Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Amazing level of intelligent response on this forum.


Recommended Posts

Welcome to Tyria!

I've noticed the same thing compared to other game forums I've been part of and I think it's partially a result of the game design - GW2 encourages very cooperative play and it's also a very casual-friendly game which IMO creates a more relaxed environment. There's less concern that the person next to you might not be an experienced playing doing max DPS and so less aggression towards those who admit they don't know everything.

But I think the forum community deserves some of the credit too. There's a lot of people here who are really keen to help people out, or write informative posts, and some who will IMO go above and beyond, going out of their way to help people out both on the forum and in game. I'm always impressed when someone says they can't do something and get people replying offering to meet up in-game to help them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

It's a bit off-topic but I'm both glad to hear that LOTRO had/has a good community too and even more sad that I didn't get into it back when it first came out. But that was probably the height of my 'subscription MMOs are not an option for me' phase and I was scared off by the sub-section of the LOTR fans on the Neopets forums who would do stupid things like write topic titles in Quenya so "only real fans" would know what it was about and demand you answer a quiz before they'd generously grant you the privilege of having your replies read. Which is stupid in retrospect because the Neopets forums were full of sub-cultures coming together to try and one-up or exclude each other by creating stupid criteria for "real fans", I knew other groups weren't like that outside of that forum, so I don't know why I thought it was representative of anything. Also I recently discovered I know enough Sindarin to get the gist of what he was yelling drunkenly in the Tolkien movie (although that was a mix of several languages since Sindarin wasn't fully developed at that point), so maybe I could have gotten by. (Incidentally Sindarin is a fantastic language for yelling at the stars about unrequited love.)

Anyway, I think I'll always regret not giving that game a go when it was released, even though I doubt I'd have stuck with it long after the F2P changes. But I'm very glad I discovered Guild Wars (1) around then and learned that there were alternatives to subscription MMOs which need huge amounts of time to get the most from them. I still love the idea of the big sandbox games like Ultima Online which was my first introduction to MMOs (and the MUDs which preceded them) but this game is a much better fit for me.

The fact that it's got a great community, a setting I like and we just got dragon mounts makes it even better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Katastroff.1045 said:Be thankfull for BDO, all the internet kitten are over there, its gotta be the most toxic map chat i ever seen.

I think there's a lot to be said for game design and the culture it creates. BDO has mandatory PVP that you cannot opt out of, whereas in GW2 it's strictly opt-in. WoW has the unholy tank-healer-dps trinity baked into the dungeon finder, whereas GW2 encourages self-sufficiency in character builds and skills that interact. The rewards in GW2 are non-competitive and there is a small experience bonus for reviving other players, so it's rewarded early on and that cultivates good player interaction. The core game philosophy was really good and this has been maintained and built upon really well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Gulbasaur.1865 said:

@Katastroff.1045 said:Be thankfull for BDO, all the internet kitten are over there, its gotta be the most toxic map chat i ever seen.

I think there's a lot to be said for game design and the culture it creates. BDO has mandatory PVP that you
cannot
opt out of, whereas in GW2 it's strictly opt-in. WoW has the unholy tank-healer-dps trinity baked into the dungeon finder, whereas GW2 encourages self-sufficiency in character builds and skills that interact. The rewards in GW2 are non-competitive and there is a small experience bonus for reviving other players, so it's rewarded early on and that cultivates good player interaction. The core game philosophy was really good and this has been maintained and built upon really well.

First regarding BDO, dunno, personally never seen anyone talk in that game at all, so can't say I agree. I mean by definition BDO would be the least offensive MMO game I've ever seen, simply because I can't remember having seen anyone say anything at all! ;)

Regarding the GW2 comment there: Where GW2 encourages self sufficient builds, and basically to rely on yourself, while never forcing you to have to group up for anything. This also leads to the game feeling very anti-social, because most players doesn't group up unless they're forced to (lazy, too much hassle, path of least resistance etc). So I have several friends that tried GW2 and liked parts of it, but just get bored and wander off because it feels like a single player game, rather than an MMO game. Because there is very little reason or motivation to group up.

This is one of the reasons why the Trinity design (for all its faults) still is popular, it gives players a reason/motivation to play together. If you play a Tank, you don't do enough damage to kill most big things, and you can't heal yourself, so you need others to help you. GW2 tried adding some mechanics to encourage players to play together (combo system for example, which has been completely ignored afterwards) but it just doesn't feel intuitive enough for most players to learn/use, and in an awkward way it doesn't feel forced enough that players bother to deal with it.

So in the end, GW2 feels like taking the subway in London, full of people around you, but none of which tries to socially interact with each others. You're all there for a common purpose, to get from A to B, not to socialize.

GW2 does a lot of good things with its design, but this is probably the one point where I think GW2's design ended up working poorly.

/rant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@joneirikb.7506 said:

@Katastroff.1045 said:Be thankfull for BDO, all the internet kitten are over there, its gotta be the most toxic map chat i ever seen.

I think there's a lot to be said for game design and the culture it creates. BDO has mandatory PVP that you
cannot
opt out of, whereas in GW2 it's strictly opt-in. WoW has the unholy tank-healer-dps trinity baked into the dungeon finder, whereas GW2 encourages self-sufficiency in character builds and skills that interact. The rewards in GW2 are non-competitive and there is a small experience bonus for reviving other players, so it's rewarded early on and that cultivates good player interaction. The core game philosophy was really good and this has been maintained and built upon really well.

First regarding BDO, dunno, personally never seen anyone talk in that game at all, so can't say I agree. I mean by definition BDO would be the least offensive MMO game I've ever seen, simply because I can't remember having seen anyone say anything at all! ;)

Regarding the GW2 comment there: Where GW2 encourages self sufficient builds, and basically to rely on yourself, while never forcing you to have to group up for anything. This also leads to the game feeling very anti-social, because most players doesn't group up unless they're forced to (lazy, too much hassle, path of least resistance etc). So I have several friends that tried GW2 and liked parts of it, but just get bored and wander off because it feels like a single player game, rather than an MMO game. Because there is very little reason or motivation to group up.

This is one of the reasons why the Trinity design (for all its faults) still is popular, it gives players a reason/motivation to play together. If you play a Tank, you don't do enough damage to kill most big things, and you can't heal yourself, so you need others to help you. GW2 tried adding some mechanics to encourage players to play together (combo system for example, which has been completely ignored afterwards) but it just doesn't feel intuitive enough for most players to learn/use, and in an awkward way it doesn't feel forced enough that players bother to deal with it.

So in the end, GW2 feels like taking the subway in London, full of people around you, but none of which tries to socially interact with each others. You're all there for a common purpose, to get from A to B, not to socialize.

GW2 does a lot of good things with its design, but this is probably the one point where I think GW2's design ended up working poorly.

/rant

Possibly, but I think it has actually been gw2s strength. Sure there will be some who prefer a classic set up, but the subway analogy, whilst fairly apt, actually seems to work in the games favour. It attracts all those who want that style of multiplayer experience.

Personally I prefer this vastly more flexible approach which allows for a quicker and more informal/casual team up process, than the rigid more excluding feel that other mmos used to or still use

It’s not without a downside, but it’s retained and attracted a very large and sustaining population, so it has been a successful approach

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Randulf.7614 said:

@"Katastroff.1045" said:Be thankfull for BDO, all the internet kitten are over there, its gotta be the most toxic map chat i ever seen.

I think there's a lot to be said for game design and the culture it creates. BDO has mandatory PVP that you
cannot
opt out of, whereas in GW2 it's strictly opt-in. WoW has the unholy tank-healer-dps trinity baked into the dungeon finder, whereas GW2 encourages self-sufficiency in character builds and skills that interact. The rewards in GW2 are non-competitive and there is a small experience bonus for reviving other players, so it's rewarded early on and that cultivates good player interaction. The core game philosophy was really good and this has been maintained and built upon really well.

First regarding BDO, dunno, personally never seen anyone talk in that game at all, so can't say I agree. I mean by definition BDO would be the least offensive MMO game I've ever seen, simply because I can't remember having seen anyone say anything at all! ;)

Regarding the GW2 comment there: Where GW2 encourages self sufficient builds, and basically to rely on yourself, while never forcing you to have to group up for anything. This also leads to the game feeling very anti-social, because most players doesn't group up unless they're forced to (lazy, too much hassle, path of least resistance etc). So I have several friends that tried GW2 and liked parts of it, but just get bored and wander off because it feels like a single player game, rather than an MMO game. Because there is very little reason or motivation to group up.

This is one of the reasons why the Trinity design (for all its faults) still is popular, it gives players a reason/motivation to play together. If you play a Tank, you don't do enough damage to kill most big things, and you can't heal yourself, so you need others to help you. GW2 tried adding some mechanics to encourage players to play together (combo system for example, which has been completely ignored afterwards) but it just doesn't feel intuitive enough for most players to learn/use, and in an awkward way it doesn't feel forced enough that players bother to deal with it.

So in the end, GW2 feels like taking the subway in London, full of people around you, but none of which tries to socially interact with each others. You're all there for a common purpose, to get from A to B, not to socialize.

GW2 does a lot of good things with its design, but this is probably the one point where I think GW2's design ended up working poorly.

/rant

Possibly, but I think it has actually been gw2s strength. Sure there will be some who prefer a classic set up, but the subway analogy, whilst fairly apt, actually seems to work in the games favour. It attracts all those who want that style of multiplayer experience.

Personally I prefer this vastly more flexible approach which allows for a quicker and more informal/casual team up process, than the rigid more excluding feel that other mmos used to or still use

It’s not without a downside, but it’s retained and attracted a very large and sustaining population, so it has been a successful approach

I do know several people that really enjoy the way GW2 is setup as well, and I myself did initially (because, I'll be honest, I was looking for a single-player game more than an MMO!). Which really seems to be the nail, most of the people I know that does like the game, indeed treat it as a single-player game with some optional coop functions (which largely doesn't require effort, which seemingly is a big bonus for most of them).

So in effect, most of them tend to be the kind of people that wants to be social, but doesn't want to take the effort or initiative into being social. And I see a lot of other players with a similar mindset in the game, obviously not all and I've met a lot of different types of players here, but the game seems to appeal to that type. This creates a very different social dynamic in-game, than I've seen in most other games, including that a lot of the social aspect feels "shallow" because people aren't invested into it. Ironically the mode I've played where I've seen the most socializing on a stronger level is WvW, go figure.

That said, I've lately been thinking that GW1 might have had the right of it. The way they setup the world with only the cities being MMO shared, and all the land zones being instances (with bots), allowed players to play how they liked in the zones, while going to the cities to chat, and show off their armors and minipets etc, and let people bring along people if they wanted to, or bots if they didn't. Because often times it feels as if that is the direction MMO's are taking anyways. So GW1 might have been before its time, and the MMO/Instance system there might have worked even better in a modern MMO nowadays.

/rant2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in effect, most of them tend to be the kind of people that wants to be social, but doesn't want to take the effort or initiative into being social.

This is really true...I remember seeing a post of someone complaining about people not being social in the game while all he was doing was waiting for people to talk to him.

Fun thing about Guild Wars 1 being MMO only in big cities...when I played it a while back, I didn't even know it was a multiplayer game =') (I was young and stupid)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@joneirikb.7506 said:I do know several people that really enjoy the way GW2 is setup as well, and I myself did initially (because, I'll be honest, I was looking for a single-player game more than an MMO!). Which really seems to be the nail, most of the people I know that does like the game, indeed treat it as a single-player game with some optional coop functions (which largely doesn't require effort, which seemingly is a big bonus for most of them).I wouldn't say it's either or. One of the main strengths of GW2 to me is the fact that I can switch between playing for myself or with other people at will. There's hardly anything I can't achieve by myself if my friends aren't online (or I simply don't feel like playing with others), but I can play and interact with others (friends and strangers alike) whenever I feel like it (which in my case is the majority of time, but not always).

I used to play LotRO for a couple of years, as well as other games all the way back to MUDs in the late 80s/early 90s, and having to rely on other people for content completion works fine as long as you have a good bit of disposable time on your hands (although one of my fondest LotRO memories is soloing dungeons on my warden pre Helm's Deep and just taking friends along to have someone to chat to ;) ). The older I got, the more my gametime was restricted, and the more I've come to appreciate games that give me all the opportunities to be social while not forcing them on me, as that would offer me alternatives if/when I couldn't find the right group for the content I wanted to tackle.

I do play MMOs to play with other people, but I'm at a time in my life where I prefer to be in control over who to play with and when to play with them. Being thrown into a dungeon with a young know-it-all that is convinced they alone know right from wrong gameplay/equipment/rotations/whatever is not the kind of socializing I'm looking for in a game. I've had my share of that in other games.

Not being forced to formally group up with strangers doesn't mean you want to play a single player game. It might just mean you are more picky about who to play with, and when.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rasimir.6239 said:

@joneirikb.7506 said:I do know several people that really enjoy the way GW2 is setup as well, and I myself did initially (because, I'll be honest, I was looking for a single-player game more than an MMO!). Which really seems to be the nail, most of the people I know that does like the game, indeed treat it as a single-player game with some optional coop functions (which largely doesn't require effort, which seemingly is a big bonus for most of them).I wouldn't say it's either or. One of the main strengths of GW2 to me is the fact that I can switch between playing for myself or with other people at will. There's hardly anything I can't achieve by myself if my friends aren't online (or I simply don't feel like playing with others), but I can play and interact with others (friends and strangers alike) whenever I feel like it (which in my case is the majority of time, but not always).

I used to play LotRO for a couple of years, as well as other games all the way back to MUDs in the late 80s/early 90s, and having to rely on other people for content completion works fine as long as you have a good bit of disposable time on your hands (although one of my fondest LotRO memories is soloing dungeons on my warden pre Helm's Deep and just taking friends along to have someone to chat to ;) ). The older I got, the more my gametime was restricted, and the more I've come to appreciate games that give me all the opportunities to be social while not forcing them on me, as that would offer me alternatives if/when I couldn't find the right group for the content I wanted to tackle.

I do play MMOs to play with other people, but I'm at a time in my life where I prefer to be in control over who to play with and when to play with them. Being thrown into a dungeon with a young know-it-all that is convinced they alone know right from wrong gameplay/equipment/rotations/whatever is not the kind of socializing I'm looking for in a game. I've had my share of that in other games.

Not being forced to formally group up with strangers doesn't mean you want to play a single player game. It might just mean you are more picky about who to play with, and when.

Exactly. The reason I enjoy GW2 is the option to group and only some content grouping(to make communication easier) is needed. This is a good happy medium IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rasimir.6239 said:

@joneirikb.7506 said:I do know several people that really enjoy the way GW2 is setup as well, and I myself did initially (because, I'll be honest, I was looking for a single-player game more than an MMO!). Which really seems to be the nail, most of the people I know that does like the game, indeed treat it as a single-player game with some optional coop functions (which largely doesn't require effort, which seemingly is a big bonus for most of them).I wouldn't say it's either or. One of the main strengths of GW2 to me is the fact that I can switch between playing for myself or with other people at will. There's hardly anything I can't achieve by myself if my friends aren't online (or I simply don't feel like playing with others), but I can play and interact with others (friends and strangers alike) whenever I feel like it (which in my case is the majority of time, but not always).

I used to play LotRO for a couple of years, as well as other games all the way back to MUDs in the late 80s/early 90s, and having to rely on other people for content completion works fine as long as you have a good bit of disposable time on your hands (although one of my fondest LotRO memories is soloing dungeons on my warden pre Helm's Deep and just taking friends along to have someone to chat to ;) ). The older I got, the more my gametime was restricted, and the more I've come to appreciate games that give me all the opportunities to be social while not forcing them on me, as that would offer me alternatives if/when I couldn't find the right group for the content I wanted to tackle.

I do play MMOs to play with other people, but I'm at a time in my life where I prefer to be in control over who to play with and when to play with them. Being thrown into a dungeon with a young know-it-all that is convinced they alone know right from wrong gameplay/equipment/rotations/whatever is not the kind of socializing I'm looking for in a game. I've had my share of that in other games.

Not being forced to formally group up with strangers doesn't mean you want to play a single player game. It might just mean you are more picky about who to play with, and when.

Well said! My sentiments exactly. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...