78 replies to this topic

[Trei]

Some people just need to Learn to Learn.

[lioka qiao]

I guess we're done then.  Negative comments are here to stay.  "Learn to Play" has it's place.  I just hope that players who complain are doing so after trying to find counters to the thing they complain about.  The devs don't want to hear frustrated QQ.  They want to hear constructive comments that include possible ideas on how to fix the problem.

[RandolfRa]

lioka qiao, on 18 December 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

I guess we're done then.  Negative comments are here to stay.  "Learn to Play" has it's place.  I just hope that players who complain are doing so after trying to find counters to the thing they complain about.  The devs don't want to hear frustrated QQ.  They want to hear constructive comments that include possible ideas on how to fix the problem.

If a game causes lots of frustrated QQ, there is something wrong with it.

[lioka qiao]

We should let the game dev decide the best way to solve the problem.  In the meantime while the problem exists we should "deal with it".

BTW heres a way to fix the thief QQ:
Make steal or infiltrator's signet cancel Cloak and Dagger if they are used during Cloak and Dagger.  The rest stays the same.  Without the surprise strike the thief combo is easily countered.

[Ragnadaam]

RandolfRa, on 18 December 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

If a game causes lots of frustrated QQ, there is something wrong with it.

Wrong; in fact I cannot believe you'd even try to say that seeing as how it's not even remotely accurate. In order for this statement to be true, everyone would have to be rational and objective people, that are only getting upset because of legitimate reasons. The self evident absurdity of that sentence as it pertains to players of an mmo speaks for itself. Really, I can't believe you even said that, it's as if you've never played any games before, let alone mmos. Or you think everyone else here never has.

[Krill]

Look on the bright side, this isn't GW1 with 2000 random skills and people arguing to just counter or d-shot anything that is obviously broken. This game should not be as difficult to balance if anet would move away from their balancing philosophy of buffing underused skills / traits instead of scaling back what's obviously too good, which ultimately only creates more FoTM type gimmicks.

Edited by Krill, 19 December 2012 - 03:32 AM.

[Asudementio]

AetherMcLoud, on 02 December 2012 - 05:34 AM, said:

Pretty much since the dawn of multiplayer gaming the "learn 2 play" argument gets used. And after yesterday's developer stream it's gotten even more use.

The problem is, it's not only a dead-end argument, but it's also completely without meaning and nothing but a double standard. Let me explain:

At and after release there were a LOT of whines about thieves and mesmers killing everone left and right. Tournament players (mostly rightly so) said that this was clearly a L2P issue because they didn't have those problems in tPVP, and/or there were counters for most of it (besides a few issues like portal, etc.)

Same goes for 100b warriors and a few other builds/professions. Everything always is a L2P issue.

Yet now in the developer stream, those very players who said said "L2P" at those 100b, thieves, etc. whiners now want to call for nerfs for this and that.

To this I simply say: L2P. If they can't handle ele downed state they should simply have a build that gives them enough defense to survive until the vapor form wears off and then stomp the now defenseless ele.
They said warrior condition removal is so underpowered. To this I say: L2P, why don't you dodge the conditions before they are applied? Why don't you LOS before they are applied.
They said AOE is too strong. To this I say L2P, why don't they use their invulnerbilities while rezzing, and/or rez with 2 people to make it faster? Why did they die in the first place? Clearly a L2P issue.

The list can go on without end. Because where do you draw the line? A class could have an ability on 6 seconds cooldown that does 4 million damage in 1 second without any setup. And if you die to it I could say: L2P, you should have dodged every 5 seconds. I realize I'm playing the devils advocate here but this is just to say that the whole L2P stuff has no end.

So, those so-called "pros" (which in itself is ridiculous because they don't make money by playing) should have absolutely no saying in balancing ever, because they themselves simply need to L2P better. Their notion of "anet should do what we say because we know what's best for the game" is beyond ridiculous.

L2p isn't always that way though. There times when it is warranted to tell someone to play better. The time to stop saying L2P is when something is unreasonably hard to manage.

[dynia666]

RandolfRa, on 18 December 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

If a game causes lots of frustrated QQ, there is something wrong with it.

o rly ? go check dark souls

[redslion]

Well, maybe if it's Dark Souls for some guys, and Assassin's Creed for others...

[Lordkrall]

RandolfRa, on 18 December 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

If a game causes lots of frustrated QQ, there is something wrong with it.

I assume it is something wrong with Dark Souls then? And those old school game released back when there were no autosave efter fifth minute and so?

[NuclearDonut]

dynia666, on 23 December 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

o rly ? go check dark souls

I don't think I've ever seen Dark Souls QQ, most people go into that game expecting to fail a lot.

[RandolfRa]

Lordkrall, on 25 December 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

I assume it is something wrong with Dark Souls then? And those old school game released back when there were no autosave efter fifth minute and so?

I have never heard of Dark Souls, but a game with that corny name certainly has to have lots of things wrong.

[redslion]

Dark Souls is a hardcore RPG. So it's supposed to be difficult. And it's a good product (from what i've read from reviews... I don't have a console, and I have been told the PC version wasn't worth it).

Just information-time.

[SpelignErrir]

RandolfRa, on 26 December 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

I have never heard of Dark Souls, but a game with that corny name certainly has to have lots of things wrong.

It has a weird name because it was made in Japan.

And "Guild Wars" players really don't have space to talk about corny names, lol.

[Crunchygremlin]

The problem is that there really is a learn to play issue in this game.
I do mean issue.

Its that the learning curve is not fun. Its painful. Almost "eve" painful.
After that hump then it gets better but there is a serious lack of fun in the 8man pvp.
most of my 8 man pvp was learned while learning an ele pre downstate buffs so maybe jaded.

[redslion]

The problem is when you play a class/build which requires low reaction time to use the stunbreaker and survive, or good awareness.

I decided to play bunker-like builds, until I can manage to achieve these goals.

[Abaregi]

L2P is the dumbest argument ever

What arguments have you compared it too and what are your qualifications?

[El Duderino]

If the game and skills are balanced correctly, and the only clear factor in winning, is not build, but skill - then L2P is the only valid argument for why someone isn't good enough to win.

Imagine if a high school football player asked a hall of fame football player why they aren't doing well with something, and the HoF player told them what they are doing wrong and that it comes down to them needing to learn to play better. Would that be the dumbest argument ever, or should there be some other magical way to make someone better without actually honing their skills?

Of course, if the game is grossly unbalanced and it is impossible to win without using specific imbalanced skills and build, then the L2P argument falls flat on its face.

Everything in PvP hinges on there being balance.

Crunchygremlin, on 06 January 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

Its that the learning curve is not fun. Its painful.

And this is opposed to the learning curve in other competitive games and sports how?

RandolfRa, on 18 December 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

If a game causes lots of frustrated QQ, there is something wrong with it.

So there is something wrong with chess, golf, baseball, bowling, poker, etc.

I'm pretty sure that people trying to get to the top of all of those sports have experience seriously frustrated QQ moments.

It is inherent part of trying to get better at something, along the lines of the famous phrase: "No pain, no gain." There is a reason that phrase sticks around.

Competition breeds inequality and frustration. It is also what makes getting better rewarding. Without either, it would be pretty bland and dull.

[redslion]

I'd just love to see hotjoin pvp reduced to 5v5. 8v8 is just a zergfest: so many people on the point, you can't learn to realize anything.

And it doesn't give the idea of a tournament because, for example, bunkers become useless in larger fights (there's a limit to the people they can whitstand at the same time).

Maybe that's the reason why you see a lot of people compaining about teams in hotjoin pvp: most players come there to test builds, learn how to mess with another class. Doing this, they look for people to fight with, not for organized pvp (IMHO I'm not learning nothing if I'm sticking into a big zerg or running to get points, while no one is there).

Some players then rant about thim, saying everyone is idiot. They should realize that if they think they can master decently their character and want to learn to play a tournament, they should join a free tournament.

And it's probably the reason it can get frustrating: you train in an environment completely different than the one in tournament: what works in one setting doesn't work on the other. And this can lead to frustration and QQ.

I, by myself, thought I was an awful player, for I played bunker in hotjoins. Then I joined tourneys. And realized, step by step, I was not that bad.XD
And I learnt more about the maps, having the time to think without orgies on the screen.XD