I think a lot of this has to do with age.

If you're really young, then constant adrenaline rushes and treating every person you see as an enemy can be a lot of fun for you, and a lot of MMORPGs have catered to that. It's what some people prefer.

Essentially, here's what this topic is about:

• The typical MMORPG: Encourages a lot of bad blood between players, and a vitriolic attitude due to never knowing if the next person you see is going to steal your kill, your node, or possibly even try to kill you. It creates a Mad Max 'badllands' feel to the proceedings, where you're in a Crapsack World [tvtropes.org]. It may not be one visually, but it is intellectually because competition is encouraged at every turn. Trust and cameraderie are considered the considerations of naive fools rather than virtues.

• The new breed: A few MMORPGs coming up are doing things which encourage player trust and cameraderie. Two prominent examples are Guild Wars 2 and WildStar. Essentially, it enforces the idea that the player is your friend and you need them if you're going to survive. It creates a sense of community where another player on the horizon is someone who's going to help you, or someone you're going to want to have a nice chat with. It's a much more calm, laid back appraoch to things.

Now that would have taken me 2 weeks to write. Good job. Anyway, I'm old school, and with old school comes the challenge that we seem to be fading away from.  I want a penalty when I'm killed or I kill a person. Give me a chance to roll for some of their gear or them mine. Ultima Online was old school and there are a small hand full of games like that anymore. :) Anyway, if there is an opposing faction then heck ya, we need to battle it out! Fistacuff!!!

@Amjoco

Thanks, I did try to be as unbiased as possible. It's... kind of hard to be unbiased. x_X Especially when you're writing like that, but I always give it my best shot.

And there's no hidden agenda, here. I'm just trying to figure out how people feel.

It's funny, because I'm older school than you, and in the past cooperation and competition were separated into different games. So I suppose when you come into games matters, it changes your perceptions. Maybe Guild Wars 2 will bring in a lot of older people (like me).

The one thing I question is the idea that people will act any different in this game. I understand the idea you have that supporting a healthy environment on the development end, may ease some tension. However, you do have to consider this is still mostly a PVP game. That attracts a certain demographic that is very clan oriented, and rarely do PVPers communicate outside of their circles; the one exception is clan/guild allies. While you may argue that server mates are all allies, that remains to be seen.

There's something else to consider as well, that's todays MMO community as a whole, which feeds off creating drama, and just for the hell of it. Doesn't take competition to get this demographic at each other's throats, all it really takes is a keyboard, someone else to rile up and a place to do it. Gw2 will still serve as that conduit for those with such a mindset.

I'm all for developers focusing on bringing players together though, it's just not a simple thing to tackle.

Good read though

Originally posted by Distopia

The one thing I question is the idea that people will act any different in this game. I understand the idea you have that supporting a healthy environment on the development end, may ease some tension. However, you do have to consider this is still mostly a PVP game. 

No, it isn't. This is a common assumption but an incorrect one. A game which has the amount of PvE replayability that Guild Wars 2 has definitely has a PvE focus. Consider, in one recent interview they said that to see all the PvE content from level 1 to level 10, you have to play the game 30 times. Thirty. Times.

What they have also said is that PvE is a very important element for them this time around, and they have said that they've definitely focused on PvE more than they did in Guild Wars 1. What they're essentially doing is creating two games: 1 PvE one, and 1 PvP one. The best reference would be Mass Effect 3. It has a singleplayer campaign and a multiplayer component. It's like that, and that's how ArenaNet themselves have described it.

If a lot of people believe that Guild Wars 2 is going to have a stronger PvP element than a PvE one, then they're going to be massively disappointed. The two elements are pretty much being created by completely different teams - again, as is my understanding of it from interviews. So to claim GW2 has a PvP focus is factually incorrect. 

There's something else to consider as well, that's todays MMO community as a whole, which feeds off creating drama, and just for the hell of it.

That's because that's encouraged by the game. If you encourage people to be competitive and misanthropic with the game, then they're going to be competitive and misanthropic. This is an atmosphere created by the game. If you're getting that, then it's the game that's causing it. Game mechanics can change that, I know because I've played games where this simply isn't the case. (Like Uru: Ages Beyond Myst, Champions Online, and so on.)

Doesn't take competition to get this demographic at each other's throats, all it really takes is a keyboard, someone else to rile up and a place to do it.

What you're forgetting here is that the way GW2 is designed, the only way left to them to grief people is via their keyboard. For that you have an ignore function. And considering that the game is designed to disallow griefing, eventually these people will get bored and leave.

Again, it's the nature of the game, the game causes the problem. If the game is designed to allow people to grief and the developers have a carefree attitude toward this - then people will grief. But if the developers are quick to hotfix issues and ban troublemakers, then the community will quickly settle down. Just as it did in Ultima Online.

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

Originally posted by Distopia

The one thing I question is the idea that people will act any different in this game. I understand the idea you have that supporting a healthy environment on the development end, may ease some tension. However, you do have to consider this is still mostly a PVP game. 

No, it isn't. This is a common assumption but an incorrect one. A game which has the amount of PvE replayability that Guild Wars 2 has definitely has a PvE focus. Consider, in one recent interview they said that to see all the PvE content from level 1 to level 10, you have to play the game 30 times. Thirty. Times.

What they have also said is that PvE is a very important element for them this time around, and they have said that they've definitely focused on PvE more than they did in Guild Wars 1. What they're essentially doing is creating two games: 1 PvE one, and 1 PvP one. The best reference would be Mass Effect 3. It has a singleplayer campaign and a multiplayer component. It's like that, and that's how ArenaNet themselves have described it.

If a lot of people believe that Guild Wars 2 is going to have a stronger PvP element than a PvE one, then they're going to be massively disappointed. The two elements are pretty much being created by completely different teams - again, as is my understanding of it from interviews. So to claim GW2 has a PvP focus is factually incorrect. 

There's something else to consider as well, that's todays MMO community as a whole, which feeds off creating drama, and just for the hell of it.

That's because that's encouraged by the game. If you encourage people to be competitive and misanthropic with the game, then they're going to be competitive and misanthropic. This is an atmosphere created by the game. If you're getting that, then it's the game that's causing it. Game mechanics can change that, I know because I've played games where this simply isn't the case. (Like Uru: Ages Beyond Myst, Champions Online, and so on.)

Doesn't take competition to get this demographic at each other's throats, all it really takes is a keyboard, someone else to rile up and a place to do it.

What you're forgetting here is that the way GW2 is designed, the only way left to them to grief people is via their keyboard. For that you have an ignore function. And considering that the game is designed to disallow griefing, eventually these people will get bored and leave.

Again, it's the nature of the game, the game causes the problem. If the game is designed to allow people to grief and the developers have a carefree attitude toward this - then people will grief. But if the developers are quick to hotfix issues and ban troublemakers, then the community will quickly settle down. Just as it did in Ultima Online.

 

totally agree with your points here.. and of course you original post. The part in the red is one of my biggest pet peeves.. ppl assume the game is only PVP because it has no WoW style raids... I doubt I will ever do much in V8 or BGs in GW2. There is still soooo much to do! The way I see it.. the PVE world is bigger than the PVP world so think of it that way if you need to.

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

Originally posted by Distopia

The one thing I question is the idea that people will act any different in this game. I understand the idea you have that supporting a healthy environment on the development end, may ease some tension. However, you do have to consider this is still mostly a PVP game. 

No, it isn't. This is a common assumption but an incorrect one. A game which has the amount of PvE replayability that Guild Wars 2 has definitely has a PvE focus. Consider, in one recent interview they said that to see all the PvE content from level 1 to level 10, you have to play the game 30 times. Thirty. Times.

What they have also said is that PvE is a very important element for them this time around, and they have said that they've definitely focused on PvE more than they did in Guild Wars 1. What they're essentially doing is creating two games: 1 PvE one, and 1 PvP one. The best reference would be Mass Effect 3. It has a singleplayer campaign and a multiplayer component. It's like that, and that's how ArenaNet themselves have described it.

If a lot of people believe that Guild Wars 2 is going to have a stronger PvP element than a PvE one, then they're going to be massively disappointed. The two elements are pretty much being created by completely different teams - again, as is my understanding of it from interviews. So to claim GW2 has a PvP focus is factually incorrect. 

There's something else to consider as well, that's todays MMO community as a whole, which feeds off creating drama, and just for the hell of it.

That's because that's encouraged by the game. If you encourage people to be competitive and misanthropic with the game, then they're going to be competitive and misanthropic. This is an atmosphere created by the game. If you're getting that, then it's the game that's causing it. Game mechanics can change that, I know because I've played games where this simply isn't the case. (Like Uru: Ages Beyond Myst, Champions Online, and so on.)

Doesn't take competition to get this demographic at each other's throats, all it really takes is a keyboard, someone else to rile up and a place to do it.

What you're forgetting here is that the way GW2 is designed, the only way left to them to grief people is via their keyboard. For that you have an ignore function. And considering that the game is designed to disallow griefing, eventually these people will get bored and leave.

Again, it's the nature of the game, the game causes the problem. If the game is designed to allow people to grief and the developers have a carefree attitude toward this - then people will grief. But if the developers are quick to hotfix issues and ban troublemakers, then the community will quickly settle down. Just as it did in Ultima Online.

 

The last part is really key, it's a process of control, and they must maintain it if it's going to work. Like I said very early in my reply, I see what you're getting at and do agree with the philsophy that both yourself and A-net are applying on this subject.

One thing that will help is the absense of a monthly fee, --I would think-- this will essentially remove the only reason to not ban a trouble maker (monthly income).

Yes I  was a little vague on what I meant about the PVP. Basically I was saying GW2 is going to attract a lot of PVPers, and they do carry some baggage.

Social design fosters communities, as a person who started out in sandboxes and prefers them, I'm well aware of that, but it's not an easy area to do right in a game

Originally posted by ariboersma

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

Originally posted by Distopia

The one thing I question is the idea that people will act any different in this game. I understand the idea you have that supporting a healthy environment on the development end, may ease some tension. However, you do have to consider this is still mostly a PVP game. 

No, it isn't. This is a common assumption but an incorrect one. A game which has the amount of PvE replayability that Guild Wars 2 has definitely has a PvE focus. Consider, in one recent interview they said that to see all the PvE content from level 1 to level 10, you have to play the game 30 times. Thirty. Times.

What they have also said is that PvE is a very important element for them this time around, and they have said that they've definitely focused on PvE more than they did in Guild Wars 1. What they're essentially doing is creating two games: 1 PvE one, and 1 PvP one. The best reference would be Mass Effect 3. It has a singleplayer campaign and a multiplayer component. It's like that, and that's how ArenaNet themselves have described it.

If a lot of people believe that Guild Wars 2 is going to have a stronger PvP element than a PvE one, then they're going to be massively disappointed. The two elements are pretty much being created by completely different teams - again, as is my understanding of it from interviews. So to claim GW2 has a PvP focus is factually incorrect. 

There's something else to consider as well, that's todays MMO community as a whole, which feeds off creating drama, and just for the hell of it.

That's because that's encouraged by the game. If you encourage people to be competitive and misanthropic with the game, then they're going to be competitive and misanthropic. This is an atmosphere created by the game. If you're getting that, then it's the game that's causing it. Game mechanics can change that, I know because I've played games where this simply isn't the case. (Like Uru: Ages Beyond Myst, Champions Online, and so on.)

Doesn't take competition to get this demographic at each other's throats, all it really takes is a keyboard, someone else to rile up and a place to do it.

What you're forgetting here is that the way GW2 is designed, the only way left to them to grief people is via their keyboard. For that you have an ignore function. And considering that the game is designed to disallow griefing, eventually these people will get bored and leave.

Again, it's the nature of the game, the game causes the problem. If the game is designed to allow people to grief and the developers have a carefree attitude toward this - then people will grief. But if the developers are quick to hotfix issues and ban troublemakers, then the community will quickly settle down. Just as it did in Ultima Online.

 

totally agree with your points here.. and of course you original post. The part in the red is one of my biggest pet peeves.. ppl assume the game is only PVP because it has no WoW style raids... I doubt I will ever do much in V8 or BGs in GW2. There is still soooo much to do! The way I see it.. the PVE world is bigger than the PVP world so think of it that way if you need to.

I think it will attract the right kind of PVEer, the sort of people who play things like coh & lotr (or even wow casually)  I think the hardcore raider types will be disapointed.  But hey theres a bazjillion games that pander to this minorities every whim.  GW2 will be all the better for not chasing this crowd.

OP.. could not agree with you more. Just sign me up for your newsletter good sir and lets be done with it.

With that said, I am sure some will come out attacking.  You did paint the past PvE mechanic is a pretty harsh light. As true as it may be when you really think about it, people dont like really thinking about it that sort of way. 

Oh, and you are wrong on one thing. I concider myself more excited about the PvP then PvE of this game, I am will still probably spend a crap ton of time (that is a Standard crap ton, NOT a metric crap ton, thank you very much) PvE'ing and I am hoping it is just as much fun as the PvP. I am a PvPer and I want a complete game.. and I think this might just be it!

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

I think a lot of this has to do with age.

If you're really young, then constant adrenaline rushes and treating every person you see as an enemy can be a lot of fun for you, and a lot of MMORPGs have catered to that. It's what some people prefer.

Essentially, here's what this topic is about:

• The typical MMORPG: Encourages a lot of bad blood between players, and a vitriolic attitude due to never knowing if the next person you see is going to steal your kill, your node, or possibly even try to kill you. It creates a Mad Max 'badllands' feel to the proceedings, where you're in a Crapsack World [tvtropes.org]. It may not be one visually, but it is intellectually because competition is encouraged at every turn. Trust and cameraderie are considered the considerations of naive fools rather than virtues.

 

• The new breed: A few MMORPGs coming up are doing things which encourage player trust and cameraderie. Two prominent examples are Guild Wars 2 and WildStar. Essentially, it enforces the idea that the player is your friend and you need them if you're going to survive. It creates a sense of community where another player on the horizon is someone who's going to help you, or someone you're going to want to have a nice chat with. It's a much more calm, laid back appraoch to things.

Didnt read the whole stuff. But you are wrong in your first assumption. In a world where danger is overall, where you can be killed, completely looted everywhere is of course competition, but because of such a dangerous environment real cameraderie can only arise. Because you will really need any help, and you will really appreciate any help.

In a world where nothing is dangerous, but on the other side you cant be ninjed, exploited, you just dont care a lot, if at all about the other players. They are there, and they may or may not fight the same mob, but finally it isnt important. Cameraderie will not really arise from such a environment. You may meet different ppl, and you may make new friends. But this environment isnt promoting for friendship and cameraderie. It could be in a forum or elsewhere.

But.. thank godness, GW2 is not a pve only game, it would be really boring after some time. The WvW will mix it up, will bring some danger into the world, and will bring the necessity for friend and cameraderie. So, finally all your huge, well written text was a completely digression from the subject because of your wrong assumptions.

But anyway, not a lot of good, or even worth reading threads around here at the moment.

Edit: I will bring an example to make it a bit easier to comprehend. I am a lil bit old school, i started back in the UO days, before Trammel(separation of PvE and PvP world). And in UO you could kill anyone, you could loot him completely, but on the other side in UO fighting/combat was not the only option of gameplay( like it is more or less in all modern mmos). I wasnt back there much of a pvp player, even the term pvp player didnt exist in the beginning, i like it to mine, to craft, to socialize at the black smithy, for some trades with resource supplier or adventurer. And i can wholeheartedly say that there i met friends, and they were friends for a long time. Because you could much easier value other players deeds. If you were attacked from a bunch of pks(Player Killers), and one or two other joined to defend you, and risk their own stuff to help you out, to help you to protect your belongings you appreciated their help, and friendship arose more often than not.

In a pve environment (like EverQuest, WoW) everyone, who tried to help you could be just a mob stealer, ninja looter or stuff like that, or it wasnt much of a deal helping in the first place. In such an environment friendship just arised if you played with them longer in a group and you were comfortable with there kind or simply not, which had nothing to do with their acting in the mmo, and could be literally happen everywhere, and not only in a mmo.

In a pve environment (like GW2) where kill stealing and ninja looting isnt possible, you will of course not refuse the "help", but because it is just pve game it isnt really necessary, mobs are stupid, and running away not much of a hassle after all. So there is not a big help, and you may or may not talk with such a person. To put it simple, nothing happend, no reason to interact even more. So how could then arise cameraderie from such an environment? Of course you can talk with them, you could then become friends after some time, but it will not encouraged from the environment, like it was in old UO. Now you dont even have to talk to other ppl to find a group, i will foresee a lot of solo player never talking with anyone, or at least not a lot, because there is basicly no reason for doing so. (This might be a problem, but we will see how it turn out)

WvW is a little bit different, because there is at least a real enemy(other players), and it may arise a similar environment like in DAoC, which wasnt that good as old UO, but a lot better than EQ/WoW, from a point of view in regard to community/cameraderie. You got at least a common target, and a common enemy, so every enemy of your enemy is your friend scenario.

Edit2: But the curse of todays mmos is the combat centric in gameplay, it is all about combat. Nothing against combat, but for community building it is really lacking. If there are other worthful activities apart from combat, if there are meaningful ways of existence within a virtual world/mmo other interaction between ppl would be possible, and other opportunities for cameraderie, friendship and community would be available. It is no coincidence that it is said UO and SWG got the best community, it was because there were other meaningful activities apart from combat  available.

Edit3: And i dont understand, why noone build upon the fundaments of UO and SWG. MMOs with a lot of different gameplay options in one game, in one world with hundreds of thousand players. Economy simulation, politics, strategic warefare, logistics, exploration, build up play, puzzle solving, combat and what not, in a more or less living and breathing online world. But what we got? World of Warcraft, a rollercoaster of fighting stupid mobs for some shiny items. And to collect more and more and more shiny items for the sake of it.

I do not agree with the OP.

What Guildwars is doing is removing the ability to kill your own server. It's a gamemechanic. Disable PvP and people will get along. Yeah right.

A player who doesn't kill me because he/she does not choose to kill me, I rather see more of them! Some game mechanics could "push" the decision in not killing you. Gamemechanics like Alliances. I could be member of Alliance X. Kill enough of us and we will burn down your guildhall, guildcity or playerhouse. I'm not a big fan of "murderer-points", but those can help too. Kill many and you will be flagged as murderer and you will not be able to enter certain npc-towns. Basicly increase the risk versus reward (or thrill).

Anyway give players one skill with which they can damage others and they will try to kill you. You can't change the nature of most gamers.

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser
...

 

Pros of a typical MMORPG.

 

The world is dangerous and potentially exciting, and only in towns and outposts do you actually feel like you're going to be completely safe. You don't know who's going to stab you in the back out there, and you don't know how someone's going to screw you over, or the interesting ways in which they might do so. You have to be clever, sharp, and keen in order to stay on top of the pile. It's a dog eat dog world, and one clearly about hierarchy. You have to keep your sword, tongue, and mind sharp if you want to be on top. And you do want to be on top, that's the ultimate goal.

 

Cons of a typical MMORPG.

 

These are pretty much the inverse for a person with the opposite mindset. You'll never find a friend there, people will constantly try to screw you over. If you're out harvesting and someone steals your node, you're going to get cussed at for just being there. If there's PvP then people are going to try and trick and grief you, so they can kill you. You constantly have people who're trying to mess you up, and it creates a lot of distrust and hatred of other people, it breeds a lot of misanthropy. As such, it's an uncomfortable place for a more sociable, friendly person. Not everyone wants that sense of constant danger, and knowing they can be screwed over at any point. It's not fun for everyone.

 

...

Are you sure that you ever played a MMORPG before you wrote that?

Originally posted by Distopia

The one thing I question is the idea that people will act any different in this game. I understand the idea you have that supporting a healthy environment on the development end, may ease some tension. However, you do have to consider this is still mostly a PVP game. That attracts a certain demographic that is very clan oriented, and rarely do PVPers communicate outside of their circles; the one exception is clan/guild allies.

So called competitive PvPers are just as miniscule a minority as hardcore PvE raiders, probably an even smaller one actually. The vast majority of players has no interest in the commitment either playstyle requires and certainly not in the drama that comes with it pretty much guaranteed. The demographic you are refering to is very clan oriented because they are very clan oriented, not because they like PvP.

Offering optional PvP while the players have the choice to go about their business ( mostly ) undisturbed when they don't feel like smashing each other's head in is the smart business decision as it appeals to a much wider audience including the dreaded casuals and social gamers. Looks like ANet are trying to take that a little further than other games have and there is a pretty good chance they'll succeed.

Originally posted by Larsa

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser
...

 

Pros of a typical MMORPG.

 

The world is dangerous and potentially exciting, and only in towns and outposts do you actually feel like you're going to be completely safe. You don't know who's going to stab you in the back out there, and you don't know how someone's going to screw you over, or the interesting ways in which they might do so. You have to be clever, sharp, and keen in order to stay on top of the pile. It's a dog eat dog world, and one clearly about hierarchy. You have to keep your sword, tongue, and mind sharp if you want to be on top. And you do want to be on top, that's the ultimate goal.

 

Cons of a typical MMORPG.

 

These are pretty much the inverse for a person with the opposite mindset. You'll never find a friend there, people will constantly try to screw you over. If you're out harvesting and someone steals your node, you're going to get cussed at for just being there. If there's PvP then people are going to try and trick and grief you, so they can kill you. You constantly have people who're trying to mess you up, and it creates a lot of distrust and hatred of other people, it breeds a lot of misanthropy. As such, it's an uncomfortable place for a more sociable, friendly person. Not everyone wants that sense of constant danger, and knowing they can be screwed over at any point. It's not fun for everyone.

 

...

Are you sure that you ever played a MMORPG before you wrote that?

Yeah, I was sort of wondering the same thing. Amazing how people's perceptions vary so much when we supposedly played the same games.

I played EVE which is likely one of the most competitive MMORPG's out there today and yet I found so many nice, helpful people, and really developed a sense of camaradarie more so than almost any other title out there today.

I fought for alliances of thousands of players and we were all held together by the competition/threat of common enemy forces, and never did I feel much closer except for perhaps DAOC's FFA PVP server Mordred. 

This is the 2nd post by the OP that leads me to believe his perception's of MMORPG's has been very heavily skewed by WOW and the standard theme park model of the past 8 years, (and all the negatives that they have brought) but he seems to have forgotten what MMORPG's can be (and used to be like at one time)

Or we just didn't play the same games.

Games don't create community people do.

Just because some game has a bunch of rules designed to encourage people people to work together doesn't mean they actually will. People will obey/break rules to suit themselves. Why do you think they have harsh penalties for doing the wrong thing in real life. You think people pay taxes out the goodness of their hearts?

I can already see things like say a small guild A holds a castle in WvWvW that a big guild B wants. Guild B could let the enemy take the castle by not helping to defend it then retake it. Reasons could include grievances between the guilds members, one guild thinking themselves as elite and the other as scrubs not worthy to hold it etc.

Whenever you put together a bunch of random people you will create some type of drama. It's human nature you can't design around it.

In the negative comments I'm just not seeing any valid or logical arguments, just obvious statements twisted to look like arguments (community makes a great game - well derp, of course it does, but it's entirely naive to believe that other factors don't influence things more in order to help shape that community), and personal attacks (yes, I've played MMORPGs, and I already know how much of a cesspool that WoW is, so let's not try and hide that). I see this and I'm not going to fall for such base intellectual dishonesty. I have yet to see a valid or logical argument against the new approach or my thread.

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask, so with that said: Does anyone have anything that can show me that my position in the OP is incorrect?

Anyway, it seems that the polls are largely in favour of the new approach. The comments don't match that. It seems that most people would prefer a more civilised game that doesn't encourage misanthropy.

Though I wouldn't blame the more civil people for being a little too afraid to voice their opinions here in more than a vote, because really, I can understand why most people wouldn't wat to face the hostility. And that I am getting personal attacks for a perfectly innocent thread is... well, entertaining, really. It just proves that people who've been playing traditional MMORPGs too long have taught themselves to be vitriolic and acidic.

If anything, you're kind of proving my point.

Feel free to prove my point more with further angry outbursts.

It would depend on how the game is supposed to be set up.  If players can play in separate factions, then definitely have the competition between factions, but not within them.  I shouldn't have to compete for resources with people on my own team!

If it's set up like GW2, then, there shouldn't be any competition among players in the PvE since everyone is on the same team, supposedly.  In games like that, I would consider PvP to be more of a friendly competition, much like football players on the same team competing against each other in practice.

On the flip side, if the game is set up more like "every person for themselves", then competition in the PvE world is required, IMO.

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

In the negative comments I'm just not seeing any valid or logical arguments, just obvious statements twisted to look like arguments (community makes a great game - well derp, of course it does, but it's entirely naive to believe that other factors don't influence things more in order to help shape that community), and personal attacks (yes, I've played MMORPGs, and I already know how much of a cesspool that WoW is, so let's not try and hide that). I see this and I'm not going to fall for such base intellectual dishonesty. I have yet to see a valid or logical argument against the new approach or my thread.

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask, so with that said: Does anyone have anything that can show me that my position in the OP is incorrect?

Anyway, it seems that the polls are largely in favour of the new approach. The comments don't match that. It seems that most people would prefer a more civilised game that doesn't encourage misanthropy.

Though I wouldn't blame the more civil people for being a little too afraid to voice their opinions here in more than a vote, because really, I can understand why most people wouldn't wat to face the hostility. And that I am getting personal attacks for a perfectly innocent thread is... well, entertaining, really. It just proves that people who've been playing traditional MMORPGs too long have taught themselves to be vitriolic and acidic.

If anything, you're kind of proving my point.

Feel free to prove my point more with further angry outbursts.

Well, you did post this on a GW2 forum, so most people here will choose the poll option to agree, as that is the style of the game, but that doesn't invalidate your argument. I played EQ for years (PvE sever) and the forced grouping/helping did promote a tight-knit community for the most part, but you might be a little harsh on the more competitive style of games. I've played on PvP servers and only had occasional problem with a jerk, but that happens on cooperative games as well.

And I'm not sure all the gameplay mechanics will promote as much player interaction as you think. W v W should bring out the co-op in people, but DE's might do the opposite, as you don't need to be grouped to participate. I hope there will be groups quickly gathered when one starts, and stay together to do more of them, but I could see a lot of solo play and then moving on alone after. Maybe to stay solo will be to hard, without tactics and help, and it will promote grouping. I think you could make the point that the solo friendly shift in game design can negatively impact community more the competitiveness. When I played CO, I soloed 98% of time as there was no reason to group as it was so easy (except the 7 or 8 quests that required full group. Got boring quick and not much interaction in community at all.

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

Though I wouldn't blame the more civil people for being a little too afraid to voice their opinions here in more than a vote, because really, I can understand why most people wouldn't wat to face the hostility. And that I am getting personal attacks for a perfectly innocent thread is... well, entertaining, really. It just proves that people who've been playing traditional MMORPGs too long have taught themselves to be vitriolic and acidic.

This is exactly what I was talking about, and you said I was wrong :).

The new way is one of the things the community has been needing for a long time. Often, the competition, like competition for resources, kills, etc... is just a negative side effect of defacto MMO design. It's not even about creating competition, it just discourages cooperation as a side effect.

GW2 encourages cooperation by removing the negatives and providing soft rewards for social play, rather than forcing formal grouping by making the game require groups to progress through content. Why has no one ever done this before? (I've actually seen games nerf cooperative bonuses, because post launch some Live Lead Designer decided that rewarding cooperation provided an exploit)!

The funny thing, though, is that you just know it's going to take some people a lot of time to break bad habits learned from other games and learn to play cooperatively and socially. I fully expect to be LMAO at all the people who will run away from any attempts at soft cooperation. I expect to be laughing often. :)