Why does Arenanet Punish Solo Play?
1 2
In what way does it improve the game to have people eternally not be able to complete a PS because they designed the final PS to be so difficult you need a group because they have a serious problem with BALANCE in game design?
Wait, are you seriously calling Arah Story difficult? O.o
It was difficult at launch, but Arah story mode is quite easy now. The problem is finding groups because it’s long but not very rewarding.
Which isn’t what tigirius is implying, but that’s the issue.
Strange, the fact that the game is too solo friendly is the reason gw2 isn’t as good as it could be in my opinion. The only things that require a group of players are world bosses(lulz), dungeons, fotm and guild missions. The rest of the game can be solo’d and its painfully easy. I miss the days of gw1 with missions that required a group of people to progress further into the game. Not to mention the glory of uw/fow, but I’m getting off topic. If they made the game any more solo friendly the game will begin to die. (imo)
I think you are wrong. Look at WIldstar, they made their content too group dependant that the game basically died before it even took off. Their developers were surprised to find that most players enjoy solo based content. I’m glad Guild Wars made contents now that can be soloed as well as you can party up and do them together. It’s best to have contents that caters to both groups of players.
You just have to learn the game, you don’t seem to be understanding how the encounter works.
mmm. what?
if GW2 punishing anything is group play, player interdependence and tactical decisions.
“Punish” is a bit of a weird word. There’s nothing punishing about it, but do keep one thing in mind:
This is a MM ORPG. The game is factually based on the idea of thousands to millions of players constantly interacting. If the game wouldn’t reward playing together with others, it’d be completely unsuited to its choice of genre, and have no reason to exist in the first place.
The strength of heart to face oneself has been made manifest. The persona Carighan has appeared.
For players that only have armor sets for WvW, with more balanced stats instead go on full damage, it might take a longer time >_>.
Pve is a litle weird game play, all player need is zerker and burst for win, this is the game mode where other stats are mostly useless.
Gw2 is not punishing solo or team players, they are “punishing” other stat users that are not using power/crit stats
1st April joke, when gw2 receives a “balance” update.
(edited by Aeolus.3615)
This is a game design fault.
and yet, apparently thousands of people are just doing fine. Makes you wonder, doesn´t it?
This game is an MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game). It was designed based on this international entertainment standard to play with other people and interact with them, not playing alone all by yourself.
If a person wishes to play a game alone, explore alone, have adventures alone, and do combats alone, then a single-player game is more suited then a massively multiplayer game.
Server: Seafarer’s Rest
All of LS is perfectly soloable, except for some achievements (some are extremely hard alone, but not impossible). Some fights are quite a step up from open world PvE though, so if you have no experience with other, harder PvE content it might seem a bit harsh at first. However, with some practice all classes can do it, you certainly don’t need a “tank”.
I have soloed all LS and LS achievements (except timed library escort), even doing several achievements at once when they were not mutually exclusive, and never had any problem.
I actually feel more punished by group play because having to cope with less experienced/skilled players and/or over trivialised content that is not even more fun to play (experienced by helping some acquaintances through there own achievements they had hard time with). So much that I never grouped even when I did the same story 18 times (lots of chars) for the BTLC key on all classes and with some exotic stat combinations amidst.
In my opinion, the real problem is that the LS do not scale up properly when playing in group, which gets players overly accustomed to easy mode. By my own definition, “achievement” is not something you are supposed to earn walking in the park.
As for NPC, one time I went to bed in the story labyrinthe without logging off and the next day, I was still alive without broken armor: the NPC had kept me alive overnight chainkilling the luminescent lurker. That is not exactly what I call useless NPC.
@Acrisor: LS story is an extension of personal story. Not of “guild story” (guild being used in the same sense NPC talk of DE)
Mastering your character, knowing how and when to switch between builds and melee/ranged weapons, knowing boss mechanics and properly dodging/comboing turns everything into easymode (speaking of solo play. There is a bit more to group play).
(edited by Gilgalas.7860)
This game is an MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game). It was designed based on this international entertainment standard to play with other people and interact with them, not playing alone all by yourself.
If a person wishes to play a game alone, explore alone, have adventures alone, and do combats alone, then a single-player game is more suited then a massively multiplayer game.
The money isn’t in that direction so much. Your point is …well. You don’t actually have one. You’re speaking towards a presumption – a belief defined by an expectation.
Bold the word ‘multiplayer’ all you like and try to attempt to absolutely define its meaning until your face falls off – it does not and shall never matter, because that’s not how people tend to prefer to do things.
Source: the entire MMO market’s ever-expanding trend towards servicing the solo-friendly player experience. That’s where the money is.
And that’s the end of all stories there are to tell on it. Game studios really don’t care about ‘supposed to be’ when ‘Supposed To Be’ shoves their game away from where the money is rather than towards it.
Sorry Mario. The cash is in another castle. Be doop boop de woop boop, BOOP!
One is only the smartest person in the room if they are alone.
This game is an MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game). It was designed based on this international entertainment standard to play with other people and interact with them, not playing alone all by yourself.
If a person wishes to play a game alone, explore alone, have adventures alone, and do combats alone, then a single-player game is more suited then a massively multiplayer game.
The money isn’t in that direction so much. Your point is …well. You don’t actually have one. You’re speaking towards a presumption – a belief defined by an expectation.
Bold the word ‘multiplayer’ all you like and try to attempt to absolutely define its meaning until your face falls off – it does not and shall never matter, because that’s not how people tend to prefer to do things.
Source: the entire MMO market’s ever-expanding trend towards servicing the solo-friendly player experience. That’s where the money is.
And that’s the end of all stories there are to tell on it. Game studios really don’t care about ‘supposed to be’ when ‘Supposed To Be’ shoves their game away from where the money is rather than towards it.
Sorry Mario. The cash is in another castle. Be doop boop de woop boop, BOOP!
The thread is not about money, but about ArenaNet punishing solo play in a massively multiplayer online game.
In my opinion this is absolutely correct and fair, because the definition of MMORPG implies the exact opposite of solo play. If you consider money should change the game from massively multiplayer game to a solo game, then your feedback should be noticed by ArenaNet and release another game designed especially for you.
Server: Seafarer’s Rest
(edited by Acrisor.8097)
Well yeah, the question is why one has to do a dungeon to finalize the personal story, that is something I’ve always wondered about.
Other than that most content of this game is perfectly solo able, I should know as I solo nearly everything which makes my friend wonder, because “you know, this is a MMO”. I like to play with other people but I don’t want them to be around 24/7.
Edit: Typos
The thread is not about money, but about ArenaNet punishing solo play in a massively multiplayer online game.
I don’t believe they do. From my perspective, they make solo play very easy to do and respectably seamless to transition out of into group activities (example: not needing to join a party to contribute meaningfully to world boss fights, events, etc).
The availability of quite the vibrant array of very solo-friendly activities suggests to me that they warmly encourage it. Punishing it?
I don’t see it. If someone’s personal lack of skill or specific and circumstantial inability to do something feels punishing to that particular someone, that’s not Anet punishing them.
So, I don’t agree that the principle question is even valid. Why does Arenanet punish solo play? They don’t seem to me to do so at all.
One is only the smartest person in the room if they are alone.
In my opinion this is absolutely correct and fair, because the definition of MMORPG implies the exact opposite of solo play. If you consider money should change the game from massively multiplayer game to a solo game, then your feedback should be noticed by ArenaNet and release another game designed especially for you.
There is no ‘One True Definition’ to what an MMORPG is other than a game a ‘massive’ number of people can concurrently play. There is absolutely nothing dictated by the genre as to exactly how that is accomplished or what social proximities must be enforced by it.
You have a specific idea of what an MMO ‘should be’? That’s very nice for you. If your idea doesn’t align itself in the direction of where the money is, you’re going to continue to be disappointed, because businesses run on money, not should-be’s and frivolous conjecture.
One is only the smartest person in the room if they are alone.
In my opinion this is absolutely correct and fair, because the definition of MMORPG implies the exact opposite of solo play. If you consider money should change the game from massively multiplayer game to a solo game, then your feedback should be noticed by ArenaNet and release another game designed especially for you.
There is no ‘One True Definition’ to what an MMORPG is other than a game a ‘massive’ number of people can concurrently play. There is absolutely nothing dictated by the genre as to exactly how that is accomplished or what social proximities must be enforced by it.
You have a specific idea of what an MMO ‘should be’? That’s very nice for you. If your idea doesn’t align itself in the direction of where the money is, you’re going to continue to be disappointed, because businesses run on money, not should-be’s and frivolous conjecture.
This is the difference between “what we want” and “what we get”. I am happy with what I want (multiplayer) and express my feedback. You are happy with what you get (solo play) because of what money can offer.
Server: Seafarer’s Rest
In my opinion this is absolutely correct and fair, because the definition of MMORPG implies the exact opposite of solo play. If you consider money should change the game from massively multiplayer game to a solo game, then your feedback should be noticed by ArenaNet and release another game designed especially for you.
There is no ‘One True Definition’ to what an MMORPG is other than a game a ‘massive’ number of people can concurrently play. There is absolutely nothing dictated by the genre as to exactly how that is accomplished or what social proximities must be enforced by it.
You have a specific idea of what an MMO ‘should be’? That’s very nice for you. If your idea doesn’t align itself in the direction of where the money is, you’re going to continue to be disappointed, because businesses run on money, not should-be’s and frivolous conjecture.
This is the difference between “what we want” and “what we get”. I am happy with what I want (multiplayer) and express my feedback. You are happy with what you get (solo play) because of what money can offer.
What I want has never and will never be a major factor in what these game studios do if my opinion isn’t measured in money.
Far be it from me to castigate you for giving feedback – that isn’t my intention at all. I simply wanted to point out that mmorpg doesn’t actually mean much, and money dictates everything relevant about what they’re going to be made to mean no matter what is our isn’t said.
Everything else really does wind up being secondary to outright trivial when the time comes to discuss budgets and design plans.
One is only the smartest person in the room if they are alone.
I’m behind on the LS, so my experience is a couple of episodes ago as I’m working on catching up. I’m definitely noticing some wide disparities in difficulty depending on profession.
I’m having a much easier time on professions that have stronger ranged attacks and movement. One example are the Mordrem wolves with their insane flanking damage. Allow them to flank, and they practically one shot you. Not such a problem on professions built for kiting and ranged damage, but on professions with limited mobility and much stronger melee damage the fight is much more difficult.
I had the same issue in the attack in the omphalos chamber of the Pale Tree. The Shadow of the Dragon lays down so much ridiculous AoE, combined with the tendrils AoE, you have to be constantly moving into the small safe zones left. They’re very clearly telegraphed, so it’s not hard to “stay out of the fire”, but on a predominantly melee character that means a lot of time doing very little damage back while you dance, compared to the kiters who can stay safe and still return fire the whole time.
I know, there’s no such thing as a melee or ranged class in GW2. But some (ele,mes) have easy access to a ton of mobility and ranged damage, while others (guard) can only dish out reasonable ranged damage if foes are stationary or cc’able and don’t have a ton of escape mobility.
1 2