Would "intelligent" mobs counter power creep?

[Gehenna.3625]

10 hours ago, SoftFootpaws.9134 said:

i think there's been many insanely popular games that counter this line of thinking, especially in the fps and rts genres.

 

i feel like if this was really true then those games wouldn't sell millions of copies, when their matchups can be as difficult as something like the soo-won meta. it seems to me like being a casual player (which means not having alot of time to play) gets confused with sheer laziness alot. the game attracts players who don't want to do anything simply because the game design has made it viable to do nothing, in the bulk of the content available.

 

if you tried to do that in almost any other game, you would probably be dead in the first five minutes of gameplay.

 

this game was actually much harder at release, with far less powercreep and a significantly more advanced ai and mob density, and again in heart of thorns. while there were some player complaints, the best known reason we have for it being changed is server performance.

We're talking GW2 here and not other games. I'm not saying that all games are like GW2. Different games attract different populations after all. There's a reason why, for example, SWTOR also dumbed down the mobs in explorable/story areas over the years. I remember playing it from the start and man it was tough to level, especially some areas and some story bosses were insane. And then after a few years they "streamlined" the whole leveling experience and that made the game too easy imo as well. That game attracts a lot of the same players as GW2 btw. 

And you're talking about fps and rts games...those are completely different genres of games and therefore attract different player types. So that comparison just falls flat to begin with.

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

4 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

We're talking GW2 here and not other games. I'm not saying that all games are like GW2. Different games attract different populations after all. There's a reason why, for example, SWTOR also dumbed down the mobs in explorable/story areas over the years. I remember playing it from the start and man it was tough to level, especially some areas and some story bosses were insane. And then after a few years they "streamlined" the whole leveling experience and that made the game too easy imo as well. That game attracts a lot of the same players as GW2 btw. 

And you're talking about fps and rts games...those are completely different genres of games and therefore attract different player types. So that comparison just falls flat to begin with.

the combat system in this game is literally just quake but with role-playing mechanics. i mean, this is pretty obvious from any pvp match, especially since the original set of maps were directly modelled after quake iii team arena, including the announcer which was removed . furthermore wvw is just a real-time strategy game where you're the actual units instead of the commander managing the user interface.

 

i think this game has alot more in common with fps and rts than it does with most mmorpgs, many of which are click-to-move at that.

Edited February 4 by SoftFootpaws.9134

[Gehenna.3625]

19 minutes ago, SoftFootpaws.9134 said:

the combat system in this game is literally just quake but with role-playing mechanics. i mean, this is pretty obvious from any pvp match, especially since the original set of maps were directly modelled after quake iii team arena, including the announcer which was removed . furthermore wvw is just a real-time strategy game where you're the actual units instead of the commander managing the user interface.

 

i think this game has alot more in common with fps and rts than it does with most mmorpgs, many of which are click-to-move at that.

Be that what it may, they are still very different game types and the combat mechanics are not all a game is. Besides, this game isn't even first person view (which I hate) and as such I will never play fps games, for example. Besides 3rd person view allows for better fashion wars.

You need to look at the entirety of a game and not just the few things that seem similar. And PvP isn't that popular in GW2 last time I checked. So that should also be an indication to you.

[Dovahkiin from HighRock.46]

Seeing the subject, I laughed and skipped the entire discussion. – Lots of details were given by Teapot during one of his streams. In a deep wise analysis of the issues, where they come from and what to do. In very short, buffs should be heavily nerfed so we never can maintain them with a rotation. And this nerf should happen in all modes. I don't remember when he spoke about that. Weeks ago I think.

Regards

[Astralporing.1957]

12 hours ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

Incorrect, the game doesn't require it because a lot of players don't WANT to learn. Look at EoD and the meta in Dragon's End. It got nerfed a couple of times and the thing that dropped for the turtle mount was made available in another, easier way. 

Also one of the hearts in seitung province tried to teach people to do some things like combos...people still don't use them. A lot of people just want to relax and bum around in the GW2 world and that's their prerogative. They're not interested in flashy fast-paced combat with all sorts of intricacies like boons, combos, etc. People still don't dodge out of damage circles.

And when Anet tries to force people to be a bit better, like with that meta, the forums here are filled with complaints. Sorry, but you're wrong. Anet has tried and failed many times. 

That's because demanding improvement does nothing when you do not help players in improving. And the fact is that Anet's idea of getting players to improve was always to ask them to get better, without explaining to them how they are supposed to do that. And all that in the game where it is extremely easy to miss something seemingly obvious, or get a ton of stuff completely wrong.

So, some players indeed do not want to improve, but most actually either do want to (but have no idea how), or, even more commonly, don't even know they should.

[Astralporing.1957]

2 hours ago, SoftFootpaws.9134 said:

the combat system in this game is literally just quake but with role-playing mechanics. i mean, this is pretty obvious from any pvp match, especially since the original set of maps were directly modelled after quake iii team arena, including the announcer which was removed . furthermore wvw is just a real-time strategy game where you're the actual units instead of the commander managing the user interface.

 

i think this game has alot more in common with fps and rts than it does with most mmorpgs, many of which are click-to-move at that.

Yes, there has, since very beginning, a severe disassociation with many game mechanics and the game's population. Simply put, the combat, gear and build systems seem to be designed with a relatively small (but highly dedicated) number of hardcores with passion for action games and buildcrafting in mind. A lot of other game systems however, connected with the way this game was marketed (no, i do not mean the "aaaah" or cab marketing, but think more like the way word of mouth and zines made GW2 look to players) made it a game for mostly a casual population (and to a much greater degree than in other MMORPGs). And for this group of players those formerly mentioned game systems are never going to fully click, nor will they ever play this game as if it were a PvP combat shooter.

And as for "quake but with RPG mechanics"... there's a reason why, say, Deus Ex or Cyberpunk 2077 have a story mode.

[Padrion.7382]

13 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

A lot of other game systems however, connected with the way this game was marketed (no, i do not mean the "aaaah" or cab marketing, but think more like the way word of mouth and zines made GW2 look to players) made it a game for mostly a casual population

I think it's a misconception that casual games have to be shallow and easy. Sure there are people out there who are just really bad at video games and mainly want to watch the cutscenes, but there are also those people who don't mind a little challenge, as long as they don't have to dedicate their life to it. The problem with GW2 is, that it has no learning curve and hardly ever explains its mechanics. There are a few optional tasks in the starting areas where have to block, dodge and so on (and these are the most fun ones imho) but by the time those skills are needed  they will be long forgotten by most players.

[Astralporing.1957]

4 hours ago, Padrion.7382 said:

I think it's a misconception that casual games have to be shallow and easy. Sure there are people out there who are just really bad at video games and mainly want to watch the cutscenes, but there are also those people who don't mind a little challenge, as long as they don't have to dedicate their life to it. The problem with GW2 is, that it has no learning curve and hardly ever explains its mechanics. There are a few optional tasks in the starting areas where have to block, dodge and so on (and these are the most fun ones imho) but by the time those skills are needed  they will be long forgotten by most players.

Oh, i agree. The main difference between casual and hardcore is not difficulty/challenge level itself (although a lot of casuals are not there to get challenged, others do consider it part of the fun). Nor is it a playing time (although it is often mentioned as a main factor, in reality a lot of casuals can play for truly extensive amounts of time). The main difference lies in the approach to content. Both in gameplay organizing (casuals tent to play more according to what they prefer that day, instead of working under a strict schedule), and in so called "preparation phase". In order for (most, because, obviously, there are always exceptions) casuals to improve, there must be a learning curve, and the learning process needs to be organic, something a player learns in game, just by playing. Gw2 fails on both counts. Not only instead of a learning curve we have a set of (few, but very high) steps, but the whole learning process is not natural. It relies on either an extensive analysis of game systems (something most players, even hardcore ones, never do), or on getting required knowledge from third-party sources.

That includes such important parts as gearing up, picking correct build, and learning right rotation. Notice, btw, that the game not only does not help in making correct choices there, but is also actually riddled with traps - options that on surface may seem good, but in reality are far from it.

All that brings us back to my original point  - in GW2, there's a massive disassociation between game systems and the game population. There's also a disassociation between game systems, game population and apparent design goals. One of those three things will always clash with at least one of the remaining two. Sometimes both.

Edited February 5 by Astralporing.1957

[Zebulous.2934]

20 hours ago, Dovahkiin from HighRock.46 said:

Seeing the subject, I laughed and skipped the entire discussion. – Lots of details were given by Teapot during one of his streams. In a deep wise analysis of the issues, where they come from and what to do. In very short, buffs should be heavily nerfed so we never can maintain them with a rotation. And this nerf should happen in all modes. I don't remember when he spoke about that. Weeks ago I think.

Regards

lol, you saw the sign on the door, popped your head in, told us that my premise was wrong, pitched  a different solution, and then left? 
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion?

[Padrion.7382]

7 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

In order for (most, because, obviously, there are always exceptions) casuals to improve, there must be a learning curve, and the learning process needs to be organic, something a player learns in game, just by playing. Gw2 fails on both counts. Not only instead of a learning curve we have a set of (few, but very high) steps, but the whole learning process is not natural. It relies on either an extensive analysis of game systems (something most players, even hardcore ones, never do), or on getting required knowledge from third-party sources.

You phrased it better than I ever could. A good game teaches you a skill then tests this skill and - if you pass - builds on top of it. Much like in school but without you ever really noticing it. GW2 does neither. If you still want to learn something you more or less have to read the wiki or other sources outside the game which is really sad.

Edited February 5 by Padrion.7382

[Gehenna.3625]

On 2/4/2024 at 1:50 PM, Astralporing.1957 said:

So, some players indeed do not want to improve, but most actually either do want to (but have no idea how), or, even more commonly, don't even know they should.

I suspect that's just what you feel and isn't actually backed up by numbers. I don't share your optimism, however, otherwise more people who encounter meta's like Dragon's End would show the will to learn instead of Anet having nerf it a couple of times, then make the turtle drop available via a vendor for map currency and the meta quickly becoming niche content.

I mean, I don't have any numbers either but considering what happens whenever Anet tries something more challenging in OW and that hardly anyone comes here to ask how they should improve but rather complain that it's too hard and then see what Anet does about it...well, like I said, I don't share your optimism.

To me, the first thing they should do (if they were serious about teaching people to git gud) is simplifying the combat system and making the difference between a skilled and unskilled player less huge. And I think we both know that that's not going to happen. But that's what it will take to start with imo. Because you're never going to be able to explain something that's complex to a gamer that doesn't want to learn complex things but is just here to have fun as it were.

And for those people who say the combat system isn't complex, I say they are giving themselves way too little credit: you're into it and you're good at it but that doesn't mean you're the lowest common denominator. Do not confuse what you're used to with what's easy in general.

[Astralporing.1957]

2 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

I suspect that's just what you feel and isn't actually backed up by numbers. I don't share your optimism, however, otherwise more people who encounter meta's like Dragon's End would show the will to learn instead of Anet having nerf it a couple of times, then make the turtle drop available via a vendor for map currency and the meta quickly becoming niche content.

I mean, I don't have any numbers either but considering what happens whenever Anet tries something more challenging in OW and that hardly anyone comes here to ask how they should improve but rather complain that it's too hard and then see what Anet does about it...well, like I said, I don't share your optimism.

Why would they show the will to learn? It's not like the game tells them clearly why the encounter failed. And even when they suspect why it might have failed, it's not like the game tells them it's their fault. From the point of view of the average player, it seems like the fight failed even though they, themselves did fine.

I've been there. For example, until i actually went and installed Arc (some time after Anet confirmed it's okay to use it), i really had no idea how big the dps disparity in the game is. And most players are still in the same situation i was then.

Remember, most players do not use Arc, do not read forum or reddit, or visit snowcrows site. They have no idea where they are compared to others (or to what is actually possible in game).

2 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

To me, the first thing they should do (if they were serious about teaching people to git gud) is simplifying the combat system and making the difference between a skilled and unskilled player less huge. And I think we both know that that's not going to happen. But that's what it will take to start with imo. Because you're never going to be able to explain something that's complex to a gamer that doesn't want to learn complex things but is just here to have fun as it were.

Yes. The system is so complex, that, from what i have seen so far, even significant part of hardcore playerbase can't really fully comprehend it, and the best they can do is to use premade builds and guides and adjust them a bit for their use.

2 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

And for those people who say the combat system isn't complex, I say they are giving themselves way too little credit: you're into it and you're good at it but that doesn't mean you're the lowest common denominator. Do not confuse what you're used to with what's easy in general.

Well, the people that are posting here have all passed the first major hurdle - they read the forums, and actively look for information. That's already a significant minority of the whole playerbase. So, yeah, Dunning-Kruger effect in action.

[voltaicbore.8012]

18 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Remember, most players do not use Arc, do not read forum or reddit, or visit snowcrows site. They have no idea where they are compared to others (or to what is actually possible in game).

I think this essentially proves @Gehenna.3625's point, and I share their non-optimism. If a pve player actually cares about their performance, there is a high probability they would have sought out and installed arcdps (the only other option is the combat log, which... is just hard to use). The fact that the vast majority of players don't use arcdps is, to me, a clear indication that the same majority of players don't actually care about performance. They might pay lip service to the idea, or respond affirmatively when asked if they want to improve, but in reality they've likely not even considered taking a concrete step toward improvement.

And I don't want to make this just about arc (although arguably I could, given that there's really no other set of performance measuring tools that come close) - all the other resources could be great first steps, and they are widely known and discussed in-game. The fact that most players will never touch any of those is, again, a sign to me that most players don't actually care about getting better at combat.  They're interested in better outcomes, but not increasing their own contribution to such an outcome.

Edited February 6 by voltaicbore.8012

[Astralporing.1957]

1 hour ago, voltaicbore.8012 said:

I think this essentially proves @Gehenna.3625's point, and I share their non-optimism. If a pve player actually cares about their performance, there is a high probability they would have sought out and installed arcdps (the only other option is the combat log, which... is just hard to use). The fact that the vast majority of players don't use arcdps is, to me, a clear indication that the same majority of players don't actually care about performance. They might pay lip service to the idea, or respond affirmatively when asked if they want to improve, but in reality they've likely not even considered taking a concrete step toward improvement.

And I don't want to make this just about arc (although arguably I could, given that there's really no other set of performance measuring tools that come close) - all the other resources could be great first steps, and they are widely known and discussed in-game. The fact that most players will never touch any of those is, again, a sign to me that most players don't actually care about getting better at combat.  They're interested in better outcomes, but not increasing their own contribution to such an outcome.

You do realize that most players do not even realize something like ArcDPS exist? Or that most players just do not mod their games even if they know things like mods and addons exist?

But yes, most players, even when they do want to improve, don't treat their entertainment medium so seriously they would do research on it on the net. And if they do, they generally look for solutions to specific issues (i.e. "how to solve puzzle X in game Y"), instead of looking at general improvement guides. Nor do they look for answers to questions they do not know they should be asking. Besides, notice, that most players in this game almost certainly have no idea how badly they do need to get better. Because the game does not tell them this at all.

Edit: there's a post on reddit i saw once that mentions why this major misunderstanding keeps happening. It illustrates pretty well the situation here. You seem to treat this game as some sort of Serious Business one needs to put effort into researching before they can be considered to care about it. That's not the only approach however. In fact, it's not the only right approach either. It's just the way you like to play, which is not shared by everyone.

Edited February 6 by Astralporing.1957

[TheQuickFox.3826]

Yes, probably. But also come with the risk of making fights very annoying to the player. So don't implement it everywhere. But some mobs are just way too easy.

"You Are A Fool To Challenge The King Of The Jotun"

RIP My King.

Edited February 6 by TheQuickFox.3826

[voltaicbore.8012]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

You seem to treat this game as some sort of Serious Business one needs to put effort into researching before they can be considered to care about it. That's not the only approach however. In fact, it's not the only right approach either. It's just the way you like to play, which is not shared by everyone.

And you seem all too willing to commit the common error of scope creep when things don't go your way. I certainly don't consider the game Serious Business, and I actually agree with your contention that most people aren't into metrics, improvement, etc. You simply made a contention earlier that "most actually do want to [improve] (but have no idea how)," and I sincerely disagree with that one concept. I think all the behaviors and preferences you advocate for (which I also agree represent most players) show that people don't actually want to improve their gameplay, they just want better outcomes. Which is fine! Just don't pretend like this acceptable majority of players actively desires improvement.

As you say this game isn't Serious Business for most of us. The amount of "research" it takes to improve is absolutely minimal. We're not talking about comparing meta rotations for the most complex class and then practicing them to reach benchmark numbers here. It can literally start with the question: "could I be doing any better in X/Y/Z context?" That can lead to "how do I know how I'm actually doing in X/Y/Z context?" If you're too shy to ask in chat, you can just ask Google, which might lead you to lurk the forums/reddit. If you feel up to it, ask ANYONE in-game - be it your guild, or even just map chat randos - and you'll get the stock answers of snowcrows for builds/gear and arcdps to measure how you're actually performing. That's it. Literally all it takes is the capacity to formulate the question "how do I get better?" and then to Ctrl+V that into a box. Some "Serious Business" this "research" is.

My point is that if one can't even be bothered to ask such easy questions and pursue such shallow knowledge (and thus remain ignorant of how to even improve), I sincerely question one's alleged desire to improve. All your bluster about "waaaah you're so sweaty, most people don't want to play like you" only seems to further contradict your earlier contention that "most people actually do want to [improve]."

Edited February 6 by voltaicbore.8012

[kharmin.7683]

13 minutes ago, voltaicbore.8012 said:

My point is that if one can't even be bothered to ask such easy questions and pursue such shallow knowledge (and thus remain ignorant of how to even improve), I sincerely question one's alleged desire to improve.

Not every casual doesn't want to improve.  It may simply be that they don't have the time to dedicate to doing the research and the practicing the required rotations at which point (at least for me) GW2 then becomes a job rather than an entertainment outlet. 

As a very casual player, I know that I can improve.  I have done some research to try and at least have my skills, attributes, armor and weapon sigils all be somewhat similar to maximize the most I can from them without spending a ton of gold on the better gear/sigils.  I've even crafted a few ascended items.  I just happen to know my limitations and that I don't have the time/energy to commit to gearing up and playing at a level that some "better" players believe that I should.

EDIT: now, having said all of that, I'm in favor of some more intelligent mobs as I've stated earlier in the thread.

Edited February 6 by kharmin.7683

[voltaicbore.8012]

20 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

As a very casual player, I know that I can improve.  I have done some research to try and at least have my skills, attributes, armor and weapon sigils all be somewhat similar to maximize the most I can from them without spending a ton of gold on the better gear/sigils.  I've even crafted a few ascended items.  I just happen to know my limitations and that I don't have the time/energy to commit to gearing up and playing at a level that some "better" players believe that I should.

Which, again, isn't what I was talking about, and is a perfectly valid way to play the game (not that you need validation from anyone anyways). You have made a decision about how far you want to push things, and nobody should impose a "well you should be pushing past that."

I just think that if one can't be bothered to ask very simple questions and obtain extremely attainable answers (which again, @kharmin.7683, is a criticism you've shown doesn't apply to you), one can't sincerely say that one wants to improve their gameplay. Nobody needs or should improve their gameplay, so why pretend like you are? I personally think it's a social holdover, many of us have been socialized into thinking that the statement, "you don't actually want to improve" is always some sort of personal attack. It's not. This is a game. Not wanting to improve is fine, but I don't like the longstanding accusation that it's objectively difficult to find various avenues of improvement.

I guess I'm pushing harder on this than anyone needs to because I see this "it's hard to even know how to go about getting better" as a longstanding misconception of the game. I consider GW2 very generous with information for the most part. Sure, you do need arc to measure a lot of metrics, but enough games natively lack such a tool suite so I don't hold that against GW2. I believe GW2 truly does have a low barrier to entry in many respects, and I don't like to see anything that runs counter to that narrative. Of course anyone is free to disagree with me, but that's just my take on it.

Edited February 6 by voltaicbore.8012

[evilcat.6817]

In story mission some bosses just turn invicible to give a monologue or artificially make fight longer, and i hate ir so much, there are also winterfrost elementals spamming ice prison making berry farm break the flow. So smart mobs would probably be some kitten mechanic making it longer for no reason, unless you spec for it, but there will be no reward for it. So probably not.

If you want reduce power creep you can

• reduce stat bonus on upgrade equipment
• reduce the base damage on utility weapon skill, if something gives vulnerebility or stuns it does not have to give tons of damage
• reduce dmg on big aoe or long range attacks, if you want tons of damage you need to come close and personal

[Padrion.7382]

4 hours ago, kharmin.7683 said:

As a very casual player, I know that I can improve.  I have done some research to try and at least have my skills, attributes, armor and weapon sigils all be somewhat similar to maximize the most I can from them without spending a ton of gold on the better gear/sigils.  I've even crafted a few ascended items.  I just happen to know my limitations and that I don't have the time/energy to commit to gearing up and playing at a level that some "better" players believe that I should.

That is perfectly fine and if you did some research on your own, you aren't even that casual anymore. The issue with GW2 open world is that you can get to max level by wearing random gear and pressing random buttons in fights. And while some people might enjoy beating a game by pressing random buttons I personally miss the challenge in that case. Even as a casual I want to feel that I did contribute something to earn victory. If there weren't some difficult champion mobs out there, I probably would have stopped playing a long time ago.