Guild wars 2 community and how it changed

[Tails.9372]

@WolfOwl.3968 said:

@Tails.9372 said:The game doesn't have any kind of instanced content which is aimed to the casual part of the playerbase

In my experience T1 fractals and dungeons are very casual friendly, as meeting the requirements to enter those instances is easy to do and the mechanics are more forgiving. And dungeons are almost trivialized in their difficulty making them near completely abandoned content by the players as well as the devs.Even T1 fractals are noticily more difficult than like 99% of the dynamic events in OW. Instanced content aimed towards this part of the playerbase like how the OW content is simply doesn't exist (again outside of the story mode which has no real replay value), the closest thing to casual friendly group content we have rn would probably be Forging Steel which screws up on the last part thanks to the BB mechanic.

@WolfOwl.3968 said:But honestly any sort of instance content specifically aimed at a casual audience is likely to be boringOnly for those seeking a challenge which is something the average casual doesn't seem to care about.

[Vision.7265]

This is a casual game. Hence, Casual is the majority. The core of this game is casual. That is the foundation of this game. Fractals, Raids, and Strikes did not always exist in this game. Back then, we used to just hang out in town and help people with things they needed in the open world.

Back to the topic: they shouldn't be pugging something if they wanted to be selective; they should just select from their own private circle. They should build their own community of people who they do not have to question. (that's on them)Maybe don't join those groups either and make your own so you can be selective? That's a different choice too. (that's on the individual)This only happens for closed, instanced content which does not dominate the beautiful, open world community of gw2.

When I think about it, It's really funny to me as a retired, competitive player (fps) because if people are really good, they can solo/carry (depending on the game).

In this game, I've only met 2 extremes (there are many in-between in the spectrum) which are super casuals and the ones you've described.I have not met a true 'legendary' pro who was both kind-hearted AND who could join pugged, closed instance groups and carry because he knew his class so well that he was flexible in build and play style. A person like that could build a wonderful community of people who could find help at all levels. It seems as though the community is great around open world areas where there are bounties, world bosses, map metas, and everything that is accessible. But as you chug along in this game and get to the 'closed' elite content, people are on edge and demand so much out of people when the blatant majority of this game is casual.

It is unfortunate that the kind-hearted people disappear when it comes to the closed-instanced, elite content. There needs to be more kind people in a game built on good community in all game modes and levels.

But seriously, are people are going for a 7-figure cash prize right? A trophy with sponsors and endorsements? No? So why are they giving regular people a hard time? It is completely illogical to be pushing hardcore in a game where there isn't any tangible (monetary, glory, trophy, or other reason) incentive to do so. Are they making money? Is this a job? I would completely understand if this were a job. I'm hardcore 100% in my career. I think that's important: to go hard where it counts.

Lesson: people like them aren't worth your time in an imaginary world where you're taking a break from real life in a casual game. Find and collect people who are decent and when that community builds, you won't have to worry about looking; it will be more about providing enough opportunities for your great community. Or you can be uberlegendary prosaint that carries exo-geared, non-meta randos in pugs. I'm just sayin. You have choices. DO YOU! :)

[IndigoSundown.5419]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@WolfOwl.3968 said:

@"Zok.4956" said:So, what some players see as "elitism" in instanced content is often a player behaviour that is a result also of the game design of GW2.Player behavior is dictated by the player, not game design.It's influenced by both. Your personality influences how helpful/selfish, and/or nice/toxic you usually are. The content influences the consequences of your behaviour - the advantages you get/price you pay for being nice and helpful, vs being selfish and toxic. Those consequences tend to impact how people behave - if being rude is an disadvantage (i.e. you get kicked out of groups more), and being nice is advantageous (say, you get invited to good groups more often), even naturally toxic people tend to moderate their behaviour somewhat, and naturally nice people can really shine. If it's the opposite however (i.e. being nice means you keep ending up in groups that fail over and over and over even after many other, less patient people left long ago), then even the nicest person may eventually start to think that there's a limit to charity (and toxic people will feel validated).Unfortunately, GW2 is a game where game design, especially in a lot of endgame content, puts a heavy price on being nice and helpful, while making more elitist behaviour beneficial.

I agree with this assessment. The main reason for the phenomenon is the ridiculous difference (up to 1000% effectiveness) between highly skilled and average play the game's design offers. Frankly, this is too much of a penalty for not optimizing. What's especially hilarious are the claims that the game does not offer challenge. With such a large gap between the top performers and everyone else, how could it?

[Shadowmoon.7986]

I blame anet for this problem. Kp is the solution to the problem anet has caused by not having a gear inspect. People do not like carrying people they do not know through content because they are not prepared.

[Tails.9372]

@IndigoSundown.5419 said:The main reason for the phenomenon is the ridiculous difference (up to 1000% effectiveness) between highly skilled and average play the game's design offers. Frankly, this is too much of a penalty for not optimizing.Yes but that's mostly the fault of the content, Forging Steel for example doesn't realy penalize you for not optimizing your build but mostly for not doing the mechanics during the last part which can turn the fight into a drag.

[Astralporing.1957]

@IndigoSundown.5419 said:I agree with this assessment. The main reason for the phenomenon is the ridiculous difference (up to 1000% effectiveness) between highly skilled and average play the game's design offers. Frankly, this is too much of a penalty for not optimizing. What's especially hilarious is the claims that the game does not offer challenge. With such a large gap between the top performers and everyone else, how could it be?It's exactly due to that gap this can be true. Remember, if 100% is average difficulty, then 500% would be insane difficulty... but it also would be laughably easy and "not a challenge" to the 1000%-ers. So, the same content, at the same time is impossible for one, but ridiculously easy for another. Which makes both claims to be equally true. And, which makes balancing any content a nightmare.

@Tails.9372 said:

@IndigoSundown.5419 said:The main reason for the phenomenon is the

ridiculous

difference (up to 1000% effectiveness) between highly skilled and

average

play the game's design offers. Frankly, this is too much of a penalty for not optimizing.Yes but that's mostly the fault of the content, Forging Steel for example doesn't realy penalize you for not optimizing your build but mostly for not doing the mechanics during the last part which can turn the fight into a drag.If for content to be considered good you need to design it to ignore large parts of the build and combat design, it may suggest that maybe, just maybe, it's those build and combat systems that are a problem. And not the types of content that are built to fully utilize them.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

You're talking about an 8yr old game...and people in general were a lot nicer in 2012 than they are in 2020. Taking it a step further, people were a lot nicer in 2008 than they were in 2012, and people were a lot nicer in 1999 than they were in 2008. At each 'milestone' in my online gaming experience, it hasn't been lost on me that people online, in general, have been going downstream.

[Tails.9372]

@Astralporing.1957 said:It's exactly due to that gap this can be true. Remember, if 100% is average difficulty, then 500% would be insane difficulty... but it also would be laughably easy and "not a challenge" to the 1000%-ers. So, the same content, at the same time is impossible for one, but ridiculously easy for another. Which makes both claims to be equally true. And, which makes balancing any content a nightmare.Only if you're trying to appeal to everyone at once.

@Astralporing.1957 said:If for content to be considered goodThat by itself is highly subjective and you will never find a universal consensus on what is considered "good".

@Astralporing.1957 said:you need to design it to ignore large parts of the build and combat designExcept you can design content in a way that still utilizes the core combat mechanics without it penalizing the players or the group as a whole.

@Astralporing.1957 said:it may suggest that maybe, just maybe, it's those build and combat systems that are a problem.Oh there are some problems here but not for the reasons you're referring to.

@Astralporing.1957 said:And not the types of content that are built to fully utilize them.Except no one takes issue with "content fully utilizing combat mechanics". It's the fact that certain types of content are catered exclusively to certain subgroups of the playerbase what people have an problem with. The lack of choice is the main issue here which goes both ways btw.

[Vilin.8056]

@WolfOwl.3968 said:

@"Vilin.8056" said:Actually the player behaviour is greatly affected by game design, as there is no in-game filtering system for challenging contents, therefore players must manually filter out who's not qualified for what contents, with whatever methods they see fit.And who decides who's "qualified?" Oh, right, elitist who will rationalize an arbitrary system to "filter out" the riffraff. What I find really funny is that player KP's are more a reflection on the group rather than the individual. A player could be the lowest performer in every group they're in but still get the KP when the group prevails, and then use that KP as a cudgel to keep other players from entering the territory they've staked out for themselves.Yes, game design influences player behavior in that to complete difficult game content they have to work to improve their skills, and in the case of raids have to work to improve their skills within a group. The content would be meaningless if it were trivial. But toxic behavior isn't influenced by game design though, it's an attitude that suggests, for whatever reason, that the player is above another player for some rationalized and arbitrary reason. Needing AP's in dungeons back in the early days of GW2 as an example. It's not a reflection of skill or game design, but a gate-keeping device to maintain status.The dichotomy of raiders is they often discourage group play by not fostering new raiders while simultaneously relying on group play and new raiders to complete and maintain content. New players = more activity in raids = Arenanet focusing more resources to raids. Less new players in raids = increased reduced activity in raids as current players get bored and leave the content = less Arenanet resources directed at the content.

For me I play games to have fun, and it's more fun to me to play with a group trying to learn or just running content with a good attitude than completing content with a group with a poor attitude. I've done the latter and it's just taxing.

You're taking a narrow PoV about how players interact with squad filtering and player valuation, while ignoring the fact that how much effort it takes a raid squad commander to set up everything, then have to keep everything in line.

The fact is that when the squad fails to function, players leave, and the group dissipates. There are 9 players evaluating the raid commander through willingness of participation just like how the commander evaluate who joins the squad through the kick command.

In the most part, this IS a management responsibility by design that goes way too much for a player who just want to "play a game"

I have been pug raiding for 6 years and has never kept one single KP in my inventory, or bank. There are many ways an experienced players could prove a squad commander that he knows the content.

Likewise I have tested filtering players for 2 years with a simple gear check (one piece of armor and one piece of weapon) instead of any forms of KP, assuming anyone attempting to raid will least have some forms of preparation at the basic level, you'd be surprised we'd have to kick just as many players.

You have to realized the fact that online players aren't usually very good at governing themselves, players will naturally exploit, abuse, hack, steal anything shape or form to their advantage simply this is just a game, not anything that they needed to pay a responsibility like in real life.

Your fun, friendly community is merely a result of player ban and a strictly enforced restriction implemented in the game design. Imagine if developer decided to give player the freedom to kill other players anywhere they want, it wouldn't take one day to turn open map the most toxic place in this game.

Likewise GW2's choice of freedom in play whatever build and style you like in any class, clashes in contents that require player performance and role assignments. Unlike fractals that have a system to block off entry players with tiers, Raid is almost immediately accessible to any new players with lv 80 boosters from day 1. Clashes bound to happen more frequently than any other contents.

Lastly everyone plays for fun, but sometimes you need to accept the fact that fun does not necessarily involve you.

[Astralporing.1957]

@Tails.9372 said:

@"Astralporing.1957" said:It's exactly due to that gap this can be true. Remember, if 100% is average difficulty, then 500% would be insane difficulty... but it also would be laughably easy and "not a challenge" to the 1000%-ers. So, the same content, at the same time is impossible for one, but ridiculously easy for another. Which makes both claims to be equally true. And,

which makes balancing any content a nightmare

.Only if you're trying to appeal to everyone at once.No, if you want to appeal to anyone beyond a

very

narrow group.

Just look at raids, even within the raiders' group are people disappointed at how easy raids turned out to be (for them specifically, that is).There were raiders that considered only Dhuum CM to be on acceptable level of challenge, and thought that everything else was laughably easy, after all.

That is the exact result of what i was talking about. Due to the massive effectiveness discrepancies, the difficulty bands are very, very narrow. For challenging content it means they are too narrow to satisfy well enough as many players as the content would need to be sustainable.

[Sylum.1806]

@Blackwolfmetal.3640 said:This used to be a very pure, friendly and nice community

I stayed away for from Crucible of Eternity for almost a year before finally trying it again (and thankfully learning it) because I got abused and kicked repeatedly by toxic players who didn't want to be inconvenienced a minute more carrying the inexperienced back in 2012. So I'm sure I don't know what you're talking about. This community had and still has a mixture of good people and jerks. Same with every other MMO and every society.

[Vilin.8056]

@Sylum.1806 said:

@Blackwolfmetal.3640 said:This used to be a very pure, friendly and nice community

I stayed away for from Crucible of Eternity for almost a year before finally trying it again (and thankfully learning it) because I got abused and kicked repeatedly by toxic players who didn't want to be inconvenienced a minute more carrying the inexperienced back in 2012. So I'm sure I don't know what you're talking about. This community had and still has a mixture of good people and jerks. Same with every other MMO and every society.Oh it wasn't inconvenienced a minute more back then, before expansions it wasn't uncommon to stuck on one boss encounter in this dungeon for 30 minutes to an hour because the party couldn't cleave down the boss before sustains run out.