"OP, you make developers look like bad guys.  its ultimately the players choice"

Because players have a choice to play the game or not doesn't change the nature of what the developers have created the past 15-20 years.  Perhaps I was a little harsh - developers are just people trying to earn a living, but it's not like the player base hasn't been letting them know that they wanted a friendlier, less elitest, more inclusive and diverse game all this time. Every tiny step forward towards a more casual, friendly, and less exclusive, elitist MMORPG has been met with ranting, raving and derision from the harcore players, and always- always - with a bait-and-switch "new" game from developers.

"Without fear, it's pointless."

All I can say about this attitude is good riddance.

One thing that I LOVED was when a poster on the GW2 beta forums complained about not being able to create an actually evil character; even a street-gutter thief only had noble (or semi-noble) responses in the personal story bits. The ANET rep said, to sum up: "Other games have that. This isn't that kind of game."

everything that I am trying to convey in my posts in this thread, can be summed up in this sentence.

Not everyone who enjoys the freedom that allows a griefer to grief, is a griefer himself (or herself).

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

Originally posted by The_Korrigan

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

The fear is a massive part of that freedom for me. Without fear, it's pointless.

I'm not challenging anybody's view, and I really am happy that GW2 is the game for a lot of people. But removing that fear is anything but increasing the freedom imo, and I can only speak for myself and the people that I regularly play mmo's with.

If I want fear, I don't play a game like GW2. The model just isn't appropriate for it (except eventually in the WvWvW area). And please, having your quest mob ninjaed or your resource node stolen while you fight nearby on a PvE server (or even on a PvP server by someone of your own side) isn't FEAR - it's a broken mechanic, because you can't do anything about it.

The isn't UO Felucia. This isn't AC1 Darktide. And it never intended to be. You're comparing apples and oranges. I totally agree with you that removing the possibility of loot/node/mob ninjaing in a FFA PvP game would be restricting freedom. But not in a game of the model of GW2.

I wont play GW2 and you know this as we've discussed it before. I am not bashing the game at all, I am against the attitude that all games should move towards this (reread the original post if you want to see where I am directing my conversation).

 

Totally agree here.  PVE/Social Mmorg needs to evolve as does more aggressive PVP style games - We want both as gamers.

Originally posted by Meleagar

"OP, you make developers look like bad guys.  its ultimately the players choice"

Because players have a choice to play the game or not doesn't change the nature of what the developers have created the past 15-20 years.  Perhaps I was a little harsh - developers are just people trying to earn a living, but it's not like the player base hasn't been letting them know that they wanted a friendlier, less elitest, more inclusive and diverse game all this time. Every tiny step forward towards a more casual, friendly, and less exclusive, elitist MMORPG has been met with ranting, raving and derision from the harcore players, and always- always - with a bait-and-switch "new" game from developers.

"Without fear, it's pointless."

All I can say about this attitude is good riddance.

One thing that I LOVED was when a poster on the GW2 beta forums complained about not being able to create an actually evil character; even a street-gutter thief only had noble (or semi-noble) responses in the personal story bits. The ANET rep said, to sum up: "Other games have that. This isn't that kind of game."

I was talking about me feeling the fear, not causing it... but once again, it;s your way or the highway. This is a very common stance on both extreme sides of this coin, and I am not about to waste time challenging the extremists here.

Originally posted by Meleagar

"OP, you make developers look like bad guys.  its ultimately the players choice"

Because players have a choice to play the game or not doesn't change the nature of what the developers have created the past 15-20 years.  Perhaps I was a little harsh - developers are just people trying to earn a living, but it's not like the player base hasn't been letting them know that they wanted a friendlier, less elitest, more inclusive and diverse game all this time. Every tiny step forward towards a more casual, friendly, and less exclusive, elitist MMORPG has been met with ranting, raving and derision from the harcore players, and always- always - with a bait-and-switch "new" game from developers.

 

"Without fear, it's pointless."

All I can say about this attitude is good riddance.

 

Disagree, I love GW2, PVE, Achievment hunting, love it - its what ive done since day dot.  I also Love EVE, where there is a real bite and fear element  to the game, you wander into a null zone and the gaming is intense (and i never grief, I hate griefing)

Originally posted by Bladestrom

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

Originally posted by The_Korrigan

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

The fear is a massive part of that freedom for me. Without fear, it's pointless.

I'm not challenging anybody's view, and I really am happy that GW2 is the game for a lot of people. But removing that fear is anything but increasing the freedom imo, and I can only speak for myself and the people that I regularly play mmo's with.

If I want fear, I don't play a game like GW2. The model just isn't appropriate for it (except eventually in the WvWvW area). And please, having your quest mob ninjaed or your resource node stolen while you fight nearby on a PvE server (or even on a PvP server by someone of your own side) isn't FEAR - it's a broken mechanic, because you can't do anything about it.

The isn't UO Felucia. This isn't AC1 Darktide. And it never intended to be. You're comparing apples and oranges. I totally agree with you that removing the possibility of loot/node/mob ninjaing in a FFA PvP game would be restricting freedom. But not in a game of the model of GW2.

I wont play GW2 and you know this as we've discussed it before. I am not bashing the game at all, I am against the attitude that all games should move towards this (reread the original post if you want to see where I am directing my conversation).

 

Totally agree here.  PVE/Social Mmorg needs to evolve as does more aggressive PVP style games - We want both as gamers.

 

I'm with you on this. I like GW2. But I also like my Sandbox and Open PvP games (not always one and the same). No reason we can't have both.

The GW2 beta was certainly a pleasant experience, once I was able to log into it. There wasn't the annoying cesspit of the general chat, there weren't players solo'ing quest side by side, or watching their backs, in case someone from an enemy faction comes around & kills them during PvE. It simply was pleasant.

Like in the Norn area, when I went up a mountain to get a skill-point and was overrun by all the mobs there. When I got to the waypoint to head back up there, I saw 2 other players trying to make their way up their as well. What happened is that we all helped each other. I was an Engineer so I'd toss elixers to buff us and the Warrior was able to tank them for a bit cause of the protection buff I gave. When he went down both me & the other player went to res him and we continued until he reached the Champion to get the skill point. Once we got it, there was a simple /wave and we were on our seperate journeys, occassionally bumping into each other again, due to the Event system.

That's how more MMORPGs should be, in some way. That's Guild Wars 2.

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

I wont play GW2 and you know this as we've discussed it before. I am not bashing the game at all, I am against the attitude that all games should move towards this (reread the original post if you want to see where I am directing my conversation).

You say "because you can't do anything about it", like I said I am against that as well, that's not freedom. The griefing has to have repercussions or else it's as restrictive as the freedom in GW2 is.

You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. Gonna make it more simple, I know I'm sometimes not clear enough, possibly because English isn't my first language too.

- In other game models, the cooperative mechanics of GW2 would indeed be restrictive and reducing "freedom". Take UO Feluccia, AC1 Darktide, EVE, Darkfall, Mortal (disregarting how bad some of those games were otherwise) and yes, in those games it would restrict freedom, because there are already mechanics built in the game for that.

- In the GW2 model, and I believe also in WoW clone model games, those mechanics can only improve "freedom". I can live without the loot/ninjaing/griefing model one can do nothing about. That's why I think that in THAT model, GW2 did it right and improved general "freedom", and also community. Frustration when you can't fight back is one of the worse of freedom breakers, and the victims are always the players who try to be honest and share. A game where the good people are always the victims and don't have any way to fight back is a game with a flaw.

About loot, this is true for any model anyway. I doubt anyone can argue against the fact that anyone who participated in a fight should be rewarded for it. The "loot whore" model where you arrive at the end of a dungeon without anything when you actually did twice the work of the other party members is flawed since day one (which goes back to EQ). Loot drama sucks in any game, and it's way better to see everybody who fought on your side after a victory leave with a smile.

I agree also.

I found myself really enjoying the cooperative spirit during events. In many fights as a guardian I found myself running about recovering or resing fallen players and before long others started doing it along side me. It became clear that putting several people on a single fallen comrade would help to revcover that person faster.

I have always enjoyed coop game play more than single play which got me really excited and why I bought the game a week and a half before the BWE even before I knew it would get me into the BWE. The guilds themselves are designed for coop participation.

I think GW2 will be the new standard for mising PvE and PVP in a game. I'll certainly not mis these very few hard core PvPers looking for open world full loot games ALL of which have failed miserably in past years.

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

everything that I am trying to convey in my posts in this thread, can be summed up in this sentence.

Not everyone who enjoys the freedom that allows a griefer to grief, is a griefer himself (or herself).

You don't even have to defend a dog-eat-dog MMO on those grounds, imo.  (edit:  by that I mean, it's not necessary to move your defense of a predatory game environment to grounds of personal taste).   If a game is designed so that its basic mechanics revolve around survival, then there is no such thing as 'griefing', just choices between individual and mutual survival.  Griefing comes into existence when the game suggests to the player that it is about one thing, and it is possible for players to game the mechanics and create a sub-game where making that suggestion out to be a lie is the game for them.  There's nothing wrong with 'griefing' on a billiards table.  But it's generally not cool to bump a pinball machine while someone else is playing.

@BadSpock

I remember doing such stuff when I started playing WoW almost a decade ago: I did a lot of "grey" quests, because sometimes I just liked to fully explore a zone. Or I did a quest several times, because sombody asked for help. I helped other players as I passed by, etc.

It took a long time until I realised, that all this was completely useless, and that I had to change my playingstyle to be more efficient in "MMO-terms".

Originally posted by Meleagar

In the GW2 Beta, you had to actually force yourself to realize you can like being around other people now. You can be generous, patient, and enjoy the company of fellow adventurers.  They cannot kill steal, ninja-loot, or bogart your nodes. All they can really do is help you. and increase your enjoyment of the game.

This made me wonder: what kind of malicious, sadistic, anti-social misfits have been programming MMOGs up until now? Why make it so that other players could steal your kill in the first place? Why make it so that resource nodes and loot was open to ninja stealing? Why program the game to force formal grouping and ultimately reward only those wiling to sacrifice their real lives for the game? Why set up a system that formally kept most of the players out of the top content and rewards?

The GW2 beta event was a real eye-opener. It's almost like Arenanet has broken some conspiratorial, secret set of MMOG development rules that, before now, we all just accepted as a necessary part of the genre. A lot of us were experiencing a kind of abused spouse syndrome, where we were expecting to get sucker-punched or slapped every time we turned around, and were instead shocked at the generosity and kindness displayed by our fellow adventurers, and the welcoming empowerment of the game-mechanics.  Many of us had to work to discard bad habits that were necessary to cultivate in other MMOGs.

Once we realized the game really did embrace us, and that there was no game value in being an asshole (and lots of reason to not be), and that the game wasn't going to exclude us or force us to play some way we didn't want to play, there was this huge sense of relief and euphoria, like being set free from the harsh, unnecessary and unjust shackles of prior MMOGs.

Now there's a realization, much like when I read an interview with some Verant (EQ) developer who said that the player base enjoyed being the victims of GM vs Uberguild events: we casual players been lied to and used, suckered into playing games that had no intention of treating us with respect or consideration for the express purpose of populating those games as  victims, 2nd-class citizens, and scrubs for the ego-amusement of others - including the developers themselves.

 

 

 

 

this post is win

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

Originally posted by Meleagar

"OP, you make developers look like bad guys.  its ultimately the players choice"

Because players have a choice to play the game or not doesn't change the nature of what the developers have created the past 15-20 years.  Perhaps I was a little harsh - developers are just people trying to earn a living, but it's not like the player base hasn't been letting them know that they wanted a friendlier, less elitest, more inclusive and diverse game all this time. Every tiny step forward towards a more casual, friendly, and less exclusive, elitist MMORPG has been met with ranting, raving and derision from the harcore players, and always- always - with a bait-and-switch "new" game from developers.

"Without fear, it's pointless."

All I can say about this attitude is good riddance.

One thing that I LOVED was when a poster on the GW2 beta forums complained about not being able to create an actually evil character; even a street-gutter thief only had noble (or semi-noble) responses in the personal story bits. The ANET rep said, to sum up: "Other games have that. This isn't that kind of game."

I was talking about me feeling the fear, not causing it... but once again, it;s your way or the highway. This is a very common stance on both extreme sides of this coin, and I am not about to waste time challenging the extremists here.

You have apparently missed the essence of my post, that for the past 15-20 years "the fear" is all we have had to choose from. You are the one saying that "without fear, it's pointless" as if MMOGing is pointless without artificially induced fear and distrust between players, which is no doubt the same kind of perspective that has been driving the development of these games ever since they first came out. I would have no complaint, nor any negative commentary to issue about MMOG developers had they offered us something other than this exclusionary, elitist, griefing, ninjaing, kill-stealing. play-like-it's-your-professional-obsession tripe for the past couple of decades through scores and scores of titles.

Yeah, you bet. I hold the developers accountable for their share in perpetuating this.

All this time,it's been your way or the highway - their way or the highway, fear and distrust and exclusivity and only-pros-need-apply or the highway, casual players are invited to be our scrubs and peasantry - or the highway.

Now that there's a game that actually changes this, actually puts something together that fosters an entirely different dynamic and perspective not based on fear and distrust, and I tell you and your fear-addicted ilk "good riddance" because I finally have ONE MMOG I can relax and have fun in that isn't at anyone else's expense, nor their's at mine, and I'm the one saying it's "my way or the highway"?

It's not "my way" or the highway, it's GW2 or "your choice of about 1000 other MMOGs" that share your "fear and distrust" perspective of why one should play an MMOG "or it's pointless".

Originally posted by Bladestrom

Originally posted by Redemp

Originally posted by Puremallace

Then you get to end game and realize it is all about 5mans instances and zerg vs zerg vs zerg. Nice post, but Rift was doing this as early as February of last year and got the video to prove it posted on youtube.

 You're in super bitter mode arn't you? I used to read what you replied in threads ... I'm not sure what game ruined you so.

+1, it is  strange how some people can apparantly enjoy being miserable and try to encourage negativity. this diseased attitude is destroying gaming discussion communities.

The assumption that somehow GW2 created huge groups of people doing stuff is pure idiocy or a SEVERELYYYYY narrow minded view of mmorpg's. Sorry I have to be the one to give the reality check here.

Was there a auto group feature? Could you press a button and be in a raid group??

I don't know which game was the first to encourage ninja looting, but that was probably just carelessness on the part of the game developers.  The next several dozen were probably mostly just copying what previous games had done.

But Guild Wars 2 is hardly the first game to stop ninja looting.  For starters, there is Guild Wars 1.

It's the same story with kill stealing.  It probably started with careless game design and continued with copycat developers, but Guild Wars 2 isn't the first game to stop it.  For example, in Champions Online, if two players aren't grouped and both participate in killing a mob, both get quest credit for it.

Well stated OP. Your exactly right. IMO its this simple fact alone that makes GW2 a next Gen MMO. 

In fact I really think we need to have a new acronym for the type of gameplay presented by GW2. They have already renamed thier RvR to WvW. I really think thier PvE should be called WvE. As it is one of the first games that really does make it a "All of Us" vs "The Enviroment" complementing or supporting the "Our Server" vs "Thier Server" PvP aspects.

Originally posted by Meleagar

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

Originally posted by Meleagar

"OP, you make developers look like bad guys.  its ultimately the players choice"

Because players have a choice to play the game or not doesn't change the nature of what the developers have created the past 15-20 years.  Perhaps I was a little harsh - developers are just people trying to earn a living, but it's not like the player base hasn't been letting them know that they wanted a friendlier, less elitest, more inclusive and diverse game all this time. Every tiny step forward towards a more casual, friendly, and less exclusive, elitist MMORPG has been met with ranting, raving and derision from the harcore players, and always- always - with a bait-and-switch "new" game from developers.

"Without fear, it's pointless."

All I can say about this attitude is good riddance.

One thing that I LOVED was when a poster on the GW2 beta forums complained about not being able to create an actually evil character; even a street-gutter thief only had noble (or semi-noble) responses in the personal story bits. The ANET rep said, to sum up: "Other games have that. This isn't that kind of game."

I was talking about me feeling the fear, not causing it... but once again, it;s your way or the highway. This is a very common stance on both extreme sides of this coin, and I am not about to waste time challenging the extremists here.

You have apparently missed the essence of my post, that for the past 15-20 years "the fear" is all we have had to choose from. You are the one saying that "without fear, it's pointless" as if MMOGing is pointless without artificially induced fear and distrust between players, which is no doubt the same kind of perspective that has been driving the development of these games ever since they first came out. I would have no complaint, nor any negative commentary to issue about MMOG developers had they offered us something other than this exclusionary, elitist, griefing, ninjaing, kill-stealing. play-like-it's-your-professional-obsession tripe for the past couple of decades through scores and scores of titles.

Yeah, you bet. I hold the developers accountable for their share in perpetuating this.

All this time,it's been your way or the highway - their way or the highway, fear and distrust and exclusivity and only-pros-need-apply or the highway, casual players are invited to be our scrubs and peasantry - or the highway.

Now that there's a game that actually changes this, actually puts something together that fosters an entirely different dynamic and perspective not based on fear and distrust, and I tell you and your fear-addicted ilk "good riddance" because I finally have ONE MMOG I can relax and have fun in that isn't at anyone else's expense, nor their's at mine, and I'm the one saying it's "my way or the highway"?

It's not "my way" or the highway, it's GW2 or "your choice of about 1000 other MMOGs" that share your "fear and distrust" perspective of why one should play an MMOG "or it's pointless".

 

Well I sincerely hope that you get many more games like GW2 that cater to your playstyle, that's something I have have wished for since day 1. Both styles of games for both style of players :)

I wouldn't dream of wishing GW2 to change their game to suit me, or any other game for that matter. I simply bypass the ones that have been heavily restrictive imo and I play the ones that create an atmosphere that I enjoy, where I have to very careful who I trust and they have to be very careful who they screw.

To you though, I dont think "good riddance" from my types of games, I simply wish you the best in your game.

Originally posted by semantikron

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

everything that I am trying to convey in my posts in this thread, can be summed up in this sentence.

Not everyone who enjoys the freedom that allows a griefer to grief, is a griefer himself (or herself).

You don't even have to defend a dog-eat-dog MMO on those grounds, imo.  (edit:  by that I mean, it's not necessary to move your defense of a predatory game environment to grounds of personal taste).   If a game is designed so that its basic mechanics revolve around survival, then there is no such thing as 'griefing', just choices between individual and mutual survival.  Griefing comes into existence when the game suggests to the player that it is about one thing, and it is possible for players to game the mechanics and create a sub-game where making that suggestion out to be a lie is the game for them.  There's nothing wrong with 'griefing' on a billiards table.  But it's generally not cool to bump a pinball machine while someone else is playing.

^ Thank you! Much better said than I did :)

Originally posted by Puremallace

The assumption that somehow GW2 created huge groups of people doing stuff is pure idiocy or a SEVERELYYYYY narrow minded view of mmorpg's. Sorry I have to be the one to give the reality check here.

 

Was there a auto group feature? Could you press a button and be in a raid group??

You didn't need to.  Aside from having your own private chat and being able to see people's health bars through another means there was no benefit to grouping up.  Aside from that everything you could do inside a group you could do out, from buffing other people, sharing (poor wood for it since you get FULL credit no matter how many hit it, unlike in other MMOs) EXP, using cross profession combos, healing, and partaking in events.  You could also see nearby corpses to revive whether they are in your group or not on your map and other nearby players would be visible on your map as green dots also.

You could request to join others groups if you absolutely needed to group up.

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

Originally posted by semantikron

Originally posted by Mithrandolir

everything that I am trying to convey in my posts in this thread, can be summed up in this sentence.

Not everyone who enjoys the freedom that allows a griefer to grief, is a griefer himself (or herself).

You don't even have to defend a dog-eat-dog MMO on those grounds, imo.  (edit:  by that I mean, it's not necessary to move your defense of a predatory game environment to grounds of personal taste).   If a game is designed so that its basic mechanics revolve around survival, then there is no such thing as 'griefing', just choices between individual and mutual survival.  Griefing comes into existence when the game suggests to the player that it is about one thing, and it is possible for players to game the mechanics and create a sub-game where making that suggestion out to be a lie is the game for them.  There's nothing wrong with 'griefing' on a billiards table.  But it's generally not cool to bump a pinball machine while someone else is playing.

^ Thank you! Much better said than I did :)

Which is pretty much what I was also saying, in a certainly more confusing way :)