Guild Wars 2

They matched the players perfectly. One of the best mechanics in Gw was killing a boss and then capping his elite.

SEARING FLAMES FOREVER.

Agree’d, another cool thing about GW1 was when a skill got changed with a buff or whatever, so did the enemies.

Prophecies enemies lacked depth (but still light years ahead of GW2 enemies). But before anyone retorts with, well GW2 is a new game, just like Prophecies was. They’ve had 5 years to build on what they learnt in GW1. Now it just feels like they threw all that knowledge out the window.

kKagari.6804:

Prophecies enemies lacked depth (but still light years ahead of GW2 enemies). But before anyone retorts with, well GW2 is a new game, just like Prophecies was. They’ve had 5 years to build on what they learnt in GW1. Now it just feels like they threw all that knowledge out the window.

I see that retort flown around all too much, and that’s my exact reply. They’ve had years to learn from their mistakes, yet they haven’t kept ANY of that information.

I disagree. Its one of the things I didnt like about GW1 was the constant feeling of playing PVP in the PVE enviroment. Factions was a prime example of this. Everywhere you went each encounter was essentially an AI “team” that all had synergistic skills. This showed up the huge gap in player vs enemy skillsets, and was one of the reasons so many players were turned off Factions/Cantha as a whole. PvP is fine for those that like it, I have nothing against it and participated in plenty of PvP events. But when I am playing PvE, it is BECAUSE I dont want to play PvP and do not want the “same” experience with the game.

Thats why Nightfall didnt have this as much in PVE. Yes there were numerous encounters that were the same as factions but there was also plenty that were also just “units” and not entire teams.

Its why I believe that in this respect Gw2 is far superior. Much less enemy skill synergy, no PvP bleedthrough in the PvE enviroment, and much easier to understand enemies skillsets.

Lexandro.1456:

I disagree. Its one of the things I didnt like about GW1 was the constant feeling of playing PVP in the PVE enviroment. Factions was a prime example of this. Everywhere you went each encounter was essentially an AI “team” that all had synergistic skills. This showed up the huge gap in player vs enemy skillsets, and was one of the reasons so many players were turned off Factions/Cantha as a whole. PvP is fine for those that like it, I have nothing against it and participated in plenty of PvP events. But when I am playing PvE, it is BECAUSE I dont want to play PvP and do not want the “same” experience with the game.

Thats why Nightfall didnt have this as much in PVE. Yes there were numerous encounters that were the same as factions but there was also plenty that were also just “units” and not entire teams.

Its why I believe that in this respect Gw2 is far superior. Much less enemy skill synergy, no PvP bleedthrough in the PvE enviroment, and much easier to understand enemies skillsets.

Nightfall had it just as much as Factions. The issue with Factions might have been that the ‘curve’ was steeper. The tutorial area experience gain was sped up, people didn’t like that, so they addressed it.

There were the kournan military, the djinns, the hekets just to name a few. Their synergies might not be as deadly to the player, but they were definitely present.

How about we just get the title of the thread more accurately changed to something like “Suggestions – Improve AI as it shocking” and put aside the comparison of a mature AI in a different game to the obviously immature one in this game.

Look at either enemy or friendly AI and I would be shocked to discover any developer willing to put their hand up and take responsibility for it – and to be honest I think the real AI dev is still locked in the Anet basement and the work-experience kid knocked this one up just before launch.

WITHOUT making comparisons to GW1, or manifesto references, most of the points people have here are valid gripes that could be presented in a different way…

kKagari.6804:

Nightfall had it just as much as Factions. The issue with Factions might have been that the ‘curve’ was steeper. The tutorial area experience gain was sped up, people didn’t like that, so they addressed it.

There were the kournan military, the djinns, the hekets just to name a few. Their synergies might not be as deadly to the player, but they were definitely present.

Nightfall had much less instances of “full team” encounters in the world itself. Yes as I said there were plenty of them in the game, however most were reserved to set piece events in the instance/quest chain. Generally when on “walkabout” you would encounter groups of 1 or 2 types of enemies.

In factions however this was not the case, it was ALL teams making it essentially PvP with an Ai team as opponents every encounter. The slums are a perfect example of this, almost every gang was a team consisting of wars/eles/mes etc all synegising as a team. Even when you thought it wasnt, and started combat there would be a pop-up team to “complete” the units you were fighting in to a team.

As I said I dont mind PvP and quiet enjoyed playing various events in GW1. But PvP is PvP, and should not ever bleed across in to PvE. Which is why I like the current enemy arrangement in GW2. It tends to be groups of one type, supplemented by one or two units of another type making the enemies composition less of an issue.

Lexandro.1456:

kKagari.6804:

Nightfall had it just as much as Factions. The issue with Factions might have been that the ‘curve’ was steeper. The tutorial area experience gain was sped up, people didn’t like that, so they addressed it.

There were the kournan military, the djinns, the hekets just to name a few. Their synergies might not be as deadly to the player, but they were definitely present.

Nightfall had much less instances of “full team” encounters in the world itself. Yes as I said there were plenty of them in the game, however most were reserved to set piece events in the instance/quest chain. Generally when on “walkabout” you would encounter groups of 1 or 2 types of enemies.

In factions however this was not the case, it was ALL teams making it essentially PvP with an Ai team as opponents every encounter. The slums are a perfect example of this, almost every gang was a team consisting of wars/eles/mes etc all synegising as a team. Even when you thought it wasnt, and started combat there would be a pop-up team to “complete” the units you were fighting in to a team.

As I said I dont mind PvP and quiet enjoyed playing various events in GW1. But PvP is PvP, and should not ever bleed across in to PvE. Which is why I like the current enemy arrangement in GW2. It tends to be groups of one type, supplemented by one or two units of another type making the enemies composition less of an issue.

Well, agree to disagree. I think a lot of people would agree the AI in this game is insufficient for any sort of engaging challenge. I’d like to not be able to play this game with my eyes closed.

If you want an engaging challenge, do dungeons or Fractals that are designed for multiple players. The rest of the PvE enviroment in general is designed for solo or team play. The choice is the players, not an enforced one by the game.

gw 1 enemys for me was take out the healers asap the rest just fell.
but at least it was a challenge.

gw 2 everything seems to stun/daze or the odd axe thrown at you.
(mostly in orr anyway)
ai not as good.

but we don’t have proper tanks or healers,so maybe that why they are more boring than in gw.
If they was as good in gw ppl will just come crying to this forum say this op that is op.

gw 2 ai is kinda boring though.

Lexandro.1456:

If you want an engaging challenge, do dungeons or Fractals that are designed for multiple players. The rest of the PvE enviroment in general is designed for solo or team play. The choice is the players, not an enforced one by the game.

The only thing that caters for team play according to Arenanet in GW2 is higher hp pools. The challenge in fractals and dungeon is hardly engaging. You can’t do more with the limited depth available to the enemies in this game. I also think its incorrect to argue that solo players should not face any challenges at all. It can be as simple as giving svanir mobs attacks that have greater effect on chilled units, therefore engaging the player to remove the chill asap.

The difference between Guild Wars 1 and 2 has nothing to do with the quality of the AI. It has to do with the fact GW 1 was instanced and GW 2 is open world. Saying this AI doesn’t exist in Guild Wars 2 shows me people that haven’t looked at dungeon and fractal groups. The team synergy there is pretty strong, trust me.

Like in CM explorable mode where you have riflemen who do more damage to moving targets, while you have bombers who make sure you have to move, or you get blown up. Or thugs who heal and buff allies. The dredge are another good example of various roles that do various things.

But even Guild Wars 1 players like me, wouldn’t be happy or stand a chance in a game where you have mobs respawning that have that kind of synergy. That’s why groups like that have to be reserved for instances.

You might argue that they should have more groups like that on a longer repawn timer, but that wouldn’t work either, because once you kill the group, the next guy running through will have nothing to do.

kKagari.6804:

‘I swung a sword. I swung a sword again. Hey! I swung it again.’ This.

This change of philosophy is true for players when they first advertised that, however NPC’s are still swinging the sword over and over.

Enemies in Guild Wars 2 feel like the ones in WoW, bland and static. The only one who sort of has somewhat of a GW1 AI and skillset is Giganticus Lupicus and boy is that fight awesome. (Not being sarcastic)

I agree, the enemies in gw2 are incredibly boring. Even dungeon/fractal mobs are just sacks of high health and auto attack.

I’m really missing the back and forth of encounters from gw1.

Vayne.8563:

The difference between Guild Wars 1 and 2 has nothing to do with the quality of the AI. It has to do with the fact GW 1 was instanced and GW 2 is open world. Saying this AI doesn’t exist in Guild Wars 2 shows me people that haven’t looked at dungeon and fractal groups. The team synergy there is pretty strong, trust me.

Like in CM explorable mode where you have riflemen who do more damage to moving targets, while you have bombers who make sure you have to move, or you get blown up. Or thugs who heal and buff allies. The dredge are another good example of various roles that do various things.

But even Guild Wars 1 players like me, wouldn’t be happy or stand a chance in a game where you have mobs respawning that have that kind of synergy. That’s why groups like that have to be reserved for instances.

You might argue that they should have more groups like that on a longer repawn timer, but that wouldn’t work either, because once you kill the group, the next guy running through will have nothing to do.

Well, I’m not really sure why I should trust you I ran dungeons enough to get a full set of armor from each.

Think of it in terms of the events then. When bandits or whatever assault a camp, they could very well play the group synergy card here. Enemies could very well assault a camp not clumped together to get AoE’d down. I’m not saying theres none of this in the game, but it is very shallow in the scope of the whole game.

As for general running around in the field. Why do brackish skale have to inhabit the whole area. The diversity of the enemies and the nature of engaging ‘world’ mobs could be so much better if they had a few types of these guys around, rather than just one.

kKagari.6804:

Vayne.8563:

The difference between Guild Wars 1 and 2 has nothing to do with the quality of the AI. It has to do with the fact GW 1 was instanced and GW 2 is open world. Saying this AI doesn’t exist in Guild Wars 2 shows me people that haven’t looked at dungeon and fractal groups. The team synergy there is pretty strong, trust me.

Like in CM explorable mode where you have riflemen who do more damage to moving targets, while you have bombers who make sure you have to move, or you get blown up. Or thugs who heal and buff allies. The dredge are another good example of various roles that do various things.

But even Guild Wars 1 players like me, wouldn’t be happy or stand a chance in a game where you have mobs respawning that have that kind of synergy. That’s why groups like that have to be reserved for instances.

You might argue that they should have more groups like that on a longer repawn timer, but that wouldn’t work either, because once you kill the group, the next guy running through will have nothing to do.

Well, I’m not really sure why I should trust you I ran dungeons enough to get a full set of armor from each.

Think of it in terms of the events then. When bandits or whatever assault a camp, they could very well play the group synergy card here. Enemies could very well assault a camp not clumped together to get AoE’d down. I’m not saying theres none of this in the game, but it is very shallow in the scope of the whole game.

As for general running around in the field. Why do brackish skale have to inhabit the whole area. The diversity of the enemies and the nature of engaging ‘world’ mobs could be so much better if they had a few types of these guys around, rather than just one.

The dynamic events, again, are made for open world They could put those mobs in there, but they’d have to complete redo scaling to do it, because if you happen to be one guy and stumble on that event, you’d likely be eaten alive. The entire thing I said about the open world is true. It’s too hard to balance it out that way. It’s why those things are only found in instances.

As for the diversity of the world. sure they could put in different skales but being the game is centered around events, not just killing random mobs, it would make a difference to a whole lot less people than you think.

Every single developer has to make time choices about how much time something takes to produce including maintainence. So they make changes. They made changes, recently to the krait. They’re much harder now.

Did you see the complaint threads about them? I did. And it’s fair enough. You make something that hard, and it is harder, and you turn off a lot of the casual players who are just minding their own business having fun. You want challenge and I like challenge too. But I also recognized that I’m in a vast minority. The game was never going to be tailor made for me…but I understand why that is.

Lexandro.1456:

I disagree. Its one of the things I didnt like about GW1 was the constant feeling of playing PVP in the PVE enviroment. Factions was a prime example of this. Everywhere you went each encounter was essentially an AI “team” that all had synergistic skills. This showed up the huge gap in player vs enemy skillsets, and was one of the reasons so many players were turned off Factions/Cantha as a whole. PvP is fine for those that like it, I have nothing against it and participated in plenty of PvP events. But when I am playing PvE, it is BECAUSE I dont want to play PvP and do not want the “same” experience with the game.

Thats why Nightfall didnt have this as much in PVE. Yes there were numerous encounters that were the same as factions but there was also plenty that were also just “units” and not entire teams.

Its why I believe that in this respect Gw2 is far superior. Much less enemy skill synergy, no PvP bleedthrough in the PvE enviroment, and much easier to understand enemies skillsets.

If PvE is like PvP for u, than you are saying that the AI’s in the game is smarter than you as a person.. Cus i don’t really get it.. If you see a group of mobs, you need 10 minutes to kill it in normal mode… cus that’s PVP.. so i find it really sad for u, but for normal people it takes 5-20 seconds to kill a group of mobs.

CoRtex.2157:

Lexandro.1456:

I disagree. Its one of the things I didnt like about GW1 was the constant feeling of playing PVP in the PVE enviroment. Factions was a prime example of this. Everywhere you went each encounter was essentially an AI “team” that all had synergistic skills. This showed up the huge gap in player vs enemy skillsets, and was one of the reasons so many players were turned off Factions/Cantha as a whole. PvP is fine for those that like it, I have nothing against it and participated in plenty of PvP events. But when I am playing PvE, it is BECAUSE I dont want to play PvP and do not want the “same” experience with the game.

Thats why Nightfall didnt have this as much in PVE. Yes there were numerous encounters that were the same as factions but there was also plenty that were also just “units” and not entire teams.

Its why I believe that in this respect Gw2 is far superior. Much less enemy skill synergy, no PvP bleedthrough in the PvE enviroment, and much easier to understand enemies skillsets.

If PvE is like PvP for u, than you are saying that the AI’s in the game is smarter than you as a person.. Cus i don’t really get it.. If you see a group of mobs, you need 10 minutes to kill it in normal mode… cus that’s PVP.. so i find it really sad for u, but for normal people it takes 5-20 seconds to kill a group of mobs.

Actually, in PvP, a good player is much smarter than any AI, but what’s the percentage of good PvPers to really bad ones? I’m not a major PvPer, but even I, with little experience, have seen some really bad PVPers out there. I’m pretty sure AI is superior to them in a fight. lol

Within the GW model, I [as many others have] enjoyed the tactical nature of squad-based synergies and counter-play. I applaud the developers of GW for having a system that places ‘weaker’ builds on foes in appropriate areas and ‘stronger’ builds on foes in appropriate areas without resorting to ‘buckets of HP’ and other duller replacements. I give Slavers’ Exile as an example. Many of the foes in Slavers’ Exile had builds that encouraged their foes [we, the players] to possess a higher skill level than foes in other areas. Fortunately, Slavers’ Exile was also labelled appropriately [Elite]. By diversifying the builds we faced, and giving foes builds [more] worth having, we received difficulty increases without needless tediousness presently seen. Effectively built and run squads could still move out with purpose in any given area, a talent lost in 250 years with up/down scaling and buckets of HP.

Skill[s] over Stats. Perhaps a philosophy lost in the mists.

Anchorwind.9016:

Within the GW model, I [as many others have] enjoyed the tactical nature of squad-based synergies and counter-play. I applaud the developers of GW for having a system that places ‘weaker’ builds on foes in appropriate areas and ‘stronger’ builds on foes in appropriate areas without resorting to ‘buckets of HP’ and other duller replacements. I give Slavers’ Exile as an example. Many of the foes in Slavers’ Exile had builds that encouraged their foes [we, the players] to possess a higher skill level than foes in other areas. Fortunately, Slavers’ Exile was also labelled appropriately [Elite]. By diversifying the builds we faced, and giving foes builds [more] worth having, we received difficulty increases without needless tediousness presently seen. Effectively built and run squads could still move out with purpose in any given area, a talent lost in 250 years with up/down scaling and buckets of HP.

Skill[s] over Stats. Perhaps a philosophy lost in the mists.

Yep. Slaver’s Exiles was an awesomely hard dungeon to beat for a lot of people. You really had to think to beat it. Of course that was introduced two years after release and not there at this point in Guild Wars 1’s development. What you had was the Underworld and the Fissure of Woe, neither of which has the complexity or synergy of Slaver’s.

As time goes on, I believe you’ll see more challenges in harder dungeons, maybe even harder dungeon modes for people who want that challenge.

The real question is what percentage of people want it. Because if it’s not a big enough percentage, then Anet would have to spend time programming something that only a small percentage of the player base would ever see or make use of.

CoRtex.2157:

Lexandro.1456:

I disagree. Its one of the things I didnt like about GW1 was the constant feeling of playing PVP in the PVE enviroment. Factions was a prime example of this. Everywhere you went each encounter was essentially an AI “team” that all had synergistic skills. This showed up the huge gap in player vs enemy skillsets, and was one of the reasons so many players were turned off Factions/Cantha as a whole. PvP is fine for those that like it, I have nothing against it and participated in plenty of PvP events. But when I am playing PvE, it is BECAUSE I dont want to play PvP and do not want the “same” experience with the game.

Thats why Nightfall didnt have this as much in PVE. Yes there were numerous encounters that were the same as factions but there was also plenty that were also just “units” and not entire teams.

Its why I believe that in this respect Gw2 is far superior. Much less enemy skill synergy, no PvP bleedthrough in the PvE enviroment, and much easier to understand enemies skillsets.

If PvE is like PvP for u, than you are saying that the AI’s in the game is smarter than you as a person.. Cus i don’t really get it.. If you see a group of mobs, you need 10 minutes to kill it in normal mode… cus that’s PVP.. so i find it really sad for u, but for normal people it takes 5-20 seconds to kill a group of mobs.

What? I cant really make sense of your post other than that you seem to want to attack me. Other than making a baseless assumption on my skill level in the current game or the previous one, could you make your point more succinctly.

Just so its clear to you what my actual point was; In Factions, world exploration and encounters were designed around PvP style combat. The developers Anet specifically said that Factions was heavily PvP focused in its design and implemenation in all areas. That means that a single encounter by you and your team was almost always a “match up” against an AI controlled team. Not individual units who are in the same area, a TEAM with synergised skills and AI tactics. It became nothing short of tedious that nearly every encounter was the same thing repeated over and over ad infinatum.

This is not the case in GW2, which is for the better imo.

I prefer the overall combat in GW2, this includes pacing and the mobs. Characters should standing-out in their abilities compared to the most of the mobs running around the world.

That’s not to say mobs shouldn’t be challenging or unable to use player skills but it should be used with a careful touch. For example, a mob that uses multiple heals should be a boss or special encounter otherwise that mechanic becomes tedious and repetitive. Just like it did in GW1 where even the bloody insects could heal each other.

Vayne.8563:

Anchorwind.9016:

Within the GW model, I [as many others have] enjoyed the tactical nature of squad-based synergies and counter-play. I applaud the developers of GW for having a system that places ‘weaker’ builds on foes in appropriate areas and ‘stronger’ builds on foes in appropriate areas without resorting to ‘buckets of HP’ and other duller replacements. I give Slavers’ Exile as an example. Many of the foes in Slavers’ Exile had builds that encouraged their foes [we, the players] to possess a higher skill level than foes in other areas. Fortunately, Slavers’ Exile was also labelled appropriately [Elite]. By diversifying the builds we faced, and giving foes builds [more] worth having, we received difficulty increases without needless tediousness presently seen. Effectively built and run squads could still move out with purpose in any given area, a talent lost in 250 years with up/down scaling and buckets of HP.

Skill[s] over Stats. Perhaps a philosophy lost in the mists.

The real question is what percentage of people want it.

I would offer the answer to that is, unfortunately, another variable. Is the added difficulty due to new AI that encourages better player skill, or a wider variety of team-play*? Or is the added difficulty due to gimmicks, that will discourage many for various reasons? Perhaps the added ‘difficulty’ is due to stat-increases on mobs, but does not require better gameplay, just more time invested [due to having to repeat the same tasks more to accomplish the same result]?

The best contribution to this concern I can offer is: Difficulty is itself not a barrier for many when implemented properly. Cheapness, tediousness, and needlessness are barriers that discourage.

Cheapness: Stealth, as an example. How many have not been frustrated that they died, but because of the manner in which they were killed? It wasn’t “I was defeated by a superior opponent” but instead “Oh great, I didn’t even see most of that fight, and can only flail around and guess…this is fun” laced with heavy sarcasm.

Tediousness: Buckets of HP. How many arrive at the point where we wish for the “Get on with it” button. We’ve dodged plenty of attacks, we’ve burned through our entire skillbars, on multiple weapons, but we’re still in the same spot against the same foe – not because we lack skill, but because of the tediousness of the foe.

Needlessness: Monster-Only Exclusive abilities, Unstrippable Boons, and other ‘Handwavium’ hard-coding to intentionally make a fight frustrating. While I do not think this is a significant across-the-board concern yet, it would take little for it to become so. Alternately, Long Recharges on so many of our skills. The pace of combat has slowed considerably in 250 years in terms of how often my #1 skill is used now vs my predecessors.

*As in: A Balanced Warrior, A Balanced Guardian, A Specialized Mesmer, A Specialized Elementalist, and a Defensive Engineer? As opposed to ‘4x-5xDPS’ due to large HP Pools and large periods of static combat.

Slightly longer than I anticipated.

Lexandro.1456:

CoRtex.2157:

Lexandro.1456:

I disagree. Its one of the things I didnt like about GW1 was the constant feeling of playing PVP in the PVE enviroment. Factions was a prime example of this. Everywhere you went each encounter was essentially an AI “team” that all had synergistic skills. This showed up the huge gap in player vs enemy skillsets, and was one of the reasons so many players were turned off Factions/Cantha as a whole. PvP is fine for those that like it, I have nothing against it and participated in plenty of PvP events. But when I am playing PvE, it is BECAUSE I dont want to play PvP and do not want the “same” experience with the game.

Thats why Nightfall didnt have this as much in PVE. Yes there were numerous encounters that were the same as factions but there was also plenty that were also just “units” and not entire teams.

Its why I believe that in this respect Gw2 is far superior. Much less enemy skill synergy, no PvP bleedthrough in the PvE enviroment, and much easier to understand enemies skillsets.

If PvE is like PvP for u, than you are saying that the AI’s in the game is smarter than you as a person.. Cus i don’t really get it.. If you see a group of mobs, you need 10 minutes to kill it in normal mode… cus that’s PVP.. so i find it really sad for u, but for normal people it takes 5-20 seconds to kill a group of mobs.

What? I cant really make sense of your post other than that you seem to want to attack me. Other than making a baseless assumption on my skill level in the current game or the previous one, could you make your point more succinctly.

Just so its clear to you what my actual point was; In Factions, world exploration and encounters were designed around PvP style combat. The developers Anet specifically said that Factions was heavily PvP focused in its design and implemenation in all areas. That means that a single encounter by you and your team was almost always a “match up” against an AI controlled team. Not individual units who are in the same area, a TEAM with synergised skills and AI tactics. It became nothing short of tedious that nearly every encounter was the same thing repeated over and over ad infinatum.

This is not the case in GW2, which is for the better imo.

You’re doing that, right now. I started a mesmer recently and was thoroughly amazed that the game got slightly harder compared to my necromancer. I didn’t care for who I fought when I was a necromancer. Every encounter could be done with staff 2 3 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 1. ad infinatum. Every encounter on my guardian would be greatsword 3 5 5 4 2 1 1 1 1.

Ok, not every. 99.9%.

DoctorOverlord.8620:

where even the bloody insects could heal each other.

They could. We could also utilize interrupts to prevent them from doing so. We could use punishment hexes to remove the effectiveness from their healing. We could prioritize targets, with direct and indirect damage to overwhelm their healing attempts. We had, at our disposal, the capability to counter their skill with skill of our own. The same can not be said presently in equal measure.

The only event in all PVE that is hard but fun in combat…. Is Grenth, it requires strategy.

In ALL over PVE there is no depht in Bosses or Mobs, it’s just clicks and kills, also in events, they doesn’t represent nothing that will make me need to focus for fight them.

Only dungeons and fractals give me that, PVE can’t give me a decent fight anymore.

If thats how you chose to play, then yes. My point was that GW1 you had little choice in how you played the content. It always required a team (bar one instance iirc), which absolutely needed “trinity” characters for vast swathes of content, and forced you in to pre-set “sripted” encounters.

GW2 gives me plenty of choice in how I go about playing the content, in that I dont physically need to group up to proceed at any point except where I chose to. I mix and match weapons for best effect as I want to, when I want to, for varying effects in encounters designed with that in mind.

I have four characters myself and the differing playstyles between them is very satisfying and enjoyable. More so that GW1 was to me. Dont get me wrong I loved GW1 and did almost every single bit of content at least once to see it all. Only thing I dont remember doing was the Jade sea dungeon (name escapes me, was the luxxon city one).

Anchorwind.9016:

They could. We could also utilize interrupts to prevent them from doing so. We could use punishment hexes to remove the effectiveness from their healing. We could prioritize targets, with direct and indirect damage to overwhelm their healing attempts. We had, at our disposal, the capability to counter their skill with skill of our own. The same can not be said presently in equal measure.

And we had to do the same for the centaurs. And the harpies. And even dinosaurs. The gameplay was always the same and it did not require learning anything once you got past the basics of interrupt timing, recognizing the little icons etc. The gameplay was not about skill, it was about good builds.

When I was playing GW1 there would be encounters where I would get repeatedly destroyed. Then I would switch my build and I would waltz through the mobs without any problem. My skill had not increased in the minute it took me to do that. And if I went back to my old build, I would get destroyed again.

Now perhaps figuring out those builds is what you mean by ‘skill’ in the game. That is not a skill, that is a solution to a puzzle. A skill is something you learn and teaches you how to succeed. You don’t suddenly forget it because you changed icons on your hotbar. And you can’t learn it by copying a build code from a wiki like you could with GW1.

I understand that people enjoy the puzzle solving aspect of GW1 but I personally found GW1’s PvE combats some of the most tedious things I have seen in a video game. Once you figured out the build it was exactly what you outlined. Time your interrupts. Watch the little icons. Use debuffs. You could destroy mobs with little effort if you had the right build and to me that is boring.

Now all that doesn’t not apply to PvP, of course. Fighting a real player always requires skill which is why I cound GW1’s PvP much better done than the PvE content.

Lexandro.1456:

I disagree. Its one of the things I didnt like about GW1 was the constant feeling of playing PVP in the PVE enviroment. Factions was a prime example of this. Everywhere you went each encounter was essentially an AI “team” that all had synergistic skills. This showed up the huge gap in player vs enemy skillsets, and was one of the reasons so many players were turned off Factions/Cantha as a whole. PvP is fine for those that like it, I have nothing against it and participated in plenty of PvP events. But when I am playing PvE, it is BECAUSE I dont want to play PvP and do not want the “same” experience with the game.

Thats why Nightfall didnt have this as much in PVE. Yes there were numerous encounters that were the same as factions but there was also plenty that were also just “units” and not entire teams.

Its why I believe that in this respect Gw2 is far superior. Much less enemy skill synergy, no PvP bleedthrough in the PvE enviroment, and much easier to understand enemies skillsets.

I’m sorry but I cannot sympathize with this point.

Even in a PvE environment I like my mind to be challenged. In GW2 the PvE open world is just a joke, the risen are probably the most complex grouping of mobs in the GW2 open world, but that’s really not saying a lot because it isn’t complex on a general level.

One of my favorite dungeons in this game is Ascalon Catacombs because the groupings of enemies, even though not wholly synergistic, is still challenging. Think Path 2 when you fight the ghosts. It’s always slightly random wave of enemies, which can potentially consist of monks, necro’s, rangers, warriors, mesmers, and elamentalists.

They still aren’t as challenging as I’d like them to be, but they are challenging to a degree. Even still, they don’t seem smart at all.

It is my belief that anything in an MMORPG that makes you think is good. If I’m not thinking in an MMO, I’ll get bored. I didn’t play GW1 but you talking about Factions and running into teams of enemies in PvE that had all these synergies makes me feel like I really missed out on some great PvE. I like PvP sometimes, but I really dislike people in general so I don’t PvP often. I would love to have some more PvP-like challenges in PvE, that would be amazing.

I’ll get flamed for saying this, but one of the reasons I’m really looking forward to The Elder Scrolls: Online is because they keep harping on PvE mobs will use each other’s abilities very similarly to what you described your scenario’s in factions to be. Mobs will protect their healers, they’ll combine abilities to try and mess you up, etc. I mean I won’t believe it till I see it because GW2’s manifesto said the same thing, but it just doesn’t measure up. I really want to be a believer though.

kKagari.6804:

‘I swung a sword. I swung a sword again. Hey! I swung it again.’ This.

Very nice thread, and makes a really good point
Also..

And yet the more I play, the more I realise that GW2 enemies DO use the same skills as players. It’s just harder to tell because you no longer have enemy skill monitors. There are a lot of creature unique skills, sure, but I would say there are more that are simply identical to player skills.

Very nice read.

I’ve been saying this recently. We need ennemies that play by the same rules as us. We need them to use dodge and have an endurance bar that can we can affect through weakness. We need them to use positionning against us, for instance by giving them attacks that deal more damage from behind, or the closer or farther away they are from us. We need them to use conditions and boons as well as their removal and manipulation almost as often as they are used in PvP. We need them to use active forms of protection and damage mitigations (blocking, dodging, protection, regeneration, aegis and healing) that actually encourage dynamic play instead of them relying on increasingly large (and boring) HP pools. We need them to build combos and skill sequences that we need to stop to avoid loosing instead of bosses that just have some oneshot ability to provide some sort of so-called ‘challenge’.

The devs said they want to avoid splitting skills between different game modes (PvE, PvP, WvW). The only way to do that is by making every game modes use the same rules and utilize the full potential of the combat system. Building an AI that cannot use the fundamentals of GW2’s wonderful combat system was a very big mistake, and until they change that PvE will forever be a missed opportunity. Well, PvE is already one of the best in an MMO, but its quality and fun could go through the roof if it wasn’t so disconnected from the basics of the combat system.

I think GW2 is a conscious move away from “build wars”. The problem with enemies having synergistic builds is that it starts imposing requirements on players builds. eg. “we need to take boon stripping for this encounter” or “we need to take stuns for this encounter”.
it becomes even worse when some mechanics are only available to certain classes, then it becomes “looking for more, monks only” all over again.

gw2 was designed to be more accessible, with fewer limits on what classes or builds could participate in content. Unfortunately the tradeoff is that the game becomes more casual – now it matters much less what build you run or what classes you bring.

So, moving forward, if we want hardcore content that offers a special challenge, it’s better to create challenges based on actions/positioning rather than builds. Make success based on what people DO rather than what they BRING.

Fractals are perhaps an example of this, although personally i don’t like the puzzle element to the fights there. i prefer to encourage combat tactics like flanking, formation depth, spreading out vs clumping up, focus fire vs spreading fire, etc.

From the monster design point of view, that means monsters need more physical mechanics that players need to deal with. eg. phalanx enemies that are strong when close together. You need to split up their formation to defeat them more easily.

It’s a big pity body blocking was removed from GW2. it would have offered many wonderful physical based mechanics to play with.

For inspiration, Anet should look at enemies in various console action games. For example, I’m playing MGR revengeance right now, and it has many interesting combat mechanics and enemies that don’t revolve around “build wars”. Other games include Dark/Demons Souls, the Devil May Cry series, God of War etc.

As thisolderhead has said, these points could easily be made without specific inference that GW1 was a superior game – implementing challenging AI is an industry issue, not just limited to GW1 vs 2. That marginalises the topic in my view.

However, I don’t necessarily believe that the application of GW1’s AI was inherently superior to GW2’s based on their use of player skill-set templates. I liked that the PvE material felt like training for PvP despite not intending to play any PvP – it was an interesting concept and balancing act for a game that promoted both styles of play. But I didn’t like how my reactions to each ‘class’ of enemy became scripted over time and how enemies felt like reskins of each other. As much as people complain about ‘just having to press the same buttons’ for GW2’s enemies, I fell into a set response to each GW1 enemy type that didn’t feel particularly more engaging, and I might even argue that it restricted solo play due to the necessity of proper target management. In general, I feel that GW2 is more open to experimentation within the player’s own class and less punishing of misstep, and I hope that future content builds on that and provides more opportunities for it as I admit that I would like for there to be more choice within skills and such.

I enjoy challenging content and complexity (and an associated difficulty with predicting an opponent’s next move) generally makes things more challenging if they are not hampered in other mechanical ways. However, I don’t feel it’s right to suggest that all players should agree with me, so I would never suggest that GW2’s system is inherently inferior to GW1’s based on my own preferences. More challenging content without an associated change in loot drops would likely have an impact upon farming and the ability of certain classes to efficiently farm and regardless of farming being something I enjoy, it is something that others enjoy and it fuels the economy as a result. That’s just an example as to how looking at this from a purely personal perspective could result in a negative impact on people who don’t share my point of view, and who I don’t expect to.

Anchorwind.9016:

Within the GW model, I [as many others have] enjoyed the tactical nature of squad-based synergies and counter-play. I applaud the developers of GW for having a system that places ‘weaker’ builds on foes in appropriate areas and ‘stronger’ builds on foes in appropriate areas without resorting to ‘buckets of HP’ and other duller replacements. I give Slavers’ Exile as an example. Many of the foes in Slavers’ Exile had builds that encouraged their foes [we, the players] to possess a higher skill level than foes in other areas. Fortunately, Slavers’ Exile was also labelled appropriately [Elite]. By diversifying the builds we faced, and giving foes builds [more] worth having, we received difficulty increases without needless tediousness presently seen. Effectively built and run squads could still move out with purpose in any given area, a talent lost in 250 years with up/down scaling and buckets of HP.

Skill[s] over Stats. Perhaps a philosophy lost in the mists.

^ ^ A lot of this…

I don’t want to go back to all instances as this is now more an MMO than GW1 was in design but to balance this there were design changes that compound the removal of instances…

Open world balance for solo explorer →
Enemy groups become solo enemies →
Enemies no longer have interaction with one another (heal, prot, defend) →
Limited skill set for single enemy →
Extremely shallow encounters →
Add HP and CC to make the fight longer

I’m not going to say that the instanced content in dungeons is perfect because it’s not but it is at least better than almost any open world content. Now if more of it could be balanced around a mixed group of 5 with varying abilities and skills rather than DPS a huge health pool or solve a gimmick, we could make some real progress.

its improving i find.

some fractals encounters are really nice.
(fire harpy)
some of the new AC encounters too.
(troll, new kohler)

i see it improving slowly but surely!

Rieselle.5079:

I think GW2 is a conscious move away from “build wars”. The problem with enemies having synergistic builds is that it starts imposing requirements on players builds. eg. “we need to take boon stripping for this encounter” or “we need to take stuns for this encounter”.
it becomes even worse when some mechanics are only available to certain classes, then it becomes “looking for more, monks only” all over again.

gw2 was designed to be more accessible, with fewer limits on what classes or builds could participate in content. Unfortunately the tradeoff is that the game becomes more casual – now it matters much less what build you run or what classes you bring.

So, moving forward, if we want hardcore content that offers a special challenge, it’s better to create challenges based on actions/positioning rather than builds. Make success based on what people DO rather than what they BRING.

Fractals are perhaps an example of this, although personally i don’t like the puzzle element to the fights there. i prefer to encourage combat tactics like flanking, formation depth, spreading out vs clumping up, focus fire vs spreading fire, etc.

From the monster design point of view, that means monsters need more physical mechanics that players need to deal with. eg. phalanx enemies that are strong when close together. You need to split up their formation to defeat them more easily.

It’s a big pity body blocking was removed from GW2. it would have offered many wonderful physical based mechanics to play with.

For inspiration, Anet should look at enemies in various console action games. For example, I’m playing MGR revengeance right now, and it has many interesting combat mechanics and enemies that don’t revolve around “build wars”. Other games include Dark/Demons Souls, the Devil May Cry series, God of War etc.

GW2 is actually more equipped for what you described as a shortfall. For instance, if I needed boon stripping its very likely the skillset I’m using already can do just that, or I can simply swap out a utility. Couldn’t do that in GW1, which made some PvE encounters Build Wars as you put it.

And I agree, the GW2 engine is robust and could easily handle putting boss encounters like Monster Hunter in the game, but its constantly plagued by bad decisions and we’re left with these boring enemy encounters.

GW2 is extremely casual.

Want proof? Go dig through the posts where people were complaining at the Wintersday jumping puzzle. A jumping puzzle that I completed on my first try and never went back again.

We have a generation of people who get angry when they fail. Instead of blaming themselves and trying to improve they expect someone else to come in and fix it.

Cut the Rope is considered a casual game. Requires thought.
Where’s my Water is considered a casual game (it uses comic sans font). Requires thought.
Angry Birds is considered a casual game. On the surface level it requires minimal thought, but the leaderboard mentality helps promote mastery. (getting highest scores possible)

Casual games aren’t all brainless. GW2 can be played without using your brain (mostly). To call it casual is an insult to the casual games industry.