I would rather cal lit a SAFE design ,but not a friendly one.
You create friendships MUCH better in grouping games that have you ASK others to group.This auto grouping design for events does nothign to create friends.It is just each player acting on their own.
Also anyone that knows the work and effort it took to get content done in a group in FFXI remembers how great friendships were created.It did not matter if in a guild or not,you needed something done,you asked others and soon gained new friends.
I remember gaining friends just helping people get their AF gear,ther really is a big difference in what type of game creates friends.You spend an entire day helping someone,they are extremely gratious and it gives ones self a good feeling as well.GW2 is more designed to be selfish,i move from event to event and try to do the MOST damage i can to get the most rewards.That does nothing to promote friendships.
Just because A-Net or ANy developer says they are doing something ,does not make it fact,they will always 100% of the time be in marketing mode.People need to use game experiences and think for themselves.
The part of GW2 that i call SAFE and does promote some friendly atmosphere is by removing loot arguments.We all remember seeing a great loot item drop and everyone starts arguing over who gets it.HOWEVER IF peopel are trying to be friendly,you set it all up BEFORE hand,you don't just random fight then argue afterwards.There was still problems with that design as well, a leader would grab the loot and disband group,or everyone would GREED but one ass hat would NEED.
However even with thoe flaws i mention,the GW2 design is selfish,you are not helping anyone in events but yourself.FFXI actually TRIED to design a MUCH better system in their Campaigns.They tried to use a complete EFFORT idea for rewards.That meant you could buff others and still get the same reward as someone doing most damage,so it DID encourage friendlier game play.The problem was players soon found ways to exploit that and ruined it for everyone.
This point was to show that even if a developer tries to help promote friendly game play,players often are more selfish than friendly.
100% correct. I see nothing friendly about being forced into a group without asking, going about the business of doing as much damage or clearing as many objectives as you can individually while in the group, not saying a single word to anyone while the event is taking place, and then moving on to the next event. It doesn't promote friendliness in the least, despite ANet's assertions that it does. But it does, however, remove confrontation, which can be viewed as a good thing in its own right.
Someone has probably already said this, but I believe the Public Quests in WARHammer was the first to do the 'friendly' grouping thing w/o having to.
GW2 has taken that idea and taken the classes and the DEs well beyond that, it's incredible to watch imho. I love watching the DEs light up and run off to help.
Having played both games, WARHammer had the right ideas, but they lost their community so quickly due to other factors the PQs never really had a chance to function properly.
I don't see that happening with GW2's designs, the game just doesn't have the same flaws, they watched and learned the mistakes of the past games, something that is so smart, yet not done very often.
Good post. You know the last game to truly watch the mistakes of it's predecessors, rip off their best bits and improve or enhance them while fixing and/or removing/avoiding their failings?
World of Warcraft.
Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy
Someone has probably already said this, but I believe the Public Quests in WARHammer was the first to do the 'friendly' grouping thing w/o having to.
GW2 has taken that idea and taken the classes and the DEs well beyond that, it's incredible to watch imho. I love watching the DEs light up and run off to help.
Having played both games, WARHammer had the right ideas, but they lost their community so quickly due to other factors the PQs never really had a chance to function properly.
I don't see that happening with GW2's designs, the game just doesn't have the same flaws, they watched and learned the mistakes of the past games, something that is so smart, yet not done very often.
Problem with WAR's Public Quests was the fact that PQs gave you loot bags with specific pre-defined loot inside them. What this lead to was people only doing PQs with good loot rewards and ignoring all the others, even at the expense of rewards if you do all zone-wide PQs. Dynamic Events are the improved version of this with no specific loot rewards, but with currency that you can spend however you see fit. It's a natural iteration of the system.
Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.
Someone has probably already said this, but I believe the Public Quests in WARHammer was the first to do the 'friendly' grouping thing w/o having to.
GW2 has taken that idea and taken the classes and the DEs well beyond that, it's incredible to watch imho. I love watching the DEs light up and run off to help.
Having played both games, WARHammer had the right ideas, but they lost their community so quickly due to other factors the PQs never really had a chance to function properly.
I don't see that happening with GW2's designs, the game just doesn't have the same flaws, they watched and learned the mistakes of the past games, something that is so smart, yet not done very often.
Good post. You know the last game to truly watch the mistakes of it's predecessors, rip off their best bits and improve or enhance them while fixing and/or removing/avoiding their failings?
World of Warcraft.
I disagree, I played the original F+F beta, then the closed and open betas of WoW, and retail for a time. WoW stole good ideas, never improved on much, and when asked to change or given contributions to help make it better they ignored public opinion and did whatever they felt they wanted, especially in regards to whomever was in charge and how butthurt they felt in pvp during the beta.
WoW was definitely not an example of what I had described. Their success was because they marketed ingeniously and was able to strike at a time when Gen Y was at their peak looking for a game to call their own, in short, being in the right place at the right time.
Someone has probably already said this, but I believe the Public Quests in WARHammer was the first to do the 'friendly' grouping thing w/o having to.
GW2 has taken that idea and taken the classes and the DEs well beyond that, it's incredible to watch imho. I love watching the DEs light up and run off to help.
Having played both games, WARHammer had the right ideas, but they lost their community so quickly due to other factors the PQs never really had a chance to function properly.
I don't see that happening with GW2's designs, the game just doesn't have the same flaws, they watched and learned the mistakes of the past games, something that is so smart, yet not done very often.
Problem with WAR's Public Quests was the fact that PQs gave you loot bags with specific pre-defined loot inside them. What this lead to was people only doing PQs with good loot rewards and ignoring all the others, even at the expense of rewards if you do all zone-wide PQs. Dynamic Events are the improved version of this with no specific loot rewards, but with currency that you can spend however you see fit. It's a natural iteration of the system.
Yeah...it literally reached a point where it was impossible to get a lot of the PQs done because there was simply not enough folks around or they couldn't be bothered. Bah, so much of that game was a disappointment. Irritates me just talking about it.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
To the OP: I think it is the first game that has taken serious steps to change PVE to a cooperative experience regardless of player guild/group adherence. - Its a small change with a huge impact.
I also dont feel harassed by the game mechanics when it comes to harvesting materials because of the way GW2 works in that area. I allways found this tedious in other games, having to get addons to track nodes, and cycle around endlessly around a map hoping it wasnt on any other persons to-do list at that time of night/day. -- again a small change with a huge positive impact.
PVP is where the competition will be for me, and pve will be mostly hazzle free, which I am immensely thankfull for.
Someone has probably already said this, but I believe the Public Quests in WARHammer was the first to do the 'friendly' grouping thing w/o having to.
GW2 has taken that idea and taken the classes and the DEs well beyond that, it's incredible to watch imho. I love watching the DEs light up and run off to help.
Having played both games, WARHammer had the right ideas, but they lost their community so quickly due to other factors the PQs never really had a chance to function properly.
I don't see that happening with GW2's designs, the game just doesn't have the same flaws, they watched and learned the mistakes of the past games, something that is so smart, yet not done very often.
Problem with WAR's Public Quests was the fact that PQs gave you loot bags with specific pre-defined loot inside them. What this lead to was people only doing PQs with good loot rewards and ignoring all the others, even at the expense of rewards if you do all zone-wide PQs. Dynamic Events are the improved version of this with no specific loot rewards, but with currency that you can spend however you see fit. It's a natural iteration of the system.
Yeah...it literally reached a point where it was impossible to get a lot of the PQs done because there was simply not enough folks around or they couldn't be bothered. Bah, so much of that game was a disappointment. Irritates me just talking about it.
I think WAR's biggest problems with the PQ's were that people were leveling faster in the arena pvp. People kept doing that over and over and over. It took the people out of the game world. I would have made it so you would get little to no XP (just rewards or money) in the arena pvp and I think the world would have been a lot more populated, which would have made the PQ's doable.
I think WAR's biggest problems with the PQ's were that people were leveling faster in the arena pvp. People kept doing that over and over and over. It took the people out of the game world. I would have made it so you would get little to no XP (just rewards or money) in the arena pvp and I think the world would have been a lot more populated, which would have made the PQ's doable.
Yeah, that was certainly one of the issues. I have to admit I started doing that myself when I played the game.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
It really doesn't change the fact that in most other MMO's you have to actually be sociable to do group content. And in some cases that does lead to friendship.
In GW2 they have taken that away. You do not have to be sociable to do DE's. Is that a good or bad thing, taking away the 'little' sociable aspect to grouping entirely? Will GW2 spawn players that find it unusual in newer games to actually be sociable to form groups for certain content?
We will have to wait and see.
The only thing GW2 has taken away is the "forced" aspect of socializing structures. The question I ask is this: what social activity are you likely to enjoy more, those you are forced to engage in such as work, or those you volunteer for willingly without any coercion, ,such as getting together with some friends to do stuff?
Sure, you **might** be able to enjoy the former, but you're more likely to enjoy the latter.
It really doesn't change the fact that in most other MMO's you have to actually be sociable to do group content. And in some cases that does lead to friendship.
In GW2 they have taken that away. You do not have to be sociable to do DE's. Is that a good or bad thing, taking away the 'little' sociable aspect to grouping entirely? Will GW2 spawn players that find it unusual in newer games to actually be sociable to form groups for certain content?
We will have to wait and see.
The only thing GW2 has taken away is the "forced" aspect of socializing structures. The question I ask is this: what social activity are you likely to enjoy more, those you are forced to engage in such as work, or those you volunteer for willingly without any coercion, ,such as getting together with some friends to do stuff?
Sure, you **might** be able to enjoy the former, but you're more likely to enjoy the latter.
I don't agree with your analogy.
Why play a game if it feels like work and you don't like it? Why play a game where your forced to do things you don't like to, such as grouping?
If for certain content it is required to group, but you don't like to group up, then bypass the content. No one is actually forcing you to play.
You should of done some research into the game before purchasing if grouping up is not your thing.
Let me put it another way. If you had to be forced to group up before a DE in GW2, would it make the experience feel more like work?
The community in the game is extremely friendly vs other games
PVE teams usually work well together and a failure simply means either a revive or a wipe.
PVP is fun as well and even if you play badly there is a chance to help out the team.
One of the problems in many other games is that PVE players can get attacked by other players. Without even giving the option to attack unsuspecting people except duels which are prepared beforehand
SImple put: No. The thing is you didn't really do 'group' tasks. Sure there are events, but many of those are dumbed down barney level so anyone can do them. If there werer dungeons you did, I'd bet $100 that you would be very pissed off at other players if you randomly partied with them to complete some group quest. While the game itself isn't that much harder then games like WoW (sorry, you know its true), the fact dodging is made to play more of a part really adds another element for people to screw up at despite the otherwise simplicity.
Like someone else mentioned, the way the game is designed where grouping isn't required, no kill stealing etc will encourage a friendlier atmosphere.
However you will still get idiots. After all, it is aimed at humans.
Exactly. Humans are the target audience/player here. Where humans are involved, there is no lack of error and shortcoming.
Yeah I agree. Glad to see the target audience was humans for once. Probably was one of SWTOR's biggest foibles was targeting lemurs. Silly devs...
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Why yes, it is the most civilized and friendly thing you can do by saying 'Hello, friend! Would you like to die today? I have a feeling you would, and I am in such a mood as to oblige you on that.'
Originally posted by immodiumLike someone else mentioned, the way the game is designed where grouping isn't required, no kill stealing etc will encourage a friendlier atmosphere.However you will still get idiots. After all, it is aimed at humans.
Exactly. Humans are the target audience/player here. Where humans are involved, there is no lack of error and shortcoming.
Yeah I agree. Glad to see the target audience was humans for once. Probably was one of SWTOR's biggest foibles was targeting lemurs. Silly devs...
Huh. I wouldn't think lemurs could play MMORPG. Or video games in general for that matter. Do lemurs even wear clothes? That doesn't even make sense.
** edit ** Does Madagascar even have the internet?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by immodiumLike someone else mentioned, the way the game is designed where grouping isn't required, no kill stealing etc will encourage a friendlier atmosphere.However you will still get idiots. After all, it is aimed at humans.
Exactly. Humans are the target audience/player here. Where humans are involved, there is no lack of error and shortcoming.
Yeah I agree. Glad to see the target audience was humans for once. Probably was one of SWTOR's biggest foibles was targeting lemurs. Silly devs...
Huh. I wouldn't think lemurs could play MMORPG. Or video games in general for that matter. Do lemurs even wear clothes? That doesn't even make sense.
** edit ** Does Madagascar even have the internet?
Hmm SWG had cantina's and entertainer professions used in a way that craeted a huge amount of socialization and friendships, the entire point of it was for a pleasent gaming environment that didn't involve killing. The game really had something for almost any type of gamer, even down to a neutral faction, that if they chose could lend help to either side.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by Distopia Hmm SWG had cantina's and entertainer professions used in a way that craeted a huge amount of socialization and friendships, the entire point of it was for a pleasent gaming environemnt that didn't involve killing or viloence at all. The game really had something for almost any type of gamer, even down to a neutral faction, that if they chose could lend help to either side.
somewhat although I played SWG for a long time and mostly people just made a long ass lines waiting for buffs and moved on and went out to do whatever mission they needed the buff for all alone... we did have some nice talks sometimes while waiting in line though
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
Comments
100% correct. I see nothing friendly about being forced into a group without asking, going about the business of doing as much damage or clearing as many objectives as you can individually while in the group, not saying a single word to anyone while the event is taking place, and then moving on to the next event. It doesn't promote friendliness in the least, despite ANet's assertions that it does. But it does, however, remove confrontation, which can be viewed as a good thing in its own right.
Good post. You know the last game to truly watch the mistakes of it's predecessors, rip off their best bits and improve or enhance them while fixing and/or removing/avoiding their failings?
World of Warcraft.
Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy
Problem with WAR's Public Quests was the fact that PQs gave you loot bags with specific pre-defined loot inside them. What this lead to was people only doing PQs with good loot rewards and ignoring all the others, even at the expense of rewards if you do all zone-wide PQs. Dynamic Events are the improved version of this with no specific loot rewards, but with currency that you can spend however you see fit. It's a natural iteration of the system.
I disagree, I played the original F+F beta, then the closed and open betas of WoW, and retail for a time. WoW stole good ideas, never improved on much, and when asked to change or given contributions to help make it better they ignored public opinion and did whatever they felt they wanted, especially in regards to whomever was in charge and how butthurt they felt in pvp during the beta.
WoW was definitely not an example of what I had described. Their success was because they marketed ingeniously and was able to strike at a time when Gen Y was at their peak looking for a game to call their own, in short, being in the right place at the right time.
Yeah...it literally reached a point where it was impossible to get a lot of the PQs done because there was simply not enough folks around or they couldn't be bothered. Bah, so much of that game was a disappointment. Irritates me just talking about it.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
To the OP: I think it is the first game that has taken serious steps to change PVE to a cooperative experience regardless of player guild/group adherence. - Its a small change with a huge impact.
I also dont feel harassed by the game mechanics when it comes to harvesting materials because of the way GW2 works in that area. I allways found this tedious in other games, having to get addons to track nodes, and cycle around endlessly around a map hoping it wasnt on any other persons to-do list at that time of night/day. -- again a small change with a huge positive impact.
PVP is where the competition will be for me, and pve will be mostly hazzle free, which I am immensely thankfull for.
I think WAR's biggest problems with the PQ's were that people were leveling faster in the arena pvp. People kept doing that over and over and over. It took the people out of the game world. I would have made it so you would get little to no XP (just rewards or money) in the arena pvp and I think the world would have been a lot more populated, which would have made the PQ's doable.
Yeah, that was certainly one of the issues. I have to admit I started doing that myself when I played the game.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
The only thing GW2 has taken away is the "forced" aspect of socializing structures. The question I ask is this: what social activity are you likely to enjoy more, those you are forced to engage in such as work, or those you volunteer for willingly without any coercion, ,such as getting together with some friends to do stuff?
Sure, you **might** be able to enjoy the former, but you're more likely to enjoy the latter.
I don't agree with your analogy.
Why play a game if it feels like work and you don't like it? Why play a game where your forced to do things you don't like to, such as grouping?
If for certain content it is required to group, but you don't like to group up, then bypass the content. No one is actually forcing you to play.
You should of done some research into the game before purchasing if grouping up is not your thing.
Let me put it another way. If you had to be forced to group up before a DE in GW2, would it make the experience feel more like work?
Exactly. Humans are the target audience/player here. Where humans are involved, there is no lack of error and shortcoming.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
... depends.
Am I going to spend an hour every night begging random white mages to join my party so I can actually do something?
Sometimes making a group very much so feels like work. :I
You haven't played guild wars 1 have you.
The community in the game is extremely friendly vs other games
PVE teams usually work well together and a failure simply means either a revive or a wipe.
PVP is fun as well and even if you play badly there is a chance to help out the team.
One of the problems in many other games is that PVE players can get attacked by other players. Without even giving the option to attack unsuspecting people except duels which are prepared beforehand
Yeah I agree. Glad to see the target audience was humans for once. Probably was one of SWTOR's biggest foibles was targeting lemurs. Silly devs...
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Huh. I wouldn't think lemurs could play MMORPG. Or video games in general for that matter. Do lemurs even wear clothes? That doesn't even make sense.
** edit **
Does Madagascar even have the internet?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
somewhat although I played SWG for a long time and mostly people just made a long ass lines waiting for buffs and moved on and went out to do whatever mission they needed the buff for all alone... we did have some nice talks sometimes while waiting in line though
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
half true, they ruined mmoRPGs experience, but they boosted mmos in general