Raiding is on the verge of destroying huge segments of the GW2 community, if it hasn't already - Page 5 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Raiding is on the verge of destroying huge segments of the GW2 community, if it hasn't already

1235

Comments

  • Trevor Boyer.6524Trevor Boyer.6524 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 6, 2018

    Let me pinpoint where the rift is:

    First Era:

    • When raids first arrived, the population was larger than it is now.
    • Everyone was new and as such, they tolerated each other's learning process in raids. At least for awhile.
    • People were forming raid teams and were excited to teach other players to structure guilds around raiding.
    • A hardcore community had been formed, over the course of time this happened ->

    Current Era:

    • Population is smaller now than when raids had first arrived.
    • The hardcore community is very experienced now and a bit burnt out on teaching new players raids, so many of them avoid it completely.
    • Hardcore community begins heavily gating joins into their guilds & teams.
    • New players looking to get involved in raids missed the first listed era, where everyone was excited to learn and teach and to form their guilds & teams, back when they tolerated the learning process of others.
    • New players now must attempt to find other new players to play with in a smaller community, which at times can prove to be extremely difficult to accomplish without heavy handed scheduling, which is difficult to make work when the population is smaller and there are less people to fish in who have similar schedules.
    • New players get burnt out on raids before they even get started because finding not even a good group, but just a group that wants to dedicate time to learn, who are able to schedule this together, is becoming extremely difficult to do.

    The rift lies within time elapsed. The longer time goes on, the more experienced the original hardcore community becomes and the more burnt out they get on teaching new players, and the gates get taller. The longer time goes on, the smaller the population gets, and the more difficult it becomes for new players arriving on the scene to even find a group that will tolerate their learning process and/or be able to schedule times together to create a learning process. This effect will only get worse as the years go on. The raiders who are experienced, that are in here saying "the rift is only in your mind" aren't understanding the incredible inconvenience in organization that new players arriving on the scene are experiencing. It is a luxury to have been around during the first raid era, and to have maintained steady experience level ever since. The gates are open for most of those players.

    The 10 Commandments Of Conquest
    Abide by the commandments or God shalt deliver unto thee a packet of salt as often as thou did break them
    -> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/38081/the-10-commandments-of-conquest#1

  • yann.1946yann.1946 Member ✭✭✭

    @Cristalyan.5728 said:

    @rabenpriester.7129 said:

    @Cristalyan.5728 said:

    The rift has been created even before the first raid wing reached the game. By the developers statement the the raids are only for .... This only creates a segregation. Segregation = separation. Separation = rift. And after this statement, the entire development team acted to put it into practice. Repeating that this is a good thing.

    Honestly, the rift between you and me can't be big enough. Believe me when I say it's not the game mode that makes me want to interact as little as possible with people of a mindset such as yours.

    Oh, then I'm safe. Because, you know, the theory of "the Chosen" is for the persons with ..... manipulable minds. Because of this "you belong to the select class of the few Chosen... " the people tend be more indulgent with the .... "gods" whispering them this pleasant lie.

    This is the reason I consider the statement "the raids are ONLY...." to be a mistake from ANet. More than this, an insult for all the persons able to think. Something like .... the raids will be very difficult, something like the dungeons at at launch .... ** is a challenging statement. Something like **the raids are ONLY for ... is not challenging at all. It seems like a bribery tentative. Unfortunately, some did not resist this tentative.

    To end this: I'm truly happy you avoid to interact with persons thinking like me. Because, you know, persons like me lack the rudeness to tell you the same. And you spare me for the effort to find a polite way to tell you the truth.

    Doesn't the raids will be ridiculously hard and the raids will only be clearable by those who are good at the game basicly same thing.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 6, 2018

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Cattastrophy.2874 said:
    Don't join groups or play with people who don't want the same things in the game as you do. They won't like you, you won't like them.

    That's one problem with raid system now. It mixes people with different goals in the same content, while at the same time being demanding enough that even small differences in opinion/behaviour can cause tempers to flare.

    I think thats a problem with almost every mode. Ticket farmers in PVP and WVW who just want rewards and dont want to enjoy the mode itself clash constantly with the more hardcore players of that mode.

    Yes, that's true. Basically, it happens every time you create a mode where players need to depend on each other, design it for a specific group of players, and then create rewards aimed at a completely different group of players. The more effort and teamplay the content requires, the more toxicity is going to happen.

    So what exactly is the advantage of making this content then, if it invariably breeds a toxic environment?

    The enjoyment people get out of group content is worth the risk of toxicity from a small number of people. If you remove all group content from an MMO you end up with a single player live service. This is not what gw2 is intended to be.

    Do you really want all dungeons, fractals, raids, wvw, pvp and group events removed from the game?

    You are confusing social content with group content.

    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    Spare me the "Oh no it would be a Solo Game without group content" there is only Fractals, Dungeons and Raids that are group content, and there is a huge world of the game that is social content.

    They could get rid of the group content, BDO did, and it;s doing fine.

    Social and Group content. That's some new terms you got there.

    It's called evolving with the times, as games change, so too do the terms to accurately describe what is going on.

    Trying to claim a Meta Event and a Fractal are the same, or both group content, is as egregiousness as trying to claim that a private birthday party and a block party are the same because they are both called parties.

    at some point.. you're just wrong.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    The longer time goes on, the more experienced the original hardcore community becomes and the more burnt out they get on teaching new players, and the gates get taller. The longer time goes on, the smaller the population gets, and the more difficult it becomes for new players arriving on the scene to even find a group that will tolerate their learning process and/or be able to schedule times together to create a learning process.

    As you said, as time goes on, some raiders burn out and leave, but they open up spots in their static teams, perfect opportunity for new players to join in and fill those spots. What we might need is a way for static groups to find replacements for such situations. It's not a good idea to get a random, because they are well random, and the LFG is full of lies and deceit. However, if instead of a completely random person you got an actual guild member, that would be great to teach them raids. Teaching a random pug is not a very good usage of your time, which is why such trainers aren't as common. On the other hand teaching a guild member is an investment, because they will join up the static team and become part of it.

    Something like the "Looking for Group" sub-forum, but available in-game, would do the trick. Experienced teams that lose players over time will be able to fill them, and newer players will be able to find teams to join. Static/permanent teams, because let's face it, nobody should ever be forced to take a random nobody from the LFG tool and go over the trouble of training them, just for the one time they will play with them.

  • SkyShroud.2865SkyShroud.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 6, 2018

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Cattastrophy.2874 said:
    Don't join groups or play with people who don't want the same things in the game as you do. They won't like you, you won't like them.

    That's one problem with raid system now. It mixes people with different goals in the same content, while at the same time being demanding enough that even small differences in opinion/behaviour can cause tempers to flare.

    I think thats a problem with almost every mode. Ticket farmers in PVP and WVW who just want rewards and dont want to enjoy the mode itself clash constantly with the more hardcore players of that mode.

    Yes, that's true. Basically, it happens every time you create a mode where players need to depend on each other, design it for a specific group of players, and then create rewards aimed at a completely different group of players. The more effort and teamplay the content requires, the more toxicity is going to happen.

    So what exactly is the advantage of making this content then, if it invariably breeds a toxic environment?

    The enjoyment people get out of group content is worth the risk of toxicity from a small number of people. If you remove all group content from an MMO you end up with a single player live service. This is not what gw2 is intended to be.

    Do you really want all dungeons, fractals, raids, wvw, pvp and group events removed from the game?

    You are confusing social content with group content.

    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    Spare me the "Oh no it would be a Solo Game without group content" there is only Fractals, Dungeons and Raids that are group content, and there is a huge world of the game that is social content.

    They could get rid of the group content, BDO did, and it;s doing fine.

    Social and Group content. That's some new terms you got there.

    It's called evolving with the times, as games change, so too do the terms to accurately describe what is going on.

    Trying to claim a Meta Event and a Fractal are the same, or both group content, is as egregiousness as trying to claim that a private birthday party and a block party are the same because they are both called parties.

    at some point.. you're just wrong.

    That's some justification there but you seems to forgotten the importance of defining the terms, just what are "social" and "group"?
    Reminder, assumptions caused many conflicts in the world.

    Founder & Leader of Equinox Solstice [TIME], a Singapore-Based International PvX Guild
    Henge of Denravi Server
    www.gw2time.com

    --

    Explanations of WvW Structures & Populations Issues

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Rhiannon.1726 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Let me pinpoint where the rift is:

    First Era:

    • When raids first arrived, the population was larger than it is now.
    • Everyone was new and as such, they tolerated each other's learning process in raids. At least for awhile.
    • People were forming raid teams and were excited to teach other players to structure guilds around raiding.
    • A hardcore community had been formed, over the course of time this happened ->

    Current Era:

    • Population is smaller now than when raids had first arrived.
    • The hardcore community is very experienced now and a bit burnt out on teaching new players raids, so many of them avoid it completely.
    • Hardcore community begins heavily gating joins into their guilds & teams.
    • New players looking to get involved in raids missed the first listed era, where everyone was excited to learn and teach and to form their guilds & teams, back when they tolerated the learning process of others.
    • New players now must attempt to find other new players to play with in a smaller community, which at times can prove to be extremely difficult to accomplish without heavy handed scheduling, which is difficult to make work when the population is smaller and there are less people to fish in who have similar schedules.
    • New players get burnt out on raids before they even get started because finding not even a good group, but just a group that wants to dedicate time to learn, who are able to schedule this together, is becoming extremely difficult to do.

    The rift lies within time elapsed. The longer time goes on, the more experienced the original hardcore community becomes and the more burnt out they get on teaching new players, and the gates get taller. The longer time goes on, the smaller the population gets, and the more difficult it becomes for new players arriving on the scene to even find a group that will tolerate their learning process and/or be able to schedule times together to create a learning process. This effect will only get worse as the years go on. The raiders who are experienced, that are in here saying "the rift is only in your mind" aren't understanding the incredible inconvenience in organization that new players arriving on the scene are experiencing. It is a luxury to have been around during the first raid era, and to have maintained steady experience level ever since. The gates are open for most of those players.

    Several raid mechanics can be ignored.

    Or nearly entire fights (I'm looking at Gorseval)

  • maxwelgm.4315maxwelgm.4315 Member ✭✭✭

    @Rhiannon.1726 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Let me pinpoint where the rift is:

    First Era:

    • When raids first arrived, the population was larger than it is now.
    • Everyone was new and as such, they tolerated each other's learning process in raids. At least for awhile.
    • People were forming raid teams and were excited to teach other players to structure guilds around raiding.
    • A hardcore community had been formed, over the course of time this happened ->

    Current Era:

    • Population is smaller now than when raids had first arrived.
    • The hardcore community is very experienced now and a bit burnt out on teaching new players raids, so many of them avoid it completely.
    • Hardcore community begins heavily gating joins into their guilds & teams.
    • New players looking to get involved in raids missed the first listed era, where everyone was excited to learn and teach and to form their guilds & teams, back when they tolerated the learning process of others.
    • New players now must attempt to find other new players to play with in a smaller community, which at times can prove to be extremely difficult to accomplish without heavy handed scheduling, which is difficult to make work when the population is smaller and there are less people to fish in who have similar schedules.
    • New players get burnt out on raids before they even get started because finding not even a good group, but just a group that wants to dedicate time to learn, who are able to schedule this together, is becoming extremely difficult to do.

    The rift lies within time elapsed. The longer time goes on, the more experienced the original hardcore community becomes and the more burnt out they get on teaching new players, and the gates get taller. The longer time goes on, the smaller the population gets, and the more difficult it becomes for new players arriving on the scene to even find a group that will tolerate their learning process and/or be able to schedule times together to create a learning process. This effect will only get worse as the years go on. The raiders who are experienced, that are in here saying "the rift is only in your mind" aren't understanding the incredible inconvenience in organization that new players arriving on the scene are experiencing. It is a luxury to have been around during the first raid era, and to have maintained steady experience level ever since. The gates are open for most of those players.

    I see that completely different:

    When raiding was new:
    People often just had exotic equipment.
    There were hardly any guides.
    There was no Quantify/Snowcrows site for builds and guides how to play this build.
    It took more casual guilds weeks to get a safe VG kill, and months to even think about trying to do Gorseval with no updraft.
    And do you remember how hard it was to get a Matthias kill?

    Nowadays:
    Ascended equipment is easier to get.
    There are lots of guides for the raids.
    People have easy access to guides how to play the meta builds.
    Several raid mechanics can be ignored.
    Dedicated training guilds/discord servers exist.
    With some experienced players in a training run you have a very high chance to get Sloth and Matthias killed on one evening.
    If someone in your guild is in a raiding group, you can ask if you could try raiding when they have a free spot. You'll get several raid bosses down in one evening.

    Our perception will always be skewed towards thinking everything is fine because we are actively "where things are happening" inside the raiding scene. Not completely disagreeing with you, but I also hardly would say that the situation got better just because it got easier to veterans, at best situation is the same as always for newbies. Skipping updrafts and greens is certainly not easy to fully new groups (a group of up to 4 people is clearly hard carrying the newbie team if they get it down without actually training with the mechanics first), let alone other mechanics further down the line.

    What happens in other raiding games (other than the community slowly suffocating but always lingering there like WoW), is that content becomes trivialized and accessible to all players when new stuff gets released, purely out of vertical progression. You can experience and get drops from bosses you couldn't before as long as you play the waiting game, even if you can't seem to complete it at the time of release. Raids in gw2 will never become trivial to every kind of player, and the bottom level of skill requirement is always going to be present. The only way to introduce new people is for new people to quite literally git gud and that doesn't even match the rest of the game's philosophy, so I wouldn't say that the raiding discords and guilds have more people than they used to have, not at all.

  • Vinceman.4572Vinceman.4572 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 7, 2018

    @maxwelgm.4315 said:
    The only way to introduce new people is for new people to quite literally git gud and that doesn't even match the rest of the game's philosophy, so I wouldn't say that the raiding discords and guilds have more people than they used to have, not at all.

    You assume it is Anet's intention to have more players in raids like we have now. I'll tell you something: it never was.

  • lodjur.1284lodjur.1284 Member ✭✭✭

    @maxwelgm.4315 said:
    Our perception will always be skewed towards thinking everything is fine because we are actively "where things are happening" inside the raiding scene. Not completely disagreeing with you, but I also hardly would say that the situation got better just because it got easier to veterans, at best situation is the same as always for newbies. Skipping updrafts and greens is certainly not easy to fully new groups (a group of up to 4 people is clearly hard carrying the newbie team if they get it down without actually training with the mechanics first), let alone other mechanics further down the line.

    What happens in other raiding games (other than the community slowly suffocating but always lingering there like WoW), is that content becomes trivialized and accessible to all players when new stuff gets released, purely out of vertical progression. You can experience and get drops from bosses you couldn't before as long as you play the waiting game, even if you can't seem to complete it at the time of release. Raids in gw2 will never become trivial to every kind of player, and the bottom level of skill requirement is always going to be present. The only way to introduce new people is for new people to quite literally git gud and that doesn't even match the rest of the game's philosophy, so I wouldn't say that the raiding discords and guilds have more people than they used to have, not at all.

    Not all content has to be for all players. There is plenty of more "casual" content I have no interest in, it being in the game does in no way lessen my enjoyment of it, having diverse kinds of content means they can attract different kinds of player. In fact there being content one is unable to do (due to skill/gear/whatever) I always found to be inspiring (back when I was a lot younger and much worse at games compared to what I am now).

    Ögonen omges av vita och svarta penseldrag som gör att de ser större ut än vad de egentligen är. Baksidan av lodjurets öron kantas av svart päls som slutar i den karaktäristiska tofsen högst upp på örat. Lodjurets svans är kortare än de flesta andra kattdjurs.

  • Belorn.2659Belorn.2659 Member ✭✭✭

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Let me pinpoint where the rift is:

    First Era:

    • When raids first arrived, the population was larger than it is now.
    • Everyone was new and as such, they tolerated each other's learning process in raids. At least for awhile.
    • People were forming raid teams and were excited to teach other players to structure guilds around raiding.
    • A hardcore community had been formed, over the course of time this happened ->

    Current Era:

    • Population is smaller now than when raids had first arrived.
    • The hardcore community is very experienced now and a bit burnt out on teaching new players raids, so many of them avoid it completely.
    • Hardcore community begins heavily gating joins into their guilds & teams.
    • New players looking to get involved in raids missed the first listed era, where everyone was excited to learn and teach and to form their guilds & teams, back when they tolerated the learning process of others.
    • New players now must attempt to find other new players to play with in a smaller community, which at times can prove to be extremely difficult to accomplish without heavy handed scheduling, which is difficult to make work when the population is smaller and there are less people to fish in who have similar schedules.
    • New players get burnt out on raids before they even get started because finding not even a good group, but just a group that wants to dedicate time to learn, who are able to schedule this together, is becoming extremely difficult to do.

    As someone who plays on off-hours (ie EU time on NA Server) my experience is almost the opposite.
    First Era:

    • When the population was larger the progression teams were always full, with 2+ existing fillers
    • A lot of drama when teams and guild formed, collapsed, reformed and fell apart again.
    • Gating and harsh requirement to filter out the "good" recruits from the bad in order to retain players and create progression.
    • Party search was only used for training.

    Current era:

    • Progression happens now days as long you have 4-5 veterans. Few requirements on the "dps" players.
    • Almost all groups are looking for core members and there is no filler backups.
    • Party search is used by static teams.
    • Few new teams or guilds get created. When one collapse most players just leave the game from burnout.
  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Let me pinpoint where the rift is:

    First Era:

    • When raids first arrived, the population was larger than it is now.
    • Everyone was new and as such, they tolerated each other's learning process in raids. At least for awhile.
    • People were forming raid teams and were excited to teach other players to structure guilds around raiding.
    • A hardcore community had been formed, over the course of time this happened ->

    Current Era:

    • Population is smaller now than when raids had first arrived.
    • The hardcore community is very experienced now and a bit burnt out on teaching new players raids, so many of them avoid it completely.
    • Hardcore community begins heavily gating joins into their guilds & teams.
    • New players looking to get involved in raids missed the first listed era, where everyone was excited to learn and teach and to form their guilds & teams, back when they tolerated the learning process of others.
    • New players now must attempt to find other new players to play with in a smaller community, which at times can prove to be extremely difficult to accomplish without heavy handed scheduling, which is difficult to make work when the population is smaller and there are less people to fish in who have similar schedules.
    • New players get burnt out on raids before they even get started because finding not even a good group, but just a group that wants to dedicate time to learn, who are able to schedule this together, is becoming extremely difficult to do.

    The rift lies within time elapsed. The longer time goes on, the more experienced the original hardcore community becomes and the more burnt out they get on teaching new players, and the gates get taller. The longer time goes on, the smaller the population gets, and the more difficult it becomes for new players arriving on the scene to even find a group that will tolerate their learning process and/or be able to schedule times together to create a learning process. This effect will only get worse as the years go on. The raiders who are experienced, that are in here saying "the rift is only in your mind" aren't understanding the incredible inconvenience in organization that new players arriving on the scene are experiencing. It is a luxury to have been around during the first raid era, and to have maintained steady experience level ever since. The gates are open for most of those players.

    How do you explain then that the rift existed already from the very beginning, and was started to be quite visible after the firs raid announcements (so, even before the content was even in the game)?

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Cattastrophy.2874 said:
    Don't join groups or play with people who don't want the same things in the game as you do. They won't like you, you won't like them.

    That's one problem with raid system now. It mixes people with different goals in the same content, while at the same time being demanding enough that even small differences in opinion/behaviour can cause tempers to flare.

    I think thats a problem with almost every mode. Ticket farmers in PVP and WVW who just want rewards and dont want to enjoy the mode itself clash constantly with the more hardcore players of that mode.

    Yes, that's true. Basically, it happens every time you create a mode where players need to depend on each other, design it for a specific group of players, and then create rewards aimed at a completely different group of players. The more effort and teamplay the content requires, the more toxicity is going to happen.

    So what exactly is the advantage of making this content then, if it invariably breeds a toxic environment?

    The enjoyment people get out of group content is worth the risk of toxicity from a small number of people. If you remove all group content from an MMO you end up with a single player live service. This is not what gw2 is intended to be.

    Do you really want all dungeons, fractals, raids, wvw, pvp and group events removed from the game?

    You are confusing social content with group content.

    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    Spare me the "Oh no it would be a Solo Game without group content" there is only Fractals, Dungeons and Raids that are group content, and there is a huge world of the game that is social content.

    They could get rid of the group content, BDO did, and it;s doing fine.

    Social and Group content. That's some new terms you got there.

    It's called evolving with the times, as games change, so too do the terms to accurately describe what is going on.

    Trying to claim a Meta Event and a Fractal are the same, or both group content, is as egregiousness as trying to claim that a private birthday party and a block party are the same because they are both called parties.

    at some point.. you're just wrong.

    That's some justification there but you seems to forgotten the importance of defining the terms, just what are "social" and "group"?
    Reminder, assumptions caused many conflicts in the world.

    I defined exactly what each was, in simple words that anyone should have been able to understand the difference.

    You are confusing social content with group content.

    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • maxwelgm.4315maxwelgm.4315 Member ✭✭✭

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @maxwelgm.4315 said:
    The only way to introduce new people is for new people to quite literally git gud and that doesn't even match the rest of the game's philosophy, so I wouldn't say that the raiding discords and guilds have more people than they used to have, not at all.

    You assume it is Anet's intention to have more players in raids like we have now. I'll tell you something: it never was.

    I guess my point though is that even a constant flux of players is not feasible as it is. Population is not only X fraction of total GW2 players today, but it also decreases overall in time. I suppose it could be argued that it doesn't matter because it's the nature of online games to slowly but surely diminish their population, so yeah, I gotta agree with that.

  • Amaranthe.3578Amaranthe.3578 Member ✭✭✭

    Raids are broken for an entirely different reason.
    Your point is invalid. Youre supposed to keep looking for a guild with similar minded individuals. I know it require talking and socializing which is comparable to Chinese torture but it will get you there. Once you find the right play group the things you describe here wont be issues.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 8, 2018

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Cattastrophy.2874 said:
    Don't join groups or play with people who don't want the same things in the game as you do. They won't like you, you won't like them.

    That's one problem with raid system now. It mixes people with different goals in the same content, while at the same time being demanding enough that even small differences in opinion/behaviour can cause tempers to flare.

    I think thats a problem with almost every mode. Ticket farmers in PVP and WVW who just want rewards and dont want to enjoy the mode itself clash constantly with the more hardcore players of that mode.

    Yes, that's true. Basically, it happens every time you create a mode where players need to depend on each other, design it for a specific group of players, and then create rewards aimed at a completely different group of players. The more effort and teamplay the content requires, the more toxicity is going to happen.

    So what exactly is the advantage of making this content then, if it invariably breeds a toxic environment?

    The enjoyment people get out of group content is worth the risk of toxicity from a small number of people. If you remove all group content from an MMO you end up with a single player live service. This is not what gw2 is intended to be.

    Do you really want all dungeons, fractals, raids, wvw, pvp and group events removed from the game?

    You are confusing social content with group content.

    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    Spare me the "Oh no it would be a Solo Game without group content" there is only Fractals, Dungeons and Raids that are group content, and there is a huge world of the game that is social content.

    They could get rid of the group content, BDO did, and it;s doing fine.

    Social and Group content. That's some new terms you got there.

    It's called evolving with the times, as games change, so too do the terms to accurately describe what is going on.

    Trying to claim a Meta Event and a Fractal are the same, or both group content, is as egregiousness as trying to claim that a private birthday party and a block party are the same because they are both called parties.

    at some point.. you're just wrong.

    That's some justification there but you seems to forgotten the importance of defining the terms, just what are "social" and "group"?
    Reminder, assumptions caused many conflicts in the world.

    I defined exactly what each was, in simple words that anyone should have been able to understand the difference.

    You are confusing social content with group content.

    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    Yes you did and is hard to get around your definition since you really did invent a new term.

    I see that Didn't stop you from trying by playing with worlds.

    So at this point you are just arguing for the sake of it.

    No matter how you try to twist thing or engage in word play, at the end of things, you would still be wrong.

    With that said, Not worth the time.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • @qwerty.8943 said:

    So what is a 'semi-casual', "competent-but-not-uber DPS", though "wants-to-learn" supposed to do?

    Find a guild that shares your play-style. It really is as simple as that. The entire GW 2 playerbase is not composed, exclusively, of gear/build based elitists.
    If you can't find one, create your own guild specifically for that purpose and recruit like-minded players.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 9, 2018

    So about those Raids?

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 9, 2018

    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 9, 2018

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Well since I can do dungeons and fractals solo, I guess they are single player content too?
    As other have stated wb, meta events are group content you dont have to be in a party since the game it self dont restrict you in that way there is no kill stealing etc.

    Social content would mean I have to communicate with people I dont have to do that at all in open world.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Well since I can do dungeons and fractals solo, I guess they are single player content too?
    As other have stated wb, meta events are group content you dont have to be in a party since the game it self dont restrict you in that way there is no kill stealing etc.

    Social content would mean I have to communicate with people I dont have to do that at all in open world.

    Nope,

    You are trying to imply difficulty affects the content type, this is false.

    You can do Story Dungeons Solo as well, but if you want to play with another player in that content, you are required to group with them, which makes the content group content, regardless of their difficulty level.

    On same token Just like I can solo Dynamic Event, but they are still Social Events as anyone can come join in on the event, participate in it with me, and get rewards as well.

    Now if you are going to try and derail this thread with silly semantics, I am going to have to ask you stop.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 9, 2018

    I love how people are all of a sudden so insanely confused on the idea of social content. Let me enlighten you all with this, Social Content has been around since MMO's, in fact, Social Content was in fact the FIRST kind of MMO content to ever exist. Hence the very idea of Kill Stealing, where one person could take the kill away from another person, simply by doing more damage to it. It wasn't even group content because in the beginning opposing groups could kill steal each other, in some games they could even flat out kill each other, it was all just open social content, we were all forced to deal with each other, we couldn't go hide away in our private little groups and do our private little group based content and think we were all so special for it, because all of us got a trophy at the end. No, we had to log in and deal with each other, for better and for worse.

    But by all means.. go forth and think this is a new thing and be confused by it.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • Blue.1207Blue.1207 Member ✭✭✭
    edited December 9, 2018

    My group lets newbies in all the time. All that we ask is that they know both their class and the encounters. After that it's literally GG because raids in GW2 are the equivilent of normal raids in WoW. They're so faceroll it's almost a joke half the time. A few fights may demand more, but not really.

  • SkyShroud.2865SkyShroud.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 9, 2018

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Quoting partially
    Quoting out of context
    Modifying the context

    Ermm...I think you are right, it isn't fallacy, not the modifying part. That is called fabricating facts, right? I am not sure if that is any better.

    Lastly, you mentioned "not always good" but that also means "not always bad". It is the same as "half filled" and "half empty", both meant the same. Using that in your argument, doesn't that means you actually acknowledge that group contents are not necessary not social contents as well? However, you don't mean it that way in your other post, are you not getting confused yourself?

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    This is what you literally wrote. I will highlight keywords.

    group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people
    are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone

    It is completely contradicting to your acknowledgement that group contents are not necessary not social contents.

    I understand what you are trying to say but my point here is your usage on the terms are inappropriate, are wrong. Correct it.

    Founder & Leader of Equinox Solstice [TIME], a Singapore-Based International PvX Guild
    Henge of Denravi Server
    www.gw2time.com

    --

    Explanations of WvW Structures & Populations Issues

  • @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Quoting partially
    Quoting out of context
    Modifying the context

    Ermm...I think you are right, it isn't fallacy, not the modifying part. That is called fabricating facts, right? I am not sure if that is any better.

    Lastly, you mentioned "not always good" but that also means "not always bad". It is the same as "half filled" and "half empty", both meant the same. Using that in your argument, doesn't that means you actually acknowledge that group contents are not necessary not social contents as well? However, you don't mean it that way in your other post, are you not getting confused yourself?

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    This is what you literally wrote. I will highlight keywords.

    group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people
    are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone

    It is completely contradicting to your acknowledgement that group contents are not necessary not social contents.

    I understand what you are trying to say but my point here is your usage on the terms are inappropriate, are wrong. Correct it.

    Not always good is the same as at least 1 time bad. It can be bad all the time and not always good still holds.

  • SkyShroud.2865SkyShroud.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 9, 2018

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Quoting partially
    Quoting out of context
    Modifying the context

    Ermm...I think you are right, it isn't fallacy, not the modifying part. That is called fabricating facts, right? I am not sure if that is any better.

    Lastly, you mentioned "not always good" but that also means "not always bad". It is the same as "half filled" and "half empty", both meant the same. Using that in your argument, doesn't that means you actually acknowledge that group contents are not necessary not social contents as well? However, you don't mean it that way in your other post, are you not getting confused yourself?

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    This is what you literally wrote. I will highlight keywords.

    group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people
    are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone

    It is completely contradicting to your acknowledgement that group contents are not necessary not social contents.

    I understand what you are trying to say but my point here is your usage on the terms are inappropriate, are wrong. Correct it.

    Not always good is the same as at least 1 time bad. It can be bad all the time and not always good still holds.

    Your first statement and last statement are contradicting each other, you know? If it is bad all the time, then it is simply bad.

    People use "not always" because there are certain "conditions" that make it so. For example, "drinking water is not always good". Are that saying drinking water is bad? Of course not, there are certain conditions tied to it. Drinking water can provide a lot of health benefits but you can also end up with water intoxication if drank too much.

    He/she by using "not always" means he/she is saying that "group contents" are not "social contents" on certain conditions which also means that "group contents" can be "social contents" on certain conditions. That by itself is contradicting to his/her previous post where he/she defined "Group" and "Social" as distinct terms involving ingame features of party and squad. That again is to say his/her terms are just complete confusing mess which he refuse to admit and correct.

    Edit: And to further clarified, he/she did used "social development" but at the same time, he/she did mention "as some have pointed out". I believe in the entire thread, only he used "social content" and "group content" in that definition of his or her. All others are using "social content" as in social sense. It is puzzling how he has no issue understanding what others are talking about if he or she does not acknowledge in the widely known meanings for "social content". It is just rationally difficult to get around it. It is like using the word "boil" as "melt", "When ice boil, it become water". Can you wire your brain to think that way while already having another set of definition? It's difficult. It highly suggest he or she does subconsciously recognize the widely known meaning for "social content" and "group content".

    Founder & Leader of Equinox Solstice [TIME], a Singapore-Based International PvX Guild
    Henge of Denravi Server
    www.gw2time.com

    --

    Explanations of WvW Structures & Populations Issues

  • Zenith.7301Zenith.7301 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Problem is this game is awful about giving people the toools to improve when they don't support dps meters or real metric tools officially so all sources of improvement are cumbersome 3rd party solutions.

  • Shikaru.7618Shikaru.7618 Member ✭✭✭

    @Zenith.7301 said:
    Problem is this game is awful about giving people the toools to improve when they don't support dps meters or real metric tools officially so all sources of improvement are cumbersome 3rd party solutions.

    Not only are tools lacking, but theres also no incentive outside of fractal cms and raids. You can pick up all rewards outside of those modes by either auto attacking in nomads or buying off the tp. That's the price of the game being all inclusive in open world.

    I couldnt even begin to imagine the backlash anet would get if they made meta events and world bosses give out rewards based on performance. Eg. Measure your damage dealt, healing output, boon output, and/or break bar damage then give you drops based on those criteria.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Quoting partially
    Quoting out of context
    Modifying the context

    Ermm...I think you are right, it isn't fallacy, not the modifying part. That is called fabricating facts, right? I am not sure if that is any better.

    Lastly, you mentioned "not always good" but that also means "not always bad". It is the same as "half filled" and "half empty", both meant the same. Using that in your argument, doesn't that means you actually acknowledge that group contents are not necessary not social contents as well? However, you don't mean it that way in your other post, are you not getting confused yourself?

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    This is what you literally wrote. I will highlight keywords.

    group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people
    are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone

    It is completely contradicting to your acknowledgement that group contents are not necessary not social contents.

    I understand what you are trying to say but my point here is your usage on the terms are inappropriate, are wrong. Correct it.

    Not always good is the same as at least 1 time bad. It can be bad all the time and not always good still holds.

    Your first statement and last statement are contradicting each other, you know? If it is bad all the time, then it is simply bad.

    People use "not always" because there are certain "conditions" that make it so. For example, "drinking water is not always good". Are that saying drinking water is bad? Of course not, there are certain conditions tied to it. Drinking water can provide a lot of health benefits but you can also end up with water intoxication if drank too much.

    He/she by using "not always" means he/she is saying that "group contents" are not "social contents" on certain conditions which also means that "group contents" can be "social contents" on certain conditions. That by itself is contradicting to his/her previous post where he/she defined "Group" and "Social" as distinct terms involving ingame features of party and squad. That again is to say his/her terms are just complete confusing mess which he refuse to admit and correct.

    Edit: And to further clarified, he/she did used "social development" but at the same time, he/she did mention "as some have pointed out". I believe in the entire thread, only he used "social content" and "group content" in that definition of his or her. All others are using "social content" as in social sense. It is puzzling how he has no issue understanding what others are talking about if he or she does not acknowledge in the widely known meanings for "social content". It is just rationally difficult to get around it. It is like using the word "boil" as "melt", "When ice boil, it become water". Can you wire your brain to think that way while already having another set of definition? It's difficult. It highly suggest he or she does subconsciously recognize the widely known meaning for "social content" and "group content".

    Since you have accused me of inventing terms with "Social Content".. you have openly admitted that you have no basis for what Social Content is, so as far as you go, and others like you, there is no "Wildly Known meaning" for Social Content.

    Check yourself before you wreck yourself.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 10, 2018

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Well since I can do dungeons and fractals solo, I guess they are single player content too?
    As other have stated wb, meta events are group content you dont have to be in a party since the game it self dont restrict you in that way there is no kill stealing etc.

    Social content would mean I have to communicate with people I dont have to do that at all in open world.

    Nope,

    You are trying to imply difficulty affects the content type, this is false.

    You can do Story Dungeons Solo as well, but if you want to play with another player in that content, you are required to group with them, which makes the content group content, regardless of their difficulty level.

    On same token Just like I can solo Dynamic Event, but they are still Social Events as anyone can come join in on the event, participate in it with me, and get rewards as well.

    Now if you are going to try and derail this thread with silly semantics, I am going to have to ask you stop.

    Dident say anything about difficulty you said you had to be in a group to do fractals and dungeons.
    I dont have to be in a group to do t1-t2 fractals or ascalon dungeon for example so then thats not group content according to your terms.
    Edit
    Even wierder you would lable that as social content and yea its about as social as me running around doing world bosses, map completing or group dynamic events.
    To put it bluntly its zero social.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Well since I can do dungeons and fractals solo, I guess they are single player content too?
    As other have stated wb, meta events are group content you dont have to be in a party since the game it self dont restrict you in that way there is no kill stealing etc.

    Social content would mean I have to communicate with people I dont have to do that at all in open world.

    Nope,

    You are trying to imply difficulty affects the content type, this is false.

    You can do Story Dungeons Solo as well, but if you want to play with another player in that content, you are required to group with them, which makes the content group content, regardless of their difficulty level.

    On same token Just like I can solo Dynamic Event, but they are still Social Events as anyone can come join in on the event, participate in it with me, and get rewards as well.

    Now if you are going to try and derail this thread with silly semantics, I am going to have to ask you stop.

    Dident say anything about difficulty you said you had to be in a group to do fractals and dungeons.
    I dont have to be in a group to do t1-t2 fractals or ascalon dungeon for example so then thats not group content according to your terms.
    Edit
    Even wierder you would lable that as social content and yea its about as social as me running around doing world bosses, map completing or group dynamic events.
    To put it bluntly its zero social.

    Why do you quote me, yet not read what I said?

    What do you do? Just make up what you think I said? Just FYI.. that's called a "Strawman" and it's a fallacy.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 10, 2018

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Well since I can do dungeons and fractals solo, I guess they are single player content too?
    As other have stated wb, meta events are group content you dont have to be in a party since the game it self dont restrict you in that way there is no kill stealing etc.

    Social content would mean I have to communicate with people I dont have to do that at all in open world.

    Nope,

    You are trying to imply difficulty affects the content type, this is false.

    You can do Story Dungeons Solo as well, but if you want to play with another player in that content, you are required to group with them, which makes the content group content, regardless of their difficulty level.

    On same token Just like I can solo Dynamic Event, but they are still Social Events as anyone can come join in on the event, participate in it with me, and get rewards as well.

    Now if you are going to try and derail this thread with silly semantics, I am going to have to ask you stop.

    Dident say anything about difficulty you said you had to be in a group to do fractals and dungeons.
    I dont have to be in a group to do t1-t2 fractals or ascalon dungeon for example so then thats not group content according to your terms.
    Edit
    Even wierder you would lable that as social content and yea its about as social as me running around doing world bosses, map completing or group dynamic events.
    To put it bluntly its zero social.

    Why do you quote me, yet not read what I said?

    What do you do? Just make up what you think I said? Just FYI.. that's called a "Strawman" and it's a fallacy.

    You mean the exact same thing as you did when you accused me of implying difficulty affects the content type?

    Edit
    Your right about me reading it wrong.
    I read it as you had to be in a gorup to play it not that the only way to bring someone with you was being in a group.
    But if I dont have to be in a group to do the content is it still group content?
    If it is then group dynamic events world bosses are group content aswell since you can do the solo sure but its easier with more people.

    And since you dont have to socialise with any of the people around you its not social content.

    Source

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Cattastrophy.2874 said:
    Don't join groups or play with people who don't want the same things in the game as you do. They won't like you, you won't like them.

    That's one problem with raid system now. It mixes people with different goals in the same content, while at the same time being demanding enough that even small differences in opinion/behaviour can cause tempers to flare.

    I think thats a problem with almost every mode. Ticket farmers in PVP and WVW who just want rewards and dont want to enjoy the mode itself clash constantly with the more hardcore players of that mode.

    Yes, that's true. Basically, it happens every time you create a mode where players need to depend on each other, design it for a specific group of players, and then create rewards aimed at a completely different group of players. The more effort and teamplay the content requires, the more toxicity is going to happen.

    So what exactly is the advantage of making this content then, if it invariably breeds a toxic environment?

    The enjoyment people get out of group content is worth the risk of toxicity from a small number of people. If you remove all group content from an MMO you end up with a single player live service. This is not what gw2 is intended to be.

    Do you really want all dungeons, fractals, raids, wvw, pvp and group events removed from the game?

    You are confusing social content with group content.

    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    snip

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Well since I can do dungeons and fractals solo, I guess they are single player content too?
    As other have stated wb, meta events are group content you dont have to be in a party since the game it self dont restrict you in that way there is no kill stealing etc.

    Social content would mean I have to communicate with people I dont have to do that at all in open world.

    Nope,

    You are trying to imply difficulty affects the content type, this is false.

    You can do Story Dungeons Solo as well, but if you want to play with another player in that content, you are required to group with them, which makes the content group content, regardless of their difficulty level.

    On same token Just like I can solo Dynamic Event, but they are still Social Events as anyone can come join in on the event, participate in it with me, and get rewards as well.

    Now if you are going to try and derail this thread with silly semantics, I am going to have to ask you stop.

    Dident say anything about difficulty you said you had to be in a group to do fractals and dungeons.
    I dont have to be in a group to do t1-t2 fractals or ascalon dungeon for example so then thats not group content according to your terms.
    Edit
    Even wierder you would lable that as social content and yea its about as social as me running around doing world bosses, map completing or group dynamic events.
    To put it bluntly its zero social.

    Why do you quote me, yet not read what I said?

    What do you do? Just make up what you think I said? Just FYI.. that's called a "Strawman" and it's a fallacy.

    You mean the exact same thing as you did when you accused me of implying difficulty affects the content type?

    Edit
    Your right about me reading it wrong.
    I read it as you had to be in a gorup to play it not that the only way to bring someone with you was being in a group.
    But if I dont have to be in a group to do the content is it still group content?
    If it is then group dynamic events world bosses are group content aswell since you can do the solo sure but its easier with more people.

    And since you dont have to socialise with any of the people around you its not social content.

    Source

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @zombyturtle.5980 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Cattastrophy.2874 said:
    Don't join groups or play with people who don't want the same things in the game as you do. They won't like you, you won't like them.

    That's one problem with raid system now. It mixes people with different goals in the same content, while at the same time being demanding enough that even small differences in opinion/behaviour can cause tempers to flare.

    I think thats a problem with almost every mode. Ticket farmers in PVP and WVW who just want rewards and dont want to enjoy the mode itself clash constantly with the more hardcore players of that mode.

    Yes, that's true. Basically, it happens every time you create a mode where players need to depend on each other, design it for a specific group of players, and then create rewards aimed at a completely different group of players. The more effort and teamplay the content requires, the more toxicity is going to happen.

    So what exactly is the advantage of making this content then, if it invariably breeds a toxic environment?

    The enjoyment people get out of group content is worth the risk of toxicity from a small number of people. If you remove all group content from an MMO you end up with a single player live service. This is not what gw2 is intended to be.

    Do you really want all dungeons, fractals, raids, wvw, pvp and group events removed from the game?

    You are confusing social content with group content.

    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    snip

    You are confusing the act of socializing with doing content in a social environment.

    Here is a hint: You can be anti-social in a social situation, even in real life.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 10, 2018

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    But by all means.. go forth and think this is a new thing and be confused by it.

    People are not confused by this, they are unwilling to accept your personalized definition of content, especially since you have shown poor forum and discussion etiquette by misquoting others (which in and of itself is an act since it requires for you to actively change something after pressing the quote button).

    So like how you snipped my quote?.. funny that, but anyway, let me see if I have this right, what you are saying is that they are just being petty and argumentative.

    Thanks for the clarification.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Quoting partially
    Quoting out of context
    Modifying the context

    Ermm...I think you are right, it isn't fallacy, not the modifying part. That is called fabricating facts, right? I am not sure if that is any better.

    Lastly, you mentioned "not always good" but that also means "not always bad". It is the same as "half filled" and "half empty", both meant the same. Using that in your argument, doesn't that means you actually acknowledge that group contents are not necessary not social contents as well? However, you don't mean it that way in your other post, are you not getting confused yourself?

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    This is what you literally wrote. I will highlight keywords.

    group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people
    are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone

    It is completely contradicting to your acknowledgement that group contents are not necessary not social contents.

    I understand what you are trying to say but my point here is your usage on the terms are inappropriate, are wrong. Correct it.

    Not always good is the same as at least 1 time bad. It can be bad all the time and not always good still holds.

    Your first statement and last statement are contradicting each other, you know? If it is bad all the time, then it is simply bad.

    People use "not always" because there are certain "conditions" that make it so. For example, "drinking water is not always good". Are that saying drinking water is bad? Of course not, there are certain conditions tied to it. Drinking water can provide a lot of health benefits but you can also end up with water intoxication if drank too much.

    He/she by using "not always" means he/she is saying that "group contents" are not "social contents" on certain conditions which also means that "group contents" can be "social contents" on certain conditions. That by itself is contradicting to his/her previous post where he/she defined "Group" and "Social" as distinct terms involving ingame features of party and squad. That again is to say his/her terms are just complete confusing mess which he refuse to admit and correct.

    Edit: And to further clarified, he/she did used "social development" but at the same time, he/she did mention "as some have pointed out". I believe in the entire thread, only he used "social content" and "group content" in that definition of his or her. All others are using "social content" as in social sense. It is puzzling how he has no issue understanding what others are talking about if he or she does not acknowledge in the widely known meanings for "social content". It is just rationally difficult to get around it. It is like using the word "boil" as "melt", "When ice boil, it become water". Can you wire your brain to think that way while already having another set of definition? It's difficult. It highly suggest he or she does subconsciously recognize the widely known meaning for "social content" and "group content".

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @ButcherofMalakir.4067 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Just in case anyone wants to know what a Fallacy actually is, here is a list of them. To call something a fallacy, is a Equivocation Fallacy, unless you state which Fallacy is being used. Which also seemed to be the same fallacy the person that bought up fallacies was using in their whole discussion... just saying.

    Also, I stand by what I said.

    Meta Events, World Bosses, DE's, and the like are Social Content, and they build the social value of the game as well.

    Raids, Fractals, and Dungeons, are group Events, as they require you to be in a group to interact with other players in that content.

    as some have pointed out (Hence the subject of this topic).. group content is not always good for the social development of a game.

    Quoting partially
    Quoting out of context
    Modifying the context

    Ermm...I think you are right, it isn't fallacy, not the modifying part. That is called fabricating facts, right? I am not sure if that is any better.

    Lastly, you mentioned "not always good" but that also means "not always bad". It is the same as "half filled" and "half empty", both meant the same. Using that in your argument, doesn't that means you actually acknowledge that group contents are not necessary not social contents as well? However, you don't mean it that way in your other post, are you not getting confused yourself?

    @STIHL.2489 said:
    Dungeons, Fractals, and Raids, are group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people, such they are group based content.

    WvW and open world like content IE: World Bosses, Meta Events, Dynamic Events, etc, are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone to contribute to the completion and receive a reward for doing so.

    This is what you literally wrote. I will highlight keywords.

    group content as they require you to be in a group to play with other people
    are Social Content as they have no such requirement to group for anyone

    It is completely contradicting to your acknowledgement that group contents are not necessary not social contents.

    I understand what you are trying to say but my point here is your usage on the terms are inappropriate, are wrong. Correct it.

    Not always good is the same as at least 1 time bad. It can be bad all the time and not always good still holds.

    Your first statement and last statement are contradicting each other, you know? If it is bad all the time, then it is simply bad.

    People use "not always" because there are certain "conditions" that make it so. For example, "drinking water is not always good". Are that saying drinking water is bad? Of course not, there are certain conditions tied to it. Drinking water can provide a lot of health benefits but you can also end up with water intoxication if drank too much.

    He/she by using "not always" means he/she is saying that "group contents" are not "social contents" on certain conditions which also means that "group contents" can be "social contents" on certain conditions. That by itself is contradicting to his/her previous post where he/she defined "Group" and "Social" as distinct terms involving ingame features of party and squad. That again is to say his/her terms are just complete confusing mess which he refuse to admit and correct.

    Edit: And to further clarified, he/she did used "social development" but at the same time, he/she did mention "as some have pointed out". I believe in the entire thread, only he used "social content" and "group content" in that definition of his or her. All others are using "social content" as in social sense. It is puzzling how he has no issue understanding what others are talking about if he or she does not acknowledge in the widely known meanings for "social content". It is just rationally difficult to get around it. It is like using the word "boil" as "melt", "When ice boil, it become water". Can you wire your brain to think that way while already having another set of definition? It's difficult. It highly suggest he or she does subconsciously recognize the widely known meaning for "social content" and "group content".

    If it is bad all the time then it is not good. Not always good is weaker then not good.

    Lets say 1=good and 0=bad. Any combination of 1s and 0s that has at least one 0 is not always good. (All ones is always good). All 0s is combination of 1 and 0 and there is at least one 0.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.