109 replies to this topic

[shanaeri rynale]

I took a very long hard and detailed look at this issue back in May, and asked the question is GW2 a game looking for a heart? I looked at all the major systems in the game as we saw it in BWE2 and tried to work out if they were heart (tin man) or head (scarecrow) centric

http://shanaerirynal...he-tin-man-mmo/

[Megera]

My opinion about this topic is this:

Arenanet have done everything they could to remove anything negative when it comes to interactions between players. It's in the players' hands now whether they want to be sociable or not.

Forcing someone to group doesn't mean that he will automatically become a friend. I started playing GW1 back in 2005 when grouping with other players was the best way to complete content due to the problems with Henchmen AI. Truthfully, I didn't make any friends even though I was "forced" to group up with people. Yes, I met some cool people, but once the mission was over, we'd each go our separate ways. Whereas in GW2 I already have a number of people added to my friendlist that I randomly met while exploring. What changed? My attitude.

Another game where I ended up chatting and getting to know people was Lineage 2. The reason for this was that the combat was not very engaging and the long hours of grinding encouraged people to talk just to kill time. This is also a perfect example of people being "forced" to communicate with others. So should people be forced to talk to others if they don't want to? No, I don't think so. Those who want to meet people and have a larger circle of friends will find a way to do it without the need for whatever game mechanics to force them.

[Frakov]

Ghostwing, on 07 July 2012 - 05:33 AM, said:

That's going to be the case even if the game required you to group with other people.

I really think Rhydian's prison analogy is the best for the scenario of forced social interaction.

Right now you can still group with people, you can still meet people if you wanted to, there's nothing stopping you, and the game does encourage it by giving guild boosts etc. Your work analogy is more akin to "encouragement" rather than "force." Unless you are a slave. If that is the case I am very, very sorry.

First of all, I don't like this repeated use of the word "forced" because it has a negative connotation. It would be more accurate to describe the phenomenon as people meeting through circumstance instead of deliberately through choice. Second, the issue with guild boosts as an incentive for joining social groups isn't a good option right now as the current guild system requires work (this thread does a good job of illustrating some of its problems).

LOCOMOFO, on 07 July 2012 - 05:37 AM, said:

Wouldn't joining a like minded guild satisfy that social aspect for you?  You're more inclined to get to know everyone within the guild, just like you do in a work environment.

See above part about guilds. In short, you can only represent one guild at a time so if you're already active in a guild, your social activity in other guilds is reduced accordingly. Also with the current member cap guilds have, the social guild you join may want to give up your spot for someone who is willing to represent that guild full-time.

Rhydian, on 07 July 2012 - 05:33 AM, said:

Maybe but that is not discouraging social gameplay it is allowing you to socialize with those you want to socialize with. Just like in life if I meet someone I want to socialize with, nothing is stopping me from doing so, so GW2 promotes a more natural approach as apposed to someone who is a ranking guild member in a guild you really really need to join to get gear, who is a complete ahole who you not only do not want to assosiate with, but regret ever meeting. GW2 makes it totally possible to never need to engage in this encounter, and .. thank god for that.

It wasn't an accident that I didn't include larger parties doing instanced content for different rewards in my post. I thought about it because I believe it's a viable option, but I didn't want the discussion becoming Part 2 of our favorite large-group-instanced-content thread. That discussion will come around again in due time.

[Rhydian]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 05:50 AM, said:

It wasn't an accident that I didn't include larger parties doing instanced content for different rewards in my post. I thought about it because I believe it's a viable option, but I didn't want the discussion becoming Part 2 of our favorite large-group-instanced-content thread. That discussion will come around again in due time.

Fair enough it was something I mentioned in passing, however having known each others post history by now, begs this question.
What is the reasoning behind the question? By implication are you saying GW2 does not promote social gameplay or do believe non standard ways of doing so will not work? To reverse engineer it, how does GW2 NOT encourage social gameplay that a more traditional mmorpg does? Having played many traditional mmorpgs I dont see there being a good case of traditional being the optimal choice over non traditional less constrained set  ups.

[Enforcer]

Yes, it does encourage social gameplay.

You may not see people chat so much, but the fact he is ressing you already show how social this game will be. No fighting over mobs, loot, and you can participate in an event even though you are late. Beside, you wouldn't see much of chatting in BWE, because the time to play it is limited. I'm sure when it's out there will be tons of players that just want to log in and chilling in a place and chat.

I don't see this as anti social game, unlike the old traditional mmo where you fight for a mob and feeling pissed when someone kill steal the mob, and you spam click on some quest that need to you harvest/loot an item with five other people, and that stupid dice loot where I always see the item I wanted but my dice always failed me. Those will just promote people to hate each other, hence with the removal of all those stuff, I believe GW2 will encourage social gameplay, at least way better than all other traditional mmos.

Edited by Enforcer, 07 July 2012 - 06:08 AM.

[Frakov]

Rhydian, on 07 July 2012 - 05:56 AM, said:

Fair enough it was something I mentioned in passing, however having known each others post history by now, begs this question.
What is the reasoning behind the question? By implication are you saying GW2 does not promote social gameplay or do believe non standard ways of doing so will not work? To reverse engineer it, how does GW2 NOT encourage social gameplay that a more traditional mmorpg does? Having played many traditional mmorpgs I dont see there being a good case of traditional being the optimal choice over non traditional less constrained set  ups.

The topic in question actually started before I jumped in so I can't speak for the original reasoning behind this question, but hopefully my first post on the subject will explain my interest in this discussion:

Frakov, on 05 July 2012 - 06:27 AM, said:

This game is supposed to be a community builder and yet there is hardly ever any reason to talk to anyone around you in the open world. People jump into battles without talking, revive without talking (except sometimes 'thanks'), buff without talking, trade without talking, etc. By taking away the need for players to interact, there is less incentive to want to get to know the players you're questing with. I'm not saying forming lines is a good idea, but at least players had to communicate.

Not only do you not have to talk to other players in the open world, in large-scale events a player's individual contribution is less significant among the tens (maybe even hundreds) of other players doing the same event. When players aren't dependent on each other, there is less reason to get to know them.

What I expect will happen in these events is a bunch of people who happen to be in the area will flock to the events, get their cut of the loot/rewards, follow the big group around until the event chain ends, then go on their merry way with minimal player-to-player interaction. Whether it will actually play out like this is something we won't find out until after release and people potentially will care more about establishing friendships with other players.

[Oldthrall]

Enforcer, on 07 July 2012 - 06:06 AM, said:

Yes, it does encourage social gameplay.

You may not see people chat so much, but the fact he is ressing you already show how social this game will be. No fighting over mobs, loot, and you can participate in an event even though you are late. Beside, you wouldn't see much of chatting in BWE, because the time to play it is limited. I'm sure when it's out there will be tons of players that just want to log in and chilling in a place and chat.

I don't see this as anti social game, unlike the old traditional mmo where you fight for a mob and feeling pissed when someone kill steal the mob, and you spam click on some quest that need to you harvest/loot an item, and that stupid dice loot where I always see the item I wanted but my dice always failed me. Those will just promote people to hate each other, hence with the removal of all those stuff, I believe GW2 will encourage social gameplay, at least way better than all other traditional mmos.

YES GW2 FTW. I am so glad I don't have to fight over loot and tagging of mobs for quests etc. in gw2....although not a lot of people actually speak, they do play with each other and I think that's better than having a lot of people on the general chat just chatting and not questing because it is too much of a chore...but it is very likely that the dynamic events and lots of other stuff that is actually fun is making people actually play the game instead of sitting in a village chatting.

[Cruxisinhibitor]

I think the problem is a lot deeper than a lot of you would like to admit. Sure there's the choice whether you want to group or even interact with people, but i feel like the combat, the system that should encourage players to group up, is conceptually flawed. In GW2, everyone seems to be on a free-for-all scavenger hunt around the world. There are no real targeted heals, there is little need for player teamwork outside of dungeons and class combinations, and the skill design is not very deep, which results in a heavy theme of independent play throughout what i've experience with other people while playing over 50 hours in beta. If people are grouping up, it's predetermined unlike DE cooperation, it's like an a la carte lunch line where everyone has tunnel vision. Difficulty scales as well, making teamwork even more futile. In most situations, i found myself just one of many zerglings attacking a large enemy or groups of enemies incoherently. I found absolutely no need to physically group with people because i could get things done without teamwork at all. At the end of the day, recycling events and zerging content just feels really cheap. The only thing that shines even remotely in this game is the sPvP and the dungeon gameplay. The design is largely incoherent, almost as if they didn't discuss the implications of this system with any forethought as to how it would make the experience feel to players. It's organic and the choice is nice, but i really strongly feel that grouping is largely unnecessary and the gameplay depth / teamwork suffers for it. I realize lots of people will disagree with me, but being critical can be a hard thing to do when you're excited for a game. I really, truly feel like the game could have used a little more time in the conceptualization oven. I don't like the lack of structure and the cheap feel to how combat teamwork, or lack there of, flows.

[Rhydian]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 06:09 AM, said:

The topic in question actually started before I jumped in so I can't speak for the original reasoning behind this question, but hopefully my first post on the subject will explain my interest in this discussion:

I dont agree with the message behind the original post. I played 3 alts to about level 8 on the second Beta weekend, and there was plenty of talking going on either in groups trying to do areas together or in local chat. There was certainly more cooperation between players than on a standard mmo, thats for certain. So I dont agree with your assumption based on my own gameplay.

Just because people are not forced to do something in an organized setting does not mean they do not communicate. However there are people who refuse to approach other people and might desire a social structure they are used to, but I will return to my prison analogy on that one. Because you might be used to prison social structure, doesn't mean it is a desired norm.

Cruxisinhibitor, on 07 July 2012 - 06:13 AM, said:

I think the problem is a lot deeper than a lot of you would like to admit. Sure there's the choice whether you want to group or even interact with people, but i feel like the combat, the system that should encourage players to group up, is conceptually flawed. In GW2, everyone seems to be on a free-for-all scavenger hunt around the world. There are no real targeted heals, there is little need for player teamwork outside of dungeons and class combinations, and the skill design is not very deep, which results in a heavy theme of independent play throughout what i've experience with other people while playing over 50 hours in beta. If people are grouping up, it's predetermined unlike DE cooperation, it's like an a la carte lunch line where everyone has tunnel vision. Difficulty scales as well, making teamwork even more futile. In most situations, i found myself just one of many zerglings attacking a large enemy or groups of enemies incoherently. I found absolutely no need to physically group with people because i could get things done without teamwork at all. At the end of the day, recycling events and zerging content just feels really cheap. The only thing that shines even remotely in this game is the sPvP and the dungeon gameplay. The design is largely incoherent, almost as if they didn't discuss the implications of this system with any forethought as to how it would make the experience feel to players. It's organic and the choice is nice, but i really strongly feel that grouping is largely unnecessary and the gameplay depth / teamwork suffers for it. I realize lots of people will disagree with me, but being critical can be a hard thing to do when you're excited for a game. I really, truly feel like the game could have used a little more time in the conceptualization oven. I don't like the lack of structure and the cheap feel to how combat teamwork, or lack there of, flows.

I do not agree with this either, it is free roaming but you reach a certain level and go to certain areas even in low levels you will obviously benefit from assistance of other players. You also sound like you merely prefer a more guided structure, this is preference not a social negative.

[Astral Projections]

I think this game has the potential to be very social. The game encourages you to group up with people and eliminates things that cause conflict. Personally during the BWEs, I wasn't talking much to anyone because I was learning how to play the game and the skills for my new professions. Also I was so excited to be finally playing this game that I was just running aound looking at new things more than wanting to interact with people. Once the "new game" excitement is over, I think people will start recognizing people they have seen before and start talking to others and making friends. I don't think the BWEs are a good way to judge what the social scene will be like when the game is more mature.

[Landinion]

GW2 doesn't have trading, no elite quests or whatever and until level 30 there are no dungeons. So if you want social interaction, you have to search and become active yourself. That can be considered good or bad.

[Frakov]

Rhydian, on 07 July 2012 - 06:14 AM, said:

I dont agree with the message behind the original post. I played 3 alts to about level 8 on the second Beta weekend, and there was plenty of talking going on either in groups trying to do areas together or in local chat. There was certainly more cooperation between players than on a standard mmo, thats for certain. So I dont agree with your assumption based on my own gameplay.

Just because people are not forced to do something in an organized setting does not mean they do not communicate. However there are people who refuse to approach other people and might desire a social structure they are used to, but I will return to my prison analogy on that one. Because you might be used to prison social structure, doesn't mean it is a desired norm.

I don't know what the substance of those talks were with the groups you were with in the area, but after people have done everything in those areas time and time again, I expect there will be less talking and more just getting it done for the sake of doing it.

Edited by Frakov, 07 July 2012 - 06:19 AM.

[Izardoz]

maybe this lack of teamwork only seems so predominant because we have yet to really experience the game in its natural dynamic

during the time we have had to experience it, there has been, for the most part, a heightened sense of time-crunch, a disproportionate distribution of players, and a basic unfamiliarity with the mechanics

perhaps, once the game settles down a bit, there will be less of a sense of zerg, and more co-operative teamplay, and thus, more communication, and more lasting relationships

who knows? we will have to wait and see

[Rhydian]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 06:19 AM, said:

I don't know what the substance of those talks were with the groups you were with in the area, but after people have done everything in those areas time and time again, I expect there will be less talking and more just getting it done for the sake of doing it.

I expect they will level up and go to new areas. You seem to be stuck in the mindset that of course they will level as fast as possible and run alts through the same content. By that statement I think  you miss the point of the game entirely. No they wont redo content unless they are assisting a lower level friend or guildmate, do you consider that a pointless endeavor?

[Lufi]

It's funny how in other mmos I'm a little prick that wants other people doing same quests around him to die while in GW2 I'm running around and ressing because I could use their help. (and get some exp XD)

Edited by Lufi, 07 July 2012 - 06:26 AM.

[suyin]

well, youll certainly have a lot fewer guilds destroying themselves and each other over world boss gear.

[Enforcer]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 05:50 AM, said:

See above part about guilds. In short, you can only represent one guild at a time so if you're already active in a guild, your social activity in other guilds is reduced accordingly. Also with the current member cap guilds have, the social guild you join may want to give up your spot for someone who is willing to represent that guild full-time.

The reason one can join multiple guild is to ensure the playable in the long run, some of the guild will be dead(RL stuff/work/too busy), so with the multiple guild you've join, you can ensure that there are people to play with(there was an interview on this in youtube if im not mistaken). You can always know them with other method, such as this forum, FB, skype, and a lot of thing. Socializing doesn't really stop in the game only, the players need to improvise themselves. You can't just hope that everything is handed on your table.

Beside, being obligated to one guild is fair enough, but that doesn't stop you from socializing with people. No matter how the game encourage people to socialize, if you refuse to do so(or put a very little effort on it), then there is no point to even talking about it. It's all about you, to choose whether to socialize or not is not depending on the game. It is about the players.

Oldthrall, on 07 July 2012 - 06:10 AM, said:

but it is very likely that the dynamic events and lots of other stuff that is actually fun is making people actually play the game instead of sitting in a village chatting.

Yep.

[Cruxisinhibitor]

Rhydian, on 07 July 2012 - 06:16 AM, said:

I dont agree with the message behind the original post. I played 3 alts to about level 8 on the second Beta weekend, and there was plenty of talking going on either in groups trying to do areas together or in local chat. There was certainly more cooperation between players than on a standard mmo, thats for certain. So I dont agree with your assumption based on my own gameplay.

Just because people are not forced to do something in an organized setting does not mean they do not communicate. However there are people who refuse to approach other people and might desire a social structure they are used to, but I will return to my prison analogy on that one. Because you might be used to prison social structure, doesn't mean it is a desired norm.



I do not agree with this either, it is free roaming but you reach a certain level and go to certain areas even in low levels you will obviously benefit from assistance of other players. You also sound like you merely prefer a more guided structure, this is preference not a social negative.

What you're saying is logical, i'm just saying that, from a design perspective, it's odd that they orchestrated the combat to ultimately flow into incoherent zerg upon incoherent zerg. The skill depth is almost non-existent, examples being that almost every class can do everything the next class can, save for flavor differences (Warrior can Vigor, Might AoE, so can Ranger and multiple other classes.) I'm saying that since there is very little need for even the slightest bit of deeply coordinated interaction outside of sPvP or dungeons, i believe that causes people to have tunnel vision, compelling them into a glorified scavenger hunt while recycling cheaply crafted DE's to level up. This of course, is not very involving gameplay and the social structure, as a result of the combat system flaws, suffers.

[Arewn]

Things like kill stealing and other interactions that are generally negative in nature should certainly go. But I think they did remove a bit too many of such player to player interaction features. Face to face trading, duels (with the option to turn off), perhaps central locations for the market (black lion trading post, w.e) and a few other such things I'm probably forgetting would add to the experience and interactivity between players.

[Enforcer]

Arewn, on 07 July 2012 - 06:35 AM, said:

Things like kill stealing and other interactions that are generally negative in nature should certainly go. But I think they did remove a bit too many of such player to player interaction features. Face to face trading, duels (with the option to turn off), perhaps central locations for the market (black lion trading post, w.e) and a few other such things I'm probably forgetting would add to the experience and interactivity between players.

Some of the things you've stated is how Anet will counter the buying gold botting service imo. The only way you are able to get the gold you bought is from mailing, and that is how Anet will detect is someone bought the gold botting service. It is a good thing.

While for duels, they did said it will be implemented after launch(correct me if I'm wrong).

[Frakov]

Rhydian, on 07 July 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

I expect they will level up and go to new areas. You seem to be stuck in the mindset that of course they will level as fast as possible and run alts through the same content. By that statement I think  you miss the point of the game entirely. No they wont redo content unless they are assisting a lower level friend or guildmate, do you consider that a pointless endeavor?

My mindset isn't that people will level as fast as possible, although some will, rather it's that people will always go back and do old content because GW2's downscaling allows them to do so. I'm speculating under the assumption that there will be a point in the game's life where players will be completing content faster than Arenanet can change that zone's content to make it new and refeshing. Even if that's not the case I think it's safe to say that player's will go back and do content they've enjoyed doing before multiple times because it's fun (and completely doable without talking).

[Genesis]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 05:50 AM, said:

First of all, I don't like this repeated use of the word "forced" because it has a negative connotation. It would be more accurate to describe the phenomenon as people meeting through circumstance instead of deliberately through choice. Second, the issue with guild boosts as an incentive for joining social groups isn't a good option right now as the current guild system requires work (this thread does a good job of illustrating some of its problems).

Which is what happens now in GW2.

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 06:09 AM, said:

The topic in question actually started before I jumped in so I can't speak for the original reasoning behind this question, but hopefully my first post on the subject will explain my interest in this discussion:

There's no reason for people to talk to each other in any MMO questing system. Sorry, but it's true.

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 06:19 AM, said:

I don't know what the substance of those talks were with the groups you were with in the area, but after people have done everything in those areas time and time again, I expect there will be less talking and more just getting it done for the sake of doing it.

Again, like most MMOs over time. I don't see how "circumstantial grouping" will change that.

Cruxisinhibitor, on 07 July 2012 - 06:33 AM, said:

What you're saying is logical, i'm just saying that, from a design perspective, it's odd that they orchestrated the combat to ultimately flow into incoherent zerg upon incoherent zerg. The skill depth is almost non-existent, examples being that almost every class can do everything the next class can, save for flavor differences (Warrior can Vigor, Might AoE, so can Ranger and multiple other classes.) I'm saying that since there is very little need for even the slightest bit of deeply coordinated interaction outside of sPvP or dungeons, i believe that causes people to have tunnel vision, compelling them into a glorified scavenger hunt while recycling cheaply crafted DE's to level up. This of course, is not very involving gameplay and the social structure, as a result of the combat system flaws, suffers.

You do realize that this is one of GW2's biggest selling point as that prevents class dependency?

[Syncline]

I think that, while there could be some improvements to the interface (channels, joining groups, etc), folks worried about making connections need to wait until release.

Once server communities start to settle in more solidly (and whatever free transfer period has stopped), people will start to get to know each other, guilds will start to make their reputations, and so on. We'll start to recognize names and characters from hanging around and doing instances and PvP together, along with /map channel chatter.

Genesis, on 07 July 2012 - 06:58 AM, said:

You do realize that this is one of GW2's biggest selling point as that prevents class dependency?

Bring the player, not the class is what they were aiming for, yeah.

[Frakov]

Genesis, on 07 July 2012 - 06:58 AM, said:

Which is what happens now in GW2.

There's no reason for people to talk to each other in any MMO questing system. Sorry, but it's true.

Again, like most MMOs over time. I don't see how "circumstantial grouping" will change that.

You do realize that this is one of GW2's biggest selling point as that prevents class dependency?

People meeting through circumstance is only part of it. The second part is actually having a reason to talk to each other besides "feeling like it." It's the second part I think GW2 is lacking for the reasons I've already explained.

[Syncline]

suyin, on 07 July 2012 - 06:27 AM, said:

well, youll certainly have a lot fewer guilds destroying themselves and each other over world boss gear.

That caused SO MUCH drama on AION among top guilds, omg. Mortred's tantrums over other guilds snagging world bosses was amazing.

[Frakov]

suyin, on 07 July 2012 - 06:27 AM, said:

well, youll certainly have a lot fewer guilds destroying themselves and each other over world boss gear.

*resists urge to talk about GW2's own likely causes of internal guild drama*

*COUGH!*

Edited by Frakov, 07 July 2012 - 07:16 AM.

[Genesis]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 07:10 AM, said:

People meeting through circumstance is only part of it. The second part is actually having a reason to talk to each other besides "feeling like it." It's the second part I think GW2 is lacking for the reasons I've already explained.

This sounds like "forced fun," and I do not see the need or value of what you are trying to twist people's arms to do. The second part is basically lacking from EVERY MMO. People have no obligation in any MMO to date to talk to people apart from "feeling like it."

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 07:16 AM, said:

*resists urge to talk about GW2's own likely causes of internal guild drama*

*COUGH!*

This is irrelevant. This is internal guild drama in a GW1 guild about transitioning to GW2 and not internal guild drama within a guild of GW2.

Edited by Genesis, 07 July 2012 - 07:29 AM.

[Arewn]

Enforcer, on 07 July 2012 - 06:40 AM, said:

Some of the things you've stated is how Anet will counter the buying gold botting service imo. The only way you are able to get the gold you bought is from mailing, and that is how Anet will detect is someone bought the gold botting service. It is a good thing.

While for duels, they did said it will be implemented after launch(correct me if I'm wrong).

Any detection methods for gold botting services through the mail would also work in face to face trading though. I've heard Anet wants to avoid trading because of scams, but scams can and will happen anyways, players just have to be informed and intelligent in trading.
And yea I've heard they want to implement duels after launch too can't wait to find all those nice dueling spots out in tyria, I've already seen a few me and my friend wanted to try out.

[Frakov]

Genesis, on 07 July 2012 - 07:27 AM, said:

This sounds like "forced fun," and I do not see the need or value of what you are trying to twist people's arms to do. The second part is basically lacking from EVERY MMO. People have no obligation in any MMO to date to talk to people apart from "feeling like it."

The fun isn't forced. Fun is what may result when people who are brought together by circumstance end up developing a substantial bond because the game gave them the opportunity and incentive to do so. Right now the game gives you the opportunity to blow everyone off and hopes the incentive not to will be people's innate desire to meet new people. Although we do feel the need to meet new people, we don't always know who we might get along with if only we had the reason to try.

Edited by Frakov, 07 July 2012 - 07:36 AM.

[Genesis]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 07:35 AM, said:

The fun isn't forced. Fun is what may result when people who are brought together by circumstance end up developing a substantial bond because the game gave them the opportunity and incentive to do so. Right now the game gives you the opportunity to blow everyone off and hopes the incentive not to will be people's innate desire to meet new people. Although we do feel the need to meet new people, we don't always know who we might get along with if only we had the reason to try.

Ah, the "incentive" word. In MMOs, "incentive" is code for either "obligated" or "stupid to turn down due to a material bonus." But yes, you are proposing "forced fun," but what you describe in the bold is what GW2 already provides through dynamic events. Requiring people to do anything more than that would be coercive on people's time commitments, which is antithetical to ArenaNet's GW2 design goals. The option to blow people off while questing or doing dungeons exists in every single MMO to date as well. What can you possibly add to the game that would change that and would not be twisting people's arms to do it?