Originally posted by SinzOfMan
[...]

 Guildwars isn't a good game for socializing, your forced into a map all alone to complete a mission and it's too...(what's the opposite of spontaneous?)

[...]

predictable, repetitive, boring, linear, uninspired, always the same, monotonous. ... ?

well now it really depends on what you want out of GW and what you expect..

for example, some people say Heroes broke GW.. However for me, it was Heroes that brought me back to GW. When I was in the beta for GW.. I played it and thought:

"Solid game, but the Henchmen are lacking, they don't gain levels, and they're lacking in ability in high pressure situations."

That was really my only complaint with GW but Heroes for the most part fixed that.. you'll still have a group made of 50% henchmen.. but heroes can more than carry what they may lack, AND they have improved Henchmen AI and skill selection since Beta.

There's also some people that hate instancing.. I'm the opposite.. It's nice stepping out into a zone and knowing everything there is mine.. every quest mob, every farmable boss.. will be there when I want them.

I've found grouping can be a double edged sword.. when you find a good group, it's good.. but when you find a bad one, it's pretty darn horrific...  if I learned anything from FFXI and WoW it's that 9 / 10 PUGS suck.. 1 / 10 PUGS rock.. and my tolerance for people screaming at me or anyone else in a group is EXCEEDINGLY low.  So I really like what I call the "grouping optional" setup of GW. I group with my friends.. and it's fun every time, and my PUGS in GW rock 'cause it's always an HH team.

Originally posted by iaini

So I really like what I call the "grouping optional" setup of GW.  

Yes but thats exactly my point, because so many people think in the same way as you, theres no such thing as "grouping optional" because everyone plays with their heroes and when loooking for a PUG your practically forced to play with heroes and hench or go without, expecially in nightfall and EoTn.

Originally posted by ThurlowJ88

Originally posted by iaini

So I really like what I call the "grouping optional" setup of GW.  

Yes but thats exactly my point, because so many people think in the same way as you, theres no such thing as "grouping optional" because everyone plays with their heroes and when loooking for a PUG your practically forced to play with heroes and hench or go without, expecially in nightfall and EoTn.

while I certainly cannot argue the validity of that statement.. I can pretty squarely say it's the (player driven) experiences of past games that are to blame for the situation and mindset.... I typically don't even have local chat on, but from what you say the line of thinking is pretty commonplace if LFG hunting is so difficult.

A solution of sorts.. is to make some content simply incredibly tough, not so much so to rule out the HH team runner.. but it has to be tough enough to rule out the "casual" HH team runner, giving a choice: Get better at the team setup and micromanagement.. or find a player-centric group.

This would satisfy two situations.. grouping *may* see an increase.. and the sense of accomplishment for the HH team runner after beating something *THAT* tough is incredibly high.

I think this is a direction they've taken with *some* of the GW content.. I've yet to beat Cyndr with my HH team.. sure a duo with 6 heroes could likely beat him and a full player-party should have no issues... but I see HH team setup and management as something as important as the build I bring to a fight, so I'm willing to try it HH *until* my friends catch up to where I am in GW:EN.

So why don't I just PUG Cyndr:

A) analyzing a failure, planning, strategy, etc can be as much fun as the thrill of a success

B) I actually *enjoy* HH team management, and lastly

C) I don't want to.

However this all does bring up an interesting question; I'd think the number of people who feel the way you do would be high enough to at least pull together a decent size guild and / or alliance of guilds... not really sure how to go about such things, I've always considered managing massive guilds / alliances to be something like herding cats, but I suppose it's possible.

I totally agree with most of what you have said, and yeh i agree that GW should introduce hard events which decrease hero usage and increase player socialisation, but tbh thats what they tried to do with GWEN and tbh they failed, miserably.

Dungeons, while they are quite challenging, some of them can be completed with heroes, but that raises the furthur question of who the hell wants to?! Ive spent ages in a dungeon with a guild team, i think it was Oolas lab or something, only to get squat at the end, after all that time and effort, pointless! (and i know oolas lab is a crap dungeon but ive been in others and tbh there all alike, with no garentee of a worthwhile reward at the end)

I didnt particuarly like GWEN because i always felt it was trying to simulate what other MMO's had, for example instance raiding in WoW. GW introduced dungeons and generally they really sucked, taking lots of time to complete, no garenteed worthwhile reward for all your effort, and the scenary inside the dungeons is terribly dull and repetitive.

I'm looking forward to GW2 and i hope they will get it right, as apposed to what happened in GWEN

I've HH run a few dungeons in GWEN and they can take a long time.. for an HH team this isn't really a problem, just park the group in a corner.. go deal with life.. come back later and pick up where you left off.. so in that regard they're not bad... *however* having finished a few of them they do need to raise the loot table in them a little.. I mean, if one is going to spend that kind of time in something the loot should reflect it.. I'm not saying hand out Ecto, (but I wouldn't exactly mind this.. ^_~) but getting say.. Armor tokens and having "X" number of armor tokens tradeable for a piece of elite armor from an armor crafter in GWEN would be cool.

I'm looking forward to GW2 but they have stated there would be no heroes (that I kinda don't like) but rather some type of single NPC you can bring with you.. or something like that, I'd have to dig up the article where I read it..  not quite sure how I feel about that, it really depends on what they do with the gameplay model..

Wow, i didn't know that there wern't going going to have heroes in GW2, i can honestly say that im relieved, and tbh i think the single companion will be great, because it will appeal top both social and hero using players, giving the best of both worlds, i genuinely think it will be a good idea because it means that a person can only have 1 each, making a max of 4 in a team. And also i think they will generally be used to fill in the gaps in missions, for example if there is no monk (which there frequently isn't) then people can use their companions as a solution. I really hope they get GW2 right, if they do it will rock!

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_2

"The system of companions and allies is being reworked. Companions will have customization similar to Heroes. Players will be allowed to bring a single companion with them, who will not take up a party slot and are considered an extension of the character. When a player chooses not to bring a companion, their character will instead be buffed so that they will not be disadvantaged by not bringing a companion."

mind you that information is pretty old.. but we're deviating off topic now.

to the OP.. I'd have to recommend starting with prophecies or nightfall.. Factions isn't bad but one can get through the campaign storyline pretty quickly, and though there will still be a lot to do it's still a pretty short campaign.

---

Originally posted by ThurlowJ88

...
I'm looking forward to GW2 and i hope they will get it right, as apposed to what happened in GWEN

---

GWEN is bridge from GW to GW2, so this is way where game going. Which to pain me. And not Heroes ruined PvE, but Ursanway and other pve only "skills". This is becouse I play only PvP now.

Originally posted by ThurlowJ88

I really and truely dont understand why people reccomend nightfall over all the others, its crazy!

Agreed.  I got Nightfall first and was very disappointed.  Mostly because of the Storyline which Prophecies starts out as, Pre-Searing is too much fun, everyone should try it!  Also, the lack of European races which i'm accustomed to in just about every MMORPG i've played, is lacking in Nightfall (African origin) and Factions (Asian origin).

I always recommend Prophecies because it's what starts the storyline, but most people recommend Nightfall because of it's heroes and solo experience. 

It genuinely is a relief to see that some people think in the same way i do, most people i used to play with on GW prefered nightfall and thought it was amazing, i really couldent see it, i thought it was a severe disapointment but at least it got me another PVE character which rocks! Profecies if definately the best one of the 4, GWEN and NF are a disapointment and factions is so so.

1. Depends on your play style. If you have a lot of time and enjoy a good story: Prophecies.

If you wanna beat the game as fast as you can and PvP: Factions.

And if you're in between those two, and want two of best classes (In my opinion, of course): Nightfall

2. Definitely. I've tried playing World of Warcraft at least 10 times and from what I have judged by the community, Guild Wars is about a decade more mature.

3. Guild Wars, definitely.

Originally posted by rankor2

Question 1" Which GW should i buy first? Question 2" Is the Maturity lvl far higher than Wow? Question 3" Did president Clinton really use a cigar?  <seriously?.AND Question 3" Best MMOrpg ATM? mine is POTBS! This month anyway. Yours?

 

1.) Factions if you like PvP farming. Nightfall if you want heroes. Prophecies if you like PvE.

2.) Not really, but it's easier to find a decent guild.  And that's the only way to really find a mature group of players.

3.) No clue, sorry.