• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

Teknopathetic
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:29 PM)
Teknopathetic's Avatar
"I think this is where my argument from earlier comes into play. Way too much is being concluded from the beta on this aspect. People are just getting used to their own classes there is no way they can have enough grasp of other's builds or how they could support them. Also I usually love being support or healer, but just because it was the first weekend I could try it out I wanted to go out and cause damage. I am sure a lot of people thought this way. "


Generally, I don't think it's difficult for most people to see the "potential" of what a game could be played like at higher levels. Even if you haven't figured out optimal builds or ideal play quite yet, you should at least be capable of seeing the potential of how a class/build can be played. For example, with a Guardian, when I was trying to gear/trait for lots of healing, boon duration, etc. none of it was particularly effective. The boons lasted for an insignificant period of time, yet the cooldowns were *very* long. There was no point in going for condition removal because conditions have very short duration and also quite a few were tied to basic weapon skills that were on very short cooldowns. While all of these things are "balance" related and could be changed, I can't help but feel that ArenaNet prefers things the way they are.
Proven
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:32 PM)
Proven's Avatar

Originally Posted by cartoon_soldier

Yea, I was a part of quite a few actual Dynamic events in North starter area. They work very well.

The one I remember the most was at the dredge mine where the Norn in that video got his ore. The heart quest there asked you to go in and take ore from the Dredge, but while doing it you can find "Defense Plans" or something. You can deliver them to the same NPC collecting the ore. I think I missed something inbetween because the next thing I noticed was that the Dredge attempt to lash out and build their big machine to shore up their defense of the mine. If you stop them, then one of the NPCs decides it's time to teach them a lesson, and goes into the mine. You have to defend him until he gets into the lair of some Dredge boss, and then help him take it down. Then you go back to collecting ore. Of course, then someone else might find some "Defense Plans"...

There's another event chain in the snow/tundra part of the Norn area involving Grawl and scarecrows. It was funny to watch.

In the Charr area, I'm pretty sure there's an event chain tied to each legion, Ash, Iron, and Blood. The Ash Legion one involved protecting a spy trying to get back to friendly lines, and then helping him execute a mission born from his intel.

Didn't play around enough in the Human area, so I only know that there a multiple chains linked to centaurs and bandits, but not their details.
Trey
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:33 PM)

Originally Posted by Teknopathetic

"I think this is where my argument from earlier comes into play. Way too much is being concluded from the beta on this aspect. People are just getting used to their own classes there is no way they can have enough grasp of other's builds or how they could support them. Also I usually love being support or healer, but just because it was the first weekend I could try it out I wanted to go out and cause damage. I am sure a lot of people thought this way. "


Generally, I don't think it's difficult for most people to see the "potential" of what a game could be played like at higher levels. Even if you haven't figured out optimal builds or ideal play quite yet, you should at least be capable of seeing the potential of how a class/build can be played. For example, with a Guardian, when I was trying to gear/trait for lots of healing, boon duration, etc. none of it was particularly effective. The boons lasted for an insignificant period of time, yet the cooldowns were *very* long. There was no point in going for condition removal because conditions are both very short duration, but also quite a few were tied to basic weapon skills that were on very short cooldowns. While all of these things are "balance" related and could be changed, I can't help but feel that ArenaNet prefers things the way they are.

I fully believe that dynamic will be addressed, given that it's an entire pillar of Anet's stated gameplay design.

Originally Posted by gunbo13

I don't particularly care much about the e-sport idea. But the glaring issue I have is that cap points just aren't fun. I used to run with a lot of top HoH players nightly and we would run through everything. The only times we all sighed and were pissed off is when cap maps loaded. And I'm talking about the cap maps that GW2 emulates. You play these cap maps for hundreds of hours and you literally want to burn the game down. And if a mode like that can be so boring and annoying to players? Well, it usually isn't very fun to watch either.

Maybe players who dislike cap point maps are a small minority. But I don't remember anyone in GW1 who thought differently. Every other mode is better. All of them.

You're completely entitled to that opinion. I didn't get the chance to play the sPvP yet, either, so I won't refute anything in this post. I can even agree that it got boring watching the same play on the Battle of Khylo.


However, I'm more interested in what you were getting into about the particle effect density and along those lines. Functionalilty and fundamental mechanics and shit.
gunbo13
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:34 PM)
gunbo13's Avatar

Originally Posted by Proven

I mean, look at me, I play Team Fortress 2 in my spare time. Every single game mode there but one, 5 Capture Points, Attack/Defense Capture Point, Payload, Payload Race, King of the Hill, Territory Control, is a variation of control points. The lone exception is CTF. I'm obviously still enjoying capture point play. I don't understand what's so bad about it, at least in the case of what you'd rather be doing instead.

I know all the strats for cap points. And a lot of it is very complex. You assign roles, splits, and even migrating players to control the points. I went into detail in the last thread about how I would run these maps with GW2 classes. You can have hold builds, zerg rush-down, two-station setups, etc... There is a ton of strategy.

The problem is that the strategizing is more fun then playing. In other modes, you might split to destroy a keep or defend an important NPC/item/etc... For a split hold build, you might have a player who is standing around the ENTIRE MATCH. I'm not joking. If you play a bad team who don't know how to split, you might as well get a sandwich. And to quote egoraptor, there is a lot of fucking running around. Why the hell do we have to run around so much? Run around, sit for 30 seconds, cap, run around, fight for 20 seconds, wait 30 seconds, cap, split, run around...it never ends. And you aren't adventuring either. You are running laps on the same map, same turns, same speed boosts, same garbage.

TL;DR: when a mode has the possibility of standing around doing nothing but watching a bar go up, it's shit. Name me one other mode from the games you play that has that? Against bad teams I would weigh my 1 key down and walk away from the comp.
Proven
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:35 PM)
Proven's Avatar

Originally Posted by Teknopathetic

"I think this is where my argument from earlier comes into play. Way too much is being concluded from the beta on this aspect. People are just getting used to their own classes there is no way they can have enough grasp of other's builds or how they could support them. Also I usually love being support or healer, but just because it was the first weekend I could try it out I wanted to go out and cause damage. I am sure a lot of people thought this way. "


Generally, I don't think it's difficult for most people to see the "potential" of what a game could be played like at higher levels. Even if you haven't figured out optimal builds or ideal play quite yet, you should at least be capable of seeing the potential of how a class/build can be played. For example, with a Guardian, when I was trying to gear/trait for lots of healing, boon duration, etc. none of it was particularly effective. The boons lasted for an insignificant period of time, yet the cooldowns were *very* long. There was no point in going for condition removal because conditions are both very short duration, but also quite a few were tied to basic weapon skills that were on very short cooldowns. While all of these things are "balance" related and could be changed, I can't help but feel that ArenaNet prefers things the way they are.

Your issue with boons sounds a little weird and worrisome. Yesterday there were videos posted of spike builds made off of either boons (a warrior build) or conditions (a ranger build) quickly stacked and exploited. The durations were short but that's why they were spike builds. I'll have to go look for them.
inky
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:36 PM)
inky's Avatar

Originally Posted by Kos Luftar

I know people don't like reddit here but this video was just posted about how intricate the events are and all I can say is wow, I can't believe I didn't pay more attention in the events.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CyqGJHTjes

I actually did a couple of steps of that quest but never realized they were connected in such an intricate manner. I was also purposely avoiding NPCs and conversations but now I can't wait to find out more and more stuff like this. Pretty cool video.
Teknopathetic
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:39 PM)
Teknopathetic's Avatar
"Your issue with boons sounds a little weird and worrisome. Yesterday there were videos posted of spike builds made off of either boons (a warrior build) or conditions (a ranger build) quickly stacked and exploited. The durations were short but that's why they were spike builds. I'll have to go look for them."


I'm talking about being "supportive" with giving boons to your group, not a single class being able to burst by itself.
RepairmanJack
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:40 PM)
RepairmanJack's Avatar

Originally Posted by Teknopathetic

Generally, I don't think it's difficult for most people to see the "potential" of what a game could be played like at higher levels. Even if you haven't figured out optimal builds or ideal play quite yet, you should at least be capable of seeing the potential of how a class/build can be played. For example, with a Guardian, when I was trying to gear/trait for lots of healing, boon duration, etc. none of it was particularly effective. The boons lasted for an insignificant period of time, yet the cooldowns were *very* long. There was no point in going for condition removal because conditions are both very short duration, but also quite a few were tied to basic weapon skills that were on very short cooldowns. While all of these things are "balance" related and could be changed, I can't help but feel that ArenaNet prefers things the way they are.

I get what you're saying about the condition and boon diration, the only thing I can add to that is they stack in time duration and work across professions so they could not want them to get too long, but I get your point. You put it too low you force an entire team to be build specific or ignore it all together.

I guess I'm just a little more optimistic as I feel the potential is there. I'm still of the mind set that the team play will all come later. Although they can get a grasp of how other classes play they may not know cross profession skills, or when to stun or effect the players to benefit the people on their team, and these things will need some time and communication.

The bolded is the saddest truth. :/ That was my only let down of the weekend, reading the official forums gave off that impression of "deal with it" and a lot of "L2p".
Trey
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:43 PM)

Originally Posted by RepairmanJack

The bolded is the saddest truth. :/ That was my only let down of the weekend, reading the official forums gave off that impression of "deal with it" and a lot of "L2p".

A lot of what they responded to like that can only be properly recognized after extensive play under the desired design parameters. Three days ain't gonna cut it. Nobody rebalances fighters after a week out.

The took, and responded to, a lot of other legitimate concerns and issues.
RepairmanJack
Member
(05-04-2012, 08:47 PM)
RepairmanJack's Avatar

Originally Posted by Proven

Your issue with boons sounds a little weird and worrisome. Yesterday there were videos posted of spike builds made off of either boons (a warrior build) or conditions (a ranger build) quickly stacked and exploited. The durations were short but that's why they were spike builds. I'll have to go look for them.

If you look at a lot of the comments from those videos or other communities, they get ripped a lot because they don't take much else besides the spike traits. If they faced a decent group they would be downed pretty fast. Essentially with a support role you want the support player to be able to take those traits so that player can take less and put more into survivability or other uses. The only issue is the support is either too narrow(in classes it helps), too short, or not optimal.

It will just take time to iron out and see how it can be helped. I still think support will be a must if the time's stay the same it will just be a more pivotal role requiring smarter play.

Originally Posted by Trey

A lot of what they responded to like that can only be properly recognized after extensive play under the desired design parameters. Three days ain't gonna cut it. Nobody rebalances fighters after a week out.

The took, and responded to, a lot of other legitimate concerns and issues.

I certainly get that. I'm sort of giving the same side of the argument here. :lol With some aspects it still just gives off a bad impression. I mean they defended downed state by saying some of the strategy that can be made with it is great. Haha really? I'm sorry I just can't believe that.
Proven
Member
(05-04-2012, 09:00 PM)
Proven's Avatar

Originally Posted by Teknopathetic

"Your issue with boons sounds a little weird and worrisome. Yesterday there were videos posted of spike builds made off of either boons (a warrior build) or conditions (a ranger build) quickly stacked and exploited. The durations were short but that's why they were spike builds. I'll have to go look for them."


I'm talking about being "supportive" with giving boons to your group, not a single class being able to burst by itself.

Ah, gotcha. From what I understand, conditions are supposed to be like an attack. I either strike you for damage or I place a condition on you so that my next action is more powerful, or your next action is less powerful. So being supportive would be like removing an immobilize condition just before someone can follow up with a heavy hit move. Or providing a defense boost or blind or aegis so that the big attack can be survived.

Originally Posted by gunbo13

I know all the strats for cap points. And a lot of it is very complex. You assign roles, splits, and even migrating players to control the points. I went into detail in the last thread about how I would run these maps with GW2 classes. You can have hold builds, zerg rush-down, two-station setups, etc... There is a ton of strategy.

The problem is that the strategizing is more fun then playing. In other modes, you might split to destroy a keep or defend an important NPC/item/etc... For a split hold build, you might have a player who is standing around the ENTIRE MATCH. I'm not joking. If you play a bad team who don't know how to split, you might as well get a sandwich. And to quote egoraptor, there is a lot of fucking running around. Why the hell do we have to run around so much? Run around, sit for 30 seconds, cap, run around, fight for 20 seconds, wait 30 seconds, cap, split, run around...it never ends. And you aren't adventuring either. You are running laps on the same map, same turns, same speed boosts, same garbage.

TL;DR: when a mode has the possibility of standing around doing nothing but watching a bar go up, it's shit. Name me one other mode from the games you play that has that? Against bad teams I would weigh my 1 key down and walk away from the comp.

I guess I don't really understand. In TF2, CTF is considered the most boring mode because it can lead to people sitting in one place the entire match, in order to defend the flag. In other modes, you're killing people so that they can't cap a point, or you're defending against people attacking you while you're capping the point. You never just stand around because there's still something you can be doing. And even after the best strategy has been found and is being put to use for the hundredth time, the excitement from the flow of battle doesn't disappear.

The issue is not about watching a bar go up, it's not doing anything active period, right? That's why GW2 is taking cues from other games that have been working on this for years. While I'll agree that they're a little on the long side, the time for caps doesn't take forever. There are more things to do than you can easily get done with the player count, so you have no reason to stay in one place the entire match.

And then arguing about standing around an entire match to arguing about stop-and-go gameplay doesn't help. Hell, isn't stop-and-go gameplay supposed to be a good thing? In that gives you time to rest your character and reassess the battlefield situation? The next fight will always be seconds away. The distance between points isn't very far meaning that the time between fights is only really as long as the respawn timer. The fact that killing players adds to your point total speeds up the game as well.
Teknopathetic
Member
(05-04-2012, 09:08 PM)
Teknopathetic's Avatar
"Ah, gotcha. From what I understand, conditions are supposed to be like an attack. I either strike you for damage or I place a condition on you so that my next action is more powerful, or your next action is less powerful. So being supportive would be like removing an immobilize condition just before someone can follow up with a heavy hit move. Or providing a defense boost or blind or aegis so that the big attack can be survived."

Unfortunately, there are no tells for such abilities which makes trying to use defensive abilities reactively in an effective manner implausible.



"I certainly get that. I'm sort of giving the same side of the argument here. :lol With some aspects it still just gives off a bad impression. I mean they defended downed state by saying some of the strategy that can be made with it is great. Haha really? I'm sorry I just can't believe that."

I feel like downed state is a band-aid for the issue of there being no "significant" support roles. Because it's expected that even in an ideal group situation you can/will die, you can be revived at any time. Even after you're "finished."
gunbo13
Member
(05-04-2012, 09:09 PM)
gunbo13's Avatar

Originally Posted by Trey

However, I'm more interested in what you were getting into about the particle effect density and along those lines. Functionalilty and fundamental mechanics and shit.

Sorry didn't see this.

Particle effects and any other visual inhibitors take visual cues out of the equation. It's the equivalent of a bad camera of awful frame-rate. If you can't see what the hell is going on, all your gameplay will be formulaic. 5-4-1-2-1-1-4-3, are they dead? If not, 5-4-1-2-1-1-4-3. Opponents in PvP is what makes it dynamic. That's why it is fun as it breaks the restrictions of scripted AI. But you completely ruin it if you don't know what the heck they are doing. This is a huge concern of mine with WvW. You might as well write macros and then focus on positioning strats.

sPvP is a bit different. But even with the lower numbers, the greater issue is lack of time. Even if visual idents are not an issue, do you even have time to change up your macro patterns? Is it as boring as periodically hitting an under-used skill? Can you really change hats if you see a warrior vs. a mesmer when 100 skills are going off a minute? This is where people are saying that player skill will triumph. This is surely true to a degree but to what degree is the question. And visual issues still appear to be a problem in PvP.

Originally Posted by Proven

And then arguing about standing around an entire match to arguing about stop-and-go gameplay doesn't help. Hell, isn't stop-and-go gameplay supposed to be a good thing? In that gives you time to rest your character and reassess the battlefield situation? The next fight will always be seconds away. The distance between points isn't very far meaning that the time between fights is only really as long as the respawn timer. The fact that killing players adds to your point total speeds up the game as well.

Standing around doing nothing is a by-product of many cap builds. You put players on camping duty and they sit. At times it is extremely effective which is unfortunate. So hence, standing around. That's not stop and go, just stop. And stop and go is only a good thing if the movement isn't tedious. That's all about map design. Running in loops on boring maps makes stop and go a chore. And even if capping is quick, it is still boring. I'd rather try to halt a ganking split team or take out a runner. Running to a target is your "break" not standing around doing nothing. And if your target is to stand around watching a bar? Well, I don't think I need to repeat myself.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
(05-04-2012, 09:10 PM)
Principate's Avatar

Originally Posted by Teknopathetic

"Have yet to see how 5v5 will work out. There seems to be a surprisingly high skill cap to the PvP gameplay in this, so it's a wildcard I believe. Even if it finally rips the remainder of the WoW arena junkies away, it'll be a small victory for Anet."

I don't really think it compares to WoW arena from what I played during the BWE. And that's not because WoW Arena is particularly good, but there's a much higher importance on team builds and coordination that doesn't seem to exist in GW2 at the moment. Support doesn't seem to exist (despite them saying the game's about DPS, Control, and support), the most team coordination that's possible in GW2's structured pvp right now is focusing the same target which is not really all that interesting to play or watch.


"With Conquest I agree, it's a decent start but it has it's issues and it being it's only gametype(at launch) doesn't help, but why do you think 5v5 all together has no viability?"
"Still curious why you think so. Not that I agree or disagree with the assertion, just trying to see where you and tangentially gunbo are coming from."

See above.

I believe GW1 (as do more than fair number of other people) had a far superior team coordination than WoW really ever managed to achieve. The game types and modes were more thought out not to mention the gameplay was designed specifically for that pvp whereas WoW's was mostly shoehorned in (arena didn't come out launch and tournmanets came way after), ignoring the pve grind needed to even compete (or at least was for most of it's lifetime.


Seems after 7 years for balancing a game that operated entirely to a T on team builds Arenanet just decided to do the exact opposite with gw2. A very strange decision but I'm guessing they wanted to try something different.
Warrior_Keoni
Member
(05-04-2012, 09:14 PM)
Warrior_Keoni's Avatar

Originally Posted by Principate

I believe GW1 (as do more than fair number of other people) had a far superior team coordination than WoW really ever managed to achieve. The game types and modes were more thought out not to mention the gameplay was designed specifically for that pvp whereas WoW's was mostly shoehorned in (arena didn't come out launch and tournmanets came way after), ignoring the pve grind needed to even compete (or at least was for most of it's lifetime.


Seems after 7 years for balancing a game that operated entirely to a T on team builds Arenanet just decided to do the exact opposite with gw2. A very strange decision but I'm guessing they wanted to try something different.

Well they will certainly give us more time to learn how to PvP and such and we may end up with some of the old PvP stuff back later. Since the primary healer is taken out of the picture, people will need to decide how to coordinate better as a team and focus on downing enemies together instead of depending on a certain build.

Move as a group, fight as a group.
Kos Luftar
Member
(05-04-2012, 09:23 PM)
Kos Luftar's Avatar

Originally Posted by inky

I actually did a couple of steps of that quest but never realized they were connected in such an intricate manner. I was also purposely avoiding NPCs and conversations but now I can't wait to find out more and more stuff like this. Pretty cool video.

When I did that part I just did the snowball part and then decided to head to the next heart or skill point, wasn't sure which but as I tried to leave I just saw a hoard(herd) of bears rushing towards me, and I had no idea what was going on. I thought it was really strange.
Kanik
Sonic handles my blue balls
(05-04-2012, 09:30 PM)
Kanik's Avatar

Originally Posted by Principate

Seems after 7 years for balancing a game that operated entirely to a T on team builds Arenanet just decided to do the exact opposite with gw2. A very strange decision but I'm guessing they wanted to try something different.

GW2 is essentially a MMO that you can just jump right into and not need to worry about support, etc. It is very much action oriented - I see it as the FPS of MMOs. They're probably hoping that going this route will attract more of an audience than their previous game that has a fuck ton of depth and strategy.

This will probably also be easier to balance and as result, require less work on their end. GW must have been a mess for them. Stopped playing that game for a year, jumped in again and every build I had before across my characters was obsolete, with some skills being radically changed.
Proven
Member
(05-04-2012, 09:36 PM)
Proven's Avatar

Originally Posted by gunbo13

Standing around doing nothing is a by-product of many cap builds. You put players on camping duty and they sit. At times it is extremely effective which is unfortunate. So hence, standing around. That's not stop and go, just stop. And stop and go is only a good thing if the movement isn't tedious. That's all about map design. Running in loops on boring maps makes stop and go a chore. And even if capping is quick, it is still boring. I'd rather try to halt a ganking split team or take out a runner. Running to a target is your "break" not standing around doing nothing. And if your target is to stand around watching a bar? Well, I don't think I need to repeat myself.

I guess the argument has come to a standstill. I don't think I fully understand your cap point background. TF2 changed things up enough that the absolute closest game off the top of my head to GW2's current conquest mode is a mode in Halo, and I didn't come away with the feelings you're expressing.

Running in loops? Tense. I'm trying to get to the point as soon as possible to minimize the other team's point gain. Map design does come in here as it determines how quickly I can get there and how hard it is to take the optimal jumping path.

Sitting around capping? Tense. While I'm capping everyone knows I'm capping. Someone will be there in seconds so I don't have much time to heal (assuming as in something like TF2, you have a nearby health pack, or in GW2 you have the eventual auto-heal + heal skill). If I'm not watching all angles for attack properly I may go down in seconds.

Not moving while defending a point? Tense, admittedly less than the above two. If I have to defend a point then it means that the point is what's keeping my team in the game. Then it's similar to defending a keep or something. The enemy knows that you need that point, so someone will always be coming for the sake of taking you out. If you can afford the luxury of taking a hiding spot, that doesn't mean that they won't try to think one step ahead and get the jump on you there.

I think the maps are interesting enough combined with the movement abilities. Speed buffs, jumps, and teleports galore. Architecture you can climb all over on for shortcuts and surprise attacks.

You see the outcomes as boring and tedious, and I see them as tense and fun. I do still want to understand your mindset, but we've pretty much argued this out.
gunbo13
Member
(05-04-2012, 09:44 PM)
gunbo13's Avatar

Originally Posted by Proven

You see the outcomes as boring and tedious, and I see them as tense and fun. I do still want to understand your mindset, but we've pretty much argued this out.

Probably because my mindset comes from GW1, which GW2 closely emulates. You may find ANET's cap style less tense then what you are used to in TF2. But none of those things were tense in GW1. You won't be able to formulate a proper opinion until you've played a good amount of sPvP in GW2. And remember this is the ONLY mode. Your round-table of modes in TF2 is not here. I don't have any issue understanding your mindset. But you really have to apply it to ANET's design which will take time.

Basically YMMV but it's not like I can't contain my excitement recycling my least favorite part of PvP in GW1. I think I went through about 100 rants about cap points throughout our threads here. I only revisited it based on new footage and impressions.
etiolate
Banned
(05-04-2012, 09:50 PM)
etiolate's Avatar
I'll copy paste this from the official forums. This is in response to the sPVP thread from chaiplan.

E-sport is the PVPer’s bane. Why?
Because it’s about the sponsors, the broadcasters and a patronizing idea of its audience. All of this is combined with impatience to create a fruitless pursuit.

We feel that Conquest will be just fine as our only game type at ship! It does a lot of things for us, and I’ll talk more about this in the esport section. But quickly, conquest allows new players to quickly understand how they can help their team. It also creates great tension that’s easy to follow for spectators/announcers. Our scoring system makes it very easy for observers to follow – with a quick glance up at the score screen, you know how close the game is. -ANet

Football and Baseball are not easy to follow at first or even after watching more than a few games. It’s easier to understand if you’ve grown up playing it and learned the rules and systems. Despite this barrier of entry, they are both popular sports.
E-sports doesn’t need to be made into a microwave dinner. It doesn’t need to be made so easy at the cost of its real value. If e-sports are legitimate then people will learn the games.

The description of things needed for something to be an e-sport starts off with a subjective element and then two audience patronizing elements.

Where is the complexity of the game? Where is the skill that demands respect? If the PVP community doesn’t respect the PVP mode then you have nothing of an e-sport. You have an exhibition of your game, but not a competition of merit.

Because e-sports is not going to be as huge as people want it to be and it certainly isn’t getting near the popularity it wants by treating its audience as low-end observers. You must have patience for people to learn the game and understand it. You don’t pigeon-hole it into a place that is defined by its obviousness. You think players want a harder to master game? Well the audience wants that feeling of learning, too. It is rewarding to feel you understand a sport better from watching it. You better understand what is going poorly and what is going well. There just isn’t that factor in capture point.

You really run the risk of becoming Arena Football instead of the NFL. You run the risk of being a sideshow with a lower level of talent if you deteriorate the depth and knowledge of your format for the sake of immediate entertainment factors.

Further in the debate...

Baseball is easy to follow in that a ball is thrown at a guy and the guy tries to hit it, but the rules of out versus safe and what is a ball/strike, how runs are scored, and how you assemble a lineup, and so on and so on are not. So batting practice is simple to understand but baseball is not. I would say the same of football. Tossing and catching a football is an easy to understand but hard to master skill. The game of football is a whole other level.

The problem is that conquest is removing those sort of elements of depth and learning, and then plastering a scoreboard up top. How do you assemble a team build and combine characters for greater effect if you can’t rely on characters sticking together? The maps and mode demand splits and movement. How is an element like Cross Profession Combos matter in Conquest when you barely have more than three players total in a skirmish? These are elements of the game mostly removed by Conquest.

And the scoreboard? I rather disagree that the scoreboard has any sort of tension. Not only do matches get out of hand and become hard to come back from, but the game score and the flow of the match didn’t feel as tied together as I would expect. So much of the match and going-ons are distant from the player. I rarely felt any tension.

I think my main complaint is that the pursuit of e-sports is about the sponsors, the broadcasters and a naive and patronizing idea of the fans. The game is made to appease these concerns. This is fine if the game isn’t based on a singular product. If someone turns basketball into Powerdunk Ball then that has no impact on the NBA, college or how I play basketball at home, but since this is a product, the molding of Conquest as the launch mode and the e-sport mode keeps the PvP community out of what it desires. This only occurs because the player base that the companies seek to profit off of is last in line of importance. I’m not down with that at all.

And I feel this is no secret to those involved

No, what I am saying is that Capture Point has never been a mode with such complexities and ANet perfectly understands this. They are choosing it because a running score is easy to follow and small skirmishes are easier to announce. At least compared to a coordinated team vs team battle. They are going with 5 people per team because that’s less players for sponsors to support while allowing sponsors the same amount of exposure, thus saving the sponsors money and making them happy. You have to realize how hard it was to get someone to sponsor a 8 man GvG team with rotational players. It costs the company more money. Smaller teams are easier to sponsor. A score that explains itself is easier to sell.

TL;DR - The PVP community does not want capture point. They want their GVG/HA and the wow kiddos want DM. Capture Point removes the depth of team builds and lessens the worth of planning for things like Cross Profession Combos and even things like pairing a Warrior with a class that can put down a aoe cripple. This is not something we're guessing at. These are just lost due to the design of the game mode.

ANet knows this. Conquest is the one sPVP mode because it's what the corporate interests want. The player community comes third in this. It is unfortunate and irks me quite a bit. I think it's foolish as well. You'll be like Blizzard with their joke Arena esport. It's not legit, so nobody cares.
RepairmanJack
Member
(05-04-2012, 10:07 PM)
RepairmanJack's Avatar

Originally Posted by etiolate

I'll copy paste this from the official forums. This is in response to the sPVP thread from chaiplan.

Further in the debate...

And I feel this is no secret to those involved

TL;DR - The PVP community does not want capture point. They want their GVG/HA and the wow kiddos want DM. Capture Point removes the depth of team builds and lessens the worth of planning for things like Cross Profession Combos and even things like pairing a Warrior with a class that can put down a aoe cripple. This is not something we're guessing at. These are just lost due to the design of the game mode.

ANet knows this. Conquest is the one sPVP mode because it's what the corporate interests want. The player community comes third in this. It is unfortunate and irks me quite a bit. I think it's foolish as well. You'll be like Blizzard with their joke Arena esport. It's not legit, so nobody cares.

This is pretty much where my feeling, of them not listening to the community(on this aspect), is coming from. They are concerned about becoming an e-sport but not listening to fan's of other e-sports, or actual competitive players in any way. It's kind of disappointing. Especially when it comes across as if they're more concerned about spectator mode and things like that more than they are in more game modes.

I'm still not going to go as far as saying it will lessen team work and support rolls, but I agree with a lot of it.
Smiley90
Stop shitting on my team. Start shitting on my finger.
(05-04-2012, 10:09 PM)
Smiley90's Avatar
Guys, guys, let me tell you something.

I went on vacation last Friday at 7am, just got back yesterday. Missed the whole beta event because of it (:'(), BUT, thanks to the super-awesomeness that is poolside-Wifi, I read EVERY SINGLE PAGE OF THIS THREAD WHILE I WAS AWAY. Yep. Every single page and every single post since last Friday, I read everything while on Vacation. That's how much I've missed the beta weekend. Thanks so much everyone for posting so much and entertaining me while I was tanning/burning. ;) You guys are great, I'll join you next beta event for sure. :)
Hawkian
The Cryptarch's Bane
(05-04-2012, 10:24 PM)
Hawkian's Avatar

Originally Posted by Smiley90

Guys, guys, let me tell you something.

I went on vacation last Friday at 7am, just got back yesterday. Missed the whole beta event because of it (:'(), BUT, thanks to the super-awesomeness that is poolside-Wifi, I read EVERY SINGLE PAGE OF THIS THREAD WHILE I WAS AWAY. Yep. Every single page and every single post since last Friday, I read everything while on Vacation. That's how much I've missed the beta weekend. Thanks so much everyone for posting so much and entertaining me while I was tanning/burning. ;) You guys are great, I'll join you next beta event for sure. :)

I'll be honored to fight by your side when the time comes. :)
Mr. Luchador
I played NeoGAF Bingo and all I got was this tag
(05-04-2012, 10:31 PM)
Mr. Luchador's Avatar

Originally Posted by J-Rzez

You shut your mouth! I for purely selfish reasons want it out on this Tues. :)

Avatar Quote! I have uni papers due and a trip to New York to plan.
Vano
Member
(05-04-2012, 10:32 PM)
Vano's Avatar
I'm curious, if you could put whatever mode of PvP in the game, which ones would be and why? And which one(s) of them you see with possibilities of being accessible and good to be eSport?
Teknopathetic
Member
(05-04-2012, 10:39 PM)
Teknopathetic's Avatar
"I'm curious, if you could put whatever mode of PvP in the game, which ones would be and why? And which one(s) of them you see with possibilities of being accessible and good to be eSport?"


For an MMO, I don't think any mode has a possibility of being "accessible" enough for eSports. MMOs are inherently inaccessible with tons of arcane rules, "hidden" information from viewers (builds, stats, gear somewhat), incomprehensible spell effects, and so on. I am all for eSports and competitive gaming, but I don't think there's an MMO that will ever have a long stint as a "spectator" game, with spectators meaning people who aren't avid players of the game already.
Mr. Luchador
I played NeoGAF Bingo and all I got was this tag
(05-04-2012, 10:56 PM)
Mr. Luchador's Avatar
The whole eSports concept melts my mind to be honest. It comes across as a label someone has invented to justify countless hours poured into playing the same video game over and over again. Trying to suggest there are real tactics, training, organisation and evolution to what they are doing.
Teknopathetic
Member
(05-04-2012, 10:58 PM)
Teknopathetic's Avatar
"The whole eSports concept melts my mind to be honest. It comes across as a label someone has invented to justify countless hours poured into playing the same video game over and over again. Trying to suggest there are real tactics, training, organisation and evolution to what they are doing."


In some games that is the case.
Haly
One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
(05-04-2012, 10:59 PM)
Haly's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

The whole eSports concept melts my mind to be honest. It comes across as a label someone has invented to justify countless hours poured into playing the same video game over and over again. Trying to suggest there are real tactics, training, organisation and evolution to what they are doing.

Oh lord.
RepairmanJack
Member
(05-04-2012, 10:59 PM)
RepairmanJack's Avatar

Originally Posted by Vano

I'm curious, if you could put whatever mode of PvP in the game, which ones would be and why? And which one(s) of them you see with possibilities of being accessible and good to be eSport?

It's hard to say without playing PvP more and getting the feel for the team aspect of the whole thing. I have felt most the time that a small map style of CTF would work great in GW2. GW2's action is pretty fast and put a CTF gametype on a small map and it would benefit all styles of play and builds. A small map would also get rid of the usual fact of flag carriers sitting around most of the game and allow for more team coordination and set ups. It would have it's down sides I'm sure, but that's why I hate the idea of only one game mode at launch. Put out a couple and see what the community goes to and how they shape the game.

Originally Posted by Chriswok

The whole eSports concept melts my mind to be honest. It comes across as a label someone has invented to justify countless hours poured into playing the same video game over and over again. Trying to suggest there are real tactics, training, organisation and evolution to what they are doing.

Wait....are you trying to say there actually isn't any of that?
flyinpiranha
Member
(05-04-2012, 11:00 PM)
flyinpiranha's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

The whole eSports concept melts my mind to be honest. It comes across as a label someone has invented to justify countless hours poured into playing the same video game over and over again. Trying to suggest there are real tactics, training, organisation and evolution to what they are doing.

There are, relevant to the game. What else do you think people do in eSports?
Vinci
Danish
(05-04-2012, 11:05 PM)
Vinci's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

The whole eSports concept melts my mind to be honest. It comes across as a label someone has invented to justify countless hours poured into playing the same video game over and over again. Trying to suggest there are real tactics, training, organisation and evolution to what they are doing.

Usually if a game can be played within the context of an eSport, it's because such things do exist.
Mr. Luchador
I played NeoGAF Bingo and all I got was this tag
(05-04-2012, 11:06 PM)
Mr. Luchador's Avatar

Originally Posted by Teknopathetic

"The whole eSports concept melts my mind to be honest. It comes across as a label someone has invented to justify countless hours poured into playing the same video game over and over again. Trying to suggest there are real tactics, training, organisation and evolution to what they are doing."


In some games that is the case.

Originally Posted by Haly

Oh lord.

I don't buy it, sorry. The definition of sport has the word physical and dexterity used several times. The term eSport just sounds like a mask to try and disguise the fact that these people play a hell of a lot of video games to an extremely serious level. I apologise to anyone who may call themself an... eAthlete..? and I may have offended with this view point, but I thought I'd share it all the same.

I'm not totally discrediting that a lot of time has to be put in to master a game's mechanics, but I feel that's all it is - mastering the game's mechanics. You're always going to be stuck within that game's world and mechanics, you're never going to find a way to uniquely improve yourself or form an identity (outside of reputation).

Originally Posted by RepairmanJack

Wait....are you trying to say there actually isn't any of that?

Originally Posted by flyinpiranha

There are, relevant to the game. What else do you think people do in eSports?

Originally Posted by Vinci

Usually if a game can be played within the context of an eSport, it's because such things do exist.

No, I perhaps didn't choose my words correctly. I just don't see it as a Sport of any kind.

Sure you'll have people on vent communicating and organising. And you'll have your basic 'tactics' of Rock goes against Scissor. Paper goes against Rock. Scissor goes against Paper, etc.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
(05-04-2012, 11:09 PM)

Originally Posted by Chriswok

I don't buy it, sorry. The definition of sport has the word physical and dexterity used several times. The term eSport just sounds like a mask to try and disguise the fact that these people play a hell of a lot of video games to an extremely serious level. I apologise to anyone who may call themself an... eAthlete..? and I may have offended with this view point, but I thought I'd share it all the same.

I'm not totally discrediting that a lot of time has to be put in to master a game's mechanics, but I feel that's all it is - mastering the game's mechanics. You're always going to be stuck within that game's world and mechanics, you're never going to find a way to uniquely improve yourself or form an identity (outside of reputation).

Competitive chess isn't a sport? The term sport just means a competition game/event that can be played with rules where you compete vs other people. Anything can be a sport in a sense. But it should just be called competitions so people like you for example that address it with full body movement. Fuck guess golf isn't a sport now either, You just use your hips and arms, I'm gonna put bowling up for questioning next too. With your logic is DDR a sport?
Mr. Luchador
I played NeoGAF Bingo and all I got was this tag
(05-04-2012, 11:11 PM)
Mr. Luchador's Avatar

Originally Posted by QisTopTier

Competitive chess isn't a sport?

Its barely considered a sport - it did start as a game.
Vinci
Danish
(05-04-2012, 11:11 PM)
Vinci's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

I don't buy it, sorry. The definition of sport has the word physical and dexterity used several times. The term eSport just sounds like a mask to try and disguise the fact that these people play a hell of a lot of video games to an extremely serious level. I apologise to anyone who may call themself an... eAthlete..? and I may have offended with this view point, but I thought I'd share it all the same.

I'm not totally discrediting that a lot of time has to be put in to master a game's mechanics, but I feel that's all it is - mastering the game's mechanics. You're always going to be stuck within that game's world and mechanics, you're never going to find a way to uniquely improve yourself or form an identity (outside of reputation).

Not an example of an eSport precisely, but I would consider the following as a showcase of physical skill: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YePLMI9pu4
TheYanger
Member
(05-04-2012, 11:11 PM)
TheYanger's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

I don't buy it, sorry. The definition of sport has the word physical and dexterity used several times. The term eSport just sounds like a mask to try and disguise the fact that these people play a hell of a lot of video games to an extremely serious level. I apologise to anyone who may call themself an... eAthlete..? and I may have offended with this view point, but I thought I'd share it all the same.

I'm not totally discrediting that a lot of time has to be put in to master a game's mechanics, but I feel that's all it is - mastering the game's mechanics. You're always going to be stuck within that game's world and mechanics, you're never going to find a way to uniquely improve yourself or form an identity (outside of reputation).

Do you even understand what the fuck you're saying?
That's like saying you can't be an athlete in basketball because you're limited by the rules of the game. Just like in 'real' sports everyone has strengths and weaknesses in gaming, your argument makes no sense.
Retro
The Tree of Liberty
(05-04-2012, 11:13 PM)
Retro's Avatar

Originally Posted by Vano

I'm curious, if you could put whatever mode of PvP in the game, which ones would be and why? And which one(s) of them you see with possibilities of being accessible and good to be eSport?

I'd be fine with Capture the Flag, Hold the Ball / orb / skull. I don't see the need to have Deathmatches, we've already discussed how territories aren't conducive to the gametype... that's about it. I'm sure I could sit and come up with ideas, but I'm fine with just those two.

As far as an e-sport? Adventure Races. Multiple players start off at separate starting points and much reach a singular end goal. This is complicated by the fact that the goal is a lengthy distance away across monster-filled rough terrain. The objective is to reach the end first, so you can take a straight course, or try and find the other racers and stop them. This would be aided by things like avalanches, mudslides and traps you could trigger.

Kind like the old Eco Challenges that used to run on the Discovery channel, but with monsters and traps and such.
Mr. Luchador
I played NeoGAF Bingo and all I got was this tag
(05-04-2012, 11:15 PM)
Mr. Luchador's Avatar

Originally Posted by Vinci

Not an example of an eSport precisely, but I would consider the following as a showcase of physical skill: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YePLMI9pu4

haha well played!

Originally Posted by TheYanger

Do you even understand what the fuck you're saying?
That's like saying you can't be an athlete in basketball because you're limited by the rules of the game. Just like in 'real' sports everyone has strengths and weaknesses in gaming, your argument makes no sense.

Not really. As in Basketball you can change the game's mechanics by learning to dribble with both hands. You'll never be able to do that in a video game, say decide to try a weapon not designed for your class, or whatever. That natural evolution of ability and creating and expanding new tactics and ideas is part of Sport. I'm not talking about base rules of a game (say you must play 4 quarters of blah time, etc).
Vinci
Danish
(05-04-2012, 11:17 PM)
Vinci's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

haha well played!



Not really. As in Basketball you can change the game's mechanics by learning to dribble with both hands. You'll never be able to do that in a video game, say decide to try a weapon not designed for your class, or whatever. That natural evolution of ability and creating and expanding new tactics and ideas is part of Sport. I'm not talking about base rules of a game (say you must play 4 quarters of blah time, etc).

That's not changing the game's mechanics, unless you count doing it simultaneously at which point it's a violation.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
(05-04-2012, 11:18 PM)

Originally Posted by Chriswok

Not really. As in Basketball you can change the game's mechanics by learning to dribble with both hands. You'll never be able to do that in a video game, say decide to try a weapon not designed for your class, or whatever. That natural evolution of ability and creating and expanding new tactics and ideas is part of Sport. I'm not talking about base rules of a game (say you must play 4 quarters of blah time, etc).

Fighting games. /endofdiscussion kthx
Mr. Luchador
I played NeoGAF Bingo and all I got was this tag
(05-04-2012, 11:22 PM)
Mr. Luchador's Avatar

Originally Posted by Vinci

That's not changing the game's mechanics, unless you count doing it simultaneously at which point it's a violation.

It changes the game. People only using their dominate hand, or feet in a sport for a long time, no one really trying their other foot as wasn't even an idea. Then someone was as good with either hand or foot, and suddenly their mechanics changed. They were able to cut right and cut left with equal ability - suddenly they're harder to defend or challenge.

QB - PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS
Suddenly you face a QB who runs. First time ever. Hang on this is new. Changes the mechanics of the game.

Seriously eSports just comes across as a term used to justify spending a whole load of time playing a computer GAME. Do they consider themselves to be athletes? I'll openly admit this a totally new concept to me, and I think its the first time I've even seen the term used in this thread.

Originally Posted by QisTopTier

Fighting games. /endofdiscussion kthx

Still totally confined to what the code of the game will allow you to do. You'd never be able to throw a fire ball if it wasn't designed for that character to throw a fire ball. There is no free will or independent thinking.
RepairmanJack
Member
(05-04-2012, 11:23 PM)
RepairmanJack's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

haha well played!



Not really. As in Basketball you can change the game's mechanics by learning to dribble with both hands. You'll never be able to do that in a video game, say decide to try a weapon not designed for your class, or whatever. That natural evolution of ability and creating and expanding new tactics and ideas is part of Sport. I'm not talking about base rules of a game (say you must play 4 quarters of blah time, etc).

Have you ever watched a competitive match of any game? Your argument makes no sense to me. :lol
Haly
One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
(05-04-2012, 11:24 PM)
Haly's Avatar
Ironically, you cannot in fact change the way physical sports games are played without a lot of effort. Rule sets for "real sports" are more or less static, while games are constantly being updated and rebalanced.

Seriously eSports just comes across as a term used to justify spending a whole load of time playing a computer GAME. Do they consider themselves to be athletes? I'll openly admit this a totally new concept to me, and I think its the first time I've even seen the term used in this thread.

They consider themselves to be playing games on a highly skilled and competitive level.

The term "eSports" is just a marketing buzzword.

Still totally confined to what the code of the game will allow you to do. You'd never be able to throw a fire ball if it wasn't designed for that character to throw a fire ball. There is no free will or independent thinking.

And people are confined by their physical limitations in physical sports, so, what?

The whole point of games (digital or analogue) is to act within a defined ruleset.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
(05-04-2012, 11:25 PM)

Originally Posted by Chriswok


Still totally confined to what the code of the game will allow you to do. You'd never be able to throw a fire ball if it wasn't designed for that character to throw a fire ball. There is no free will or independent thinking.

What the fuck kind of logic is this? How many athletes can fucking do everything on the team? In games it's called swapping characters. It's sports it's called swapping players.
Mr. Luchador
I played NeoGAF Bingo and all I got was this tag
(05-04-2012, 11:27 PM)
Mr. Luchador's Avatar
Again, don't take the word mechanics to mean the 'Rules of the Sport' you're thinking of. I'm talking the way the players move - the actual Biomechanics. I know this has totally went off topic, but the whole notion just comes across, as Haly said, as a buzzword to justify countless hours spent playing computer games.

There are no athletes involved. Granted, saying there are no tactics, training and organisation may have been a little offensive (when there apparently is some of that).

Are all you guys eAthletes by any chance? Do you play competitively at computer games for an eTeam?

Originally Posted by QisTopTier

What the fuck kind of logic is this? How many athletes can fucking do everything on the team? In games it's called swapping characters. It's sports it's called swapping players.

Again, you've ignored the post where I gave an example of how NFL changed the moment a QB decided to run with the ball instead of just passing it all the time. Or the moment a sport changed when someone was able to use both feet effectively. Or how the role of a PG changed over the years in Basketball.

Its just not a sport. Having watched a video on youtube, I'm still can't see it as a sport. Its a bunch of people playing Counter Strike against each other to a very serious and competitive level. They're gamers - not athletes.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
(05-04-2012, 11:28 PM)

Originally Posted by Chriswok

Again, don't take the word mechanics to mean the 'Rules of the Sport' you're thinking of. I'm talking the way the players move - the actual Biomechanics. I know this has totally went off topic, but the whole notion just comes across, as Haly said, as a buzzword to justify countless hours spent playing computer games.

There are no athletes involved. Granted, saying there are no tactics, training and organisation may have been a little offensive (when there apparently is some of that).

Some? LOL oh god you have no clue.
Haly
One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
(05-04-2012, 11:28 PM)
Haly's Avatar
No one mentioned athleticism.

This is why it's called "eSports" instead of just "sports", the "e" implies competition across an electronic interface.
RepairmanJack
Member
(05-04-2012, 11:28 PM)
RepairmanJack's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

It changes the game. People only using their dominate hand, or feet in a sport for a long time, no one really trying their other foot as wasn't even an idea. Then someone was as good with either hand or foot, and suddenly their mechanics changed. They were able to cut right and cut left with equal ability - suddenly they're harder to defend or challenge.

QB - PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS
Suddenly you face a QB who runs. First time ever. Hang on this is new. Changes the mechanics of the game.

Seriously eSports just comes across as a term used to justify spending a whole load of time playing a computer GAME. Do they consider themselves to be athletes? I'll openly admit this a totally new concept to me, and I think its the first time I've even seen the term used in this thread.

So they put forth a rule the next day to enforce that neither of these things are allowed. Is it now not a sport?

Limitations and rules are the same things they just come from different things. Whether it is the code of the game or the rules of the league they both adhere to them and they can both still be competitive. The games become competitive in the first place because people figure out a better way to play the game, just because it comes from strategy and not a physical or mechanical change doesn't mean it's not more competitive after that.
Vinci
Danish
(05-04-2012, 11:29 PM)
Vinci's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chriswok

It changes the game. People only using their dominate hand, or feet in a sport for a long time, no one really trying their other foot as wasn't even an idea. Then someone was as good with either hand or foot, and suddenly their mechanics changed. They were able to cut right and cut left with equal ability - suddenly they're harder to defend or challenge.

QB - PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS
Suddenly you face a QB who runs. First time ever. Hang on this is new. Changes the mechanics of the game.

True, but did that sudden new evolution of the game result in every QB magically being able to run? No? And does that mean that a non-rushing QB is an epic failure because he's not playing the game up to the times?

Reality imposes certain limits on every player. There are, to a certain extent, ways in which people can do something distinct within the realm of reality - but they're still pretty limited by what it allows them to do. When a QB suddenly grows wings and flies over the heads of the defense, let me know.

Everything, even real sports, exist within confines - be they naturally or artificially designated.

You want a gaming example? Tribes. Skiing. The developers had not thought of that, but it came to define movement in the game after players came up with it. Players often find methods for success within game mechanics that they developers themselves hadn't even thought of.

Thread Tools