agree about the "proper" end game either.

    I have some other ideas in which I'd like see them do for high end areas but the typical raiding end game is not one of them.

  11. #33051
    Doozer, you mean like a return of UW, FoW, and the like?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryngo Blackratchet View Post
    Yeah, Rhandric is right, as usual.

  12. #33052
    Yeah, I like the idea of elite areas in which they can use their event system.

  13. #33053
    Legendary! draykorinee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ciderland, arrgh.
    Posts
    6,870
    Proper end game will mean slower updates, its just not possible to create meaningful raid environments in a few weeks or even a few months if evidenced by the supposed 'masters' of Pve endgame.

  14. #33054
    There are already high end dungeons in GW2. Also the devs are working on a different form of raiding than instanced raiding supposedly. However there are raids in GW2 in the style of open world encounters such as the just revamped Teq fight.

    Contextualizing endgame as a form or associated with raiding or dungeons in the abstract is a mistake. Having raids, for example, wouldn't necessarily mean you have added endgame to a game. Raiding != endgame, endgame != type of content.

    None of the Guild Wars games have ever had an endgame. Nor is an endgame completely in line with the design and intent of the franchise. The desire or even the discussion of such is reaching back to a previous conversation in this thread about audiences having low or generally ignorant understanding of the games they are playing.

    These are faulty notions allowed to proliferate within the medium's base audience.

  15. #33055
    Oh no, is that another "Definition of Endgame" discussion I see on the horizon! I'm outta here!

    On the topic of "raids" and content and such...I just wish they'd find a way to make content that feels interesting to me. Right now I couldn't dislike GW2 PvE (especially the instances) any more than I do. At least Queen's Gauntlet had some mechanics to work around, so that was nice.
    Last edited by Bovinity Divinity; 2013-10-08 at 05:25 PM.

  16. #33056
    Quote Originally Posted by draykorinee View Post
    Proper end game will mean slower updates, its just not possible to create meaningful raid environments in a few weeks or even a few months if evidenced by the supposed 'masters' of Pve endgame.
    Not necessarily, they do after all have teams that are supposed to be working on bigger projects while the living story teams do their own thing.

  17. #33057
    Quote Originally Posted by draykorinee View Post
    Proper end game will mean slower updates, its just not possible to create meaningful raid environments in a few weeks or even a few months if evidenced by the supposed 'masters' of Pve endgame.
    I'd think most of the "work" for it would be creating new models, which GW2 does more of than others, really.

    Lack of a Trinity means a dungeon/raid doesn't work the same, obviously, but if you took the Teqautl encounter and stuck it in an instance limited to 25 players, it'd be a raid boss/encounter, wouldn't it?

  18. #33058
    but if you took the Teqautl encounter and stuck it in an instance limited to 25 players, it'd be a raid boss/encounter, wouldn't it?
    While I appreciate the introduction of the revamped Tequatl, it's actually a really good example of how GW2s actual combat mechanics don't really agree with the concept of the sort of complex, detailed raid encounters that people are thinking of. The real mechanics of the fight come down to a little turret mini-game, the rest is just the same old DPS-spam.

  19. #33059
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    While I appreciate the introduction of the revamped Tequatl, it's actually a really good example of how GW2s actual combat mechanics don't really agree with the concept of the sort of complex, detailed raid encounters that people are thinking of. The real mechanics of the fight come down to a little turret mini-game, the rest is just the same old DPS-spam.
    removing the tank role, you have dps not standing in stuff and healers healing and cleansing. The turrets are cleansing and debuffing. Sure there's no tank positioning or taunt-swapping, but otherwise it's more about tuning than anything else. It's at least the equivalent of LFR, I'd say. I'm certainly not saying it's a heroic raid boss or anything, but it's surely got more mechanics than many raid bosses do.

  20. #33060
    I am not sure it's accurate to say Tequalt has more mechanics than most raid bosses. As a general term.

    Perhaps if one is making the comparison to some bastardization of form within the structure of World of Warcraft the statement might make more sense. But it seems somewhat far fetched to claim such in a wider or broader context of instanced raid encounters (i.e. "bosses").

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •