The best part of it is: We see a character getting dropped multiple times and even dying. Reviving a player also fails for a bit. As in there is a challenge minus the dead end of a total wipe. What do you guys have to say to this?
For me a challenge isn't beating on a monster in a group for 20 mins while a healer heals. Well, it is a challenge - as in it's a challenge to handle the headache it gives me playing a game like that. But I think this video shows that claims that this game is easy mode because of reviving abilities are unfounded. So it's hard mode to run back to your corpse and start a fight again and spend your whole evening trying to kill a boss because of wiping but it's easy mode to take all the painstaking time of the equation? Time spent doesn't equal challenge. If I can get back into the fight and take on the boss instead of wiping over and over that says nothing about how hard that boss is.
The best part of it is: We see a character getting dropped multiple times and even dying. Reviving a player also fails for a bit. As in there is a challenge minus the dead end of a total wipe. What do you guys have to say to this?
I would say the healer sucked... oh wait... there is none... sooo, maybe that's the reason those players actually performed quite badly.
What I see in that video is a bunch of players doing a dynamic event, but as you said yourelf it is complete chaos and most of the the time none of the players pays any attention to any action of those others players. They don't coordinate their attacks, they don't heal each other.
Then some guy tries to revive another player. Of course he fails reviving because he got no support whatsoever (where is the tank when you need one) and gets also killed by a mob. More group play failures. Ok, sorry, there is no real "group play"... call it what you want.
All in all it looks to me just like a warhammer public quest or a rift in RIFT.
But anyway, I guess anyone can see in that video what he wants to see. Let's just wait for game release or some open beta. Peace.
The best part of it is: We see a character getting dropped multiple times and even dying. Reviving a player also fails for a bit. As in there is a challenge minus the dead end of a total wipe. What do you guys have to say to this?
I would say the healer sucked... oh wait... there is none... sooo, maybe that's the reason those players actually performed quite badly.
What I see in that video is a bunch of players doing a dynamic event, but as you said yourelf it is complete chaos and most of the the time none of the players pays any attention to any action of those others players. They don't coordinate their attacks, they don't heal each other.
Then some guy tries to revive another player. Of course he fails reviving because he got no support whatsoever (where is the tank when you need one) and gets also killed by a mob. More group play failures. Ok, sorry, there is no real "group play"... call it what you want.
All in all it looks to me just like a warhammer public quest or a rift in RIFT.
But anyway, I guess anyone can see in that video what he wants to see. Let's just wait for game release or some open beta. Peace.
The point about seeing what people want to see is valid.
That being said, I look at this video as a positive because it shows failure. Too many of the human starter area and charr mid area videos seemed easymode to me. It doesn't look like people worked together very much, but I also don't think the thief player showed a lot of skill either. The guy who dies trying to rez, I'm pretty sure he shouldn't have been trying to rez with those two mobs around him, lol.
I guess I see the potential in the system; how skillful, cooperative players might have been able to win here. That's the lesson I want to take away, if you play badly, you get beaten. Having the capability to rez people doesn't make it easymode, especially if you can't even pull it off without dying yourself.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
The best part of it is: We see a character getting dropped multiple times and even dying. Reviving a player also fails for a bit. As in there is a challenge minus the dead end of a total wipe. What do you guys have to say to this?
I would say the healer sucked... oh wait... there is none... sooo, maybe that's the reason those players actually performed quite badly.
What I see in that video is a bunch of players doing a dynamic event, but as you said yourelf it is complete chaos and most of the the time none of the players pays any attention to any action of those others players. They don't coordinate their attacks, they don't heal each other.
Then some guy tries to revive another player. Of course he fails reviving because he got no support whatsoever (where is the tank when you need one) and gets also killed by a mob. More group play failures. Ok, sorry, there is no real "group play"... call it what you want.
All in all it looks to me just like a warhammer public quest or a rift in RIFT.
But anyway, I guess anyone can see in that video what he wants to see. Let's just wait for game release or some open beta. Peace.
The point about seeing what people want to see is valid.
That being said, I look at this video as a positive because it shows failure. Too many of the human starter area and charr mid area videos seemed easymode to me. It doesn't look like people worked together very much, but I also don't think the thief player showed a lot of skill either. The guy who dies trying to rez, I'm pretty sure he shouldn't have been trying to rez with those two mobs around him, lol.
I guess I see the potential in the system; how skillful, cooperative players might have been able to win here. That's the lesson I want to take away, if you play badly, you get beaten. Having the capability to rez people doesn't make it easymode, especially if you can't even pull it off without dying yourself.
Good points.
I too liked the video, because of the failure. It shows a more realistic vision of what the game will probably mostly be like in the early days. People are going to have to learn to work together, or things are just going to be that much more difficult. If history has taught us anything is that people will whine and complain at anything new, but they'll learn to adapt. Once they've become comfortable in the new system, they'll wonder why they ever liked the old system.
In the earlier areas, the events will most likely be forgiving, but at the higher end of things will also more likely require far more cooperation.
The best part of it is: We see a character getting dropped multiple times and even dying. Reviving a player also fails for a bit. As in there is a challenge minus the dead end of a total wipe. What do you guys have to say to this?
I would say the healer sucked... oh wait... there is none... sooo, maybe that's the reason those players actually performed quite badly.
What I see in that video is a bunch of players doing a dynamic event, but as you said yourelf it is complete chaos and most of the the time none of the players pays any attention to any action of those others players. They don't coordinate their attacks, they don't heal each other.
Then some guy tries to revive another player. Of course he fails reviving because he got no support whatsoever (where is the tank when you need one) and gets also killed by a mob. More group play failures. Ok, sorry, there is no real "group play"... call it what you want.
All in all it looks to me just like a warhammer public quest or a rift in RIFT.
But anyway, I guess anyone can see in that video what he wants to see. Let's just wait for game release or some open beta. Peace.
The funny thing is that I've linked this same video, showing a solid team tackling the same tough event, a countless number of times in this thread that I might as well stick the link in my sig. This really shows that the game is exactly as ANet have advertised it to be. A game with no traditional trinity, has dynamic combat and revolves around cooperation. If you don't cooperate, you will likely fail. So of course newbie's who aren't used to the game will fail, but the devs already know that cooperation is key to survival.
Also I had to laugh at whoever said that because there are no dedicated healers, the mobs & bosses won't do much damage. It doesn't matter that I as a player can actively avoid damage by dodging and other means, since there's no one giving out band-aids, the bosses will only give love-taps. Well for a demo experience, where the majority of the content was toned down for the players, this particular boss wasn't really giving love-taps.
The best part of it is: We see a character getting dropped multiple times and even dying. Reviving a player also fails for a bit. As in there is a challenge minus the dead end of a total wipe. What do you guys have to say to this?
I would say the healer sucked... oh wait... there is none... sooo, maybe that's the reason those players actually performed quite badly.
What I see in that video is a bunch of players doing a dynamic event, but as you said yourelf it is complete chaos and most of the the time none of the players pays any attention to any action of those others players. They don't coordinate their attacks, they don't heal each other.
Then some guy tries to revive another player. Of course he fails reviving because he got no support whatsoever (where is the tank when you need one) and gets also killed by a mob. More group play failures. Ok, sorry, there is no real "group play"... call it what you want.
All in all it looks to me just like a warhammer public quest or a rift in RIFT.
But anyway, I guess anyone can see in that video what he wants to see. Let's just wait for game release or some open beta. Peace.
The funny thing is that I've linked this same video, showing a solid team tackling the same tough event, a countless number of times in this thread that I might as well sick the link in my sig. This that the game is exactly as ANet have advetised it to be. A game with no trinity, dynamic combat and revolving around cooperation. If you don't cooperate, you will likely fail. So of course newbie's who aren't used to the game will fail, but the devs already know the cooperation is key to survival.
Also I had to laugh at whoever said that because there are no dedicated healers that the mobs & bosses won't do much damage. It doesn't matter that I as a player can actively avoid damage by dodging and other means, since there's no one giving out band-aids, the bosses will only give love-taps. Well for a demo experience, where the majority of the content was toned down for the players, this particular boss wasn't really giving love-taps.
Exactly. Cooperation is key. If everyone could just run around and be stupid and still win, people would, and rightfully so, complain that the game takes no skill or teamwork.
Also, grouping with people in a trinity-based game doesn't exactly guarentee teamwork and communication. I can't count how many WoW dungeons I've done where stupid tanks would just run around gathering up more mobs they can handle while the healer had no mana because they couldn't be bothered to look at their allies mana bars or ask "are you ready?" in group chat. I was a part of some pretty chaotic, no-real-teamwork fail-raids on multiple servers as well. I.e., the "chaos" and lack of teamwork/support in the video is hardly the result of absent healers or tanks.
Also I had to laugh at whoever said that because there are no dedicated healers, the mobs & bosses won't do much damage. It doesn't matter that I as a player can actively avoid damage by dodging and other means, since there's no one giving out band-aids, the bosses will only give love-taps. Well for a demo experience, where the majority of the content was toned down for the players, this particular boss wasn't really giving love-taps.
lol @ 1:55
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
wow,the combat in the first video looks dumb as hell.
I thought GW2 had action combat?,but all i see there is the same old tab targeting 123. :S
Real action combat without tab targeting,where you actually have to aim your spells and skills:
Sorry,but the "action combat" of GW2 doesn't look like this at all.
Oh God, now we'll have 20 pages of arguing over what "action combat" means, like people argue over "themepark", "sandbox" or "trinity".
All of these games have their own styles, and none is right or wrong, it's just personal preference. I don't even know off the top of my head what claims GW2 has made about it's combat. I often think of it as "more active", as in "more active than WoW." By this I mean that you can cast while moving and dodge attacks. That's enough for me. I have a friend with bad carpal tunnel problems. I'm already a little worried that GW2's combat will be too active for him. I can't even consider TERA as an option. But if those kinds of games you linked are more your speed, I wish you all the best with them.
For what it's worth, GW1 has a system where tab targeting is there, but it's also got auto targeting. If you activate an ability with no target selected, it will select the one closest to the center of your screen or nearest to you. I'm pretty sure I heard GW2 has a similar system. This video might not be the best example, but there seems to be two times that a target pops up at exactly the moment they start casting.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Rom, Tera does this also (classes can mitigate damage & regen HP/MP) and it's all well and good up to a point. But there are encounters where you just cannot do the encounters without a healer (harder content) and this is where GW2 lacks.
You can spin it all you like but the simple fact is GW2's encounters will be easy for the masses.
Originally posted by stayontarget
Rom I know you are excited and are a big fan of GW2 and that's perfectly fine. But all I am doing is pointing out a few things about what to expect in a game that does not have a true decated healer. You cannot add by subtraction, sure GW2 will be fun and exciting (at least we all hope so) but it will be scaled to what the classes can and cannot do. Think of the possabilities of what GW2 could do with there current setup and then throwing in a healer class = Harder content.
I really do love MMO fanatics, there logic is the best. So according to the logic here any game that does not have a dedicated healer is easier than a holy trinity MMO. I did not know MMO design was the pinnacle of the gaming industry and that every other game is less then it, since only MMO with the trinity can be hard. Thank you so very much for informing us of this open minded and brilliant outlook.
So that means Diablo 2 in nightmare is easy mode compared to trinity based MMO since it does not have a dedicated healer. I am sure all you MMO fanatics that champion the industry beat Bhaal on nightmare, with both hands tied behind your back while blindfolded, because it was so much easier than trinity based MMOs. Oh and I guess that means ever single player game without a healer is easy mode and does not offer the challenge of trinity based MMO.
After all if we are going to assume that GW2 is easier because it does not have a dedicated healer, then all games without a dedicated healer are easier. I am so glad MMO fanatics have played every single player game ever made and can give us this unbiased open-minded opinion. Plus how they just ignore that the Developers said that the demo was made easier and only the pirate boss in the PAX east demo was at the proper difficulty (and he was killing people left and right that did not know how to play the game yet). But the MMO fanatics are open-minded and unbiased and we should listen to them and not the developers. Since they know without playing the game how difficult it is even more than the developers.
Originally posted by gobla
If that's the case then I apologise. There's just a lot of hating going on when it comes to healers and trinity that it's a bit hard to seperate the sarcastic comments from the real insults, especially when using only text.
But personally I like the trinity. I like healers. Do they have problems? Hell yeah. Should all games everywhere throw them out because only narrow-minded, attention-deprived, sadomassochistic players like them? Hell no.
And I'm getting quite tired that just because GW2 is going in a diffirent direction ( a good direction I might add ) it's suddenly implied that all other directions are outdated and if you don't like the direction GW2 is taking then, well.... something's wrong with you.
Even the GW2 website is taking a very sarcastic stance towards the trinity and healers. And while I realise that from their point this is only humor, which in and of itself is no problem at all, I just wish there weren't so many people taking it seriously and copycatting it everywhere like it's the one undeniable universal truth.
I love how you just over looked all the people in this thread saying that any game without the trinity is a zergfest and easy mode. But the minute one person pokes fun at the trinity you are right there to defend it and say how people that put down the trinity are wrong. Apparently it is all right too bad mouth one type of game play to champion another as long as it is not a type you enjoy.
Or did I miss you lecturing all the people in this thread that say lack of holy trinity = suck?
This is not directed at you personally Gobla but the MMO fanatics are so right it is only the fanboys that are biased and narrow-minded, you all are just perfect no bias here at all.
I love how you just over looked all the people in this thread saying that any game without the trinity is a zergfest and easy mode. But the minute one person pokes fun at the trinity you are right there to defend it and say how people that put down the trinity are wrong. Apparently it is all right too bad mouth one type of game play to champion another as long as it is not a type you enjoy.
Or did I miss you lecturing all the people in this thread that say lack of holy trinity = suck?
This is not directed at you personally Gobla but the MMO fanatics are so right it is only the fanboys that are biased and narrow-minded, you all are just perfect no bias here at all.
There's plenty of people already defending GW2 that are far more capable then I am.
I don't have Master10k's extensive library of videos, developer quotes and articles about GW2 to show to the uninformed. I don't have Romanator0's excitement and patience to argue in long quote wars about the effects of GW2's design decisions. And I'm sure there's far more that are rationally excited about GW2 and willing to discuss it on these forums. GW2 is, imho, well represented.
I do have my own preference for the trinity, my annoyance with all the trinity & healer bashing and, hopefully, the rationality to argue against it. So I'll focus my efforts on defending the things I care about and I'll trust others to defend the things they care about. And if nobody cares about something then, as far as MMOs are concerned, it's not really worth defending anyway.
Besides, everyone's biased. If they say that's not the case then that's just their bias speaking. Even if they say it's the case then it's still their bias speaking. And open-mindedness isn't all it's made out to be, we really don't have enough time to explore each new idea in it's totality. Nothing would ever get done. So, sometimes, it's best to just consider something shortly and then decide it's utter and total bullshit. And then focus on the more important things in life, like calling everyone who doesn't think it's utter and total bullshit an idiot so we can get that nice feeling of righteous indignation when they start explaining their point of view.
In the end just read the posts you want to read, take the things from them you deem usefull and comment if you believe your comments are worth reading.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
The funny thing is that I've linked this same video, showing a solid team tackling the same tough event, a countless number of times in this thread that I might as well stick the link in my sig. This really shows that the game is exactly as ANet have advertised it to be. A game with no traditional trinity, has dynamic combat and revolves around cooperation. If you don't cooperate, you will likely fail. So of course newbie's who aren't used to the game will fail, but the devs already know that cooperation is key to survival.
Also I had to laugh at whoever said that because there are no dedicated healers, the mobs & bosses won't do much damage. It doesn't matter that I as a player can actively avoid damage by dodging and other means, since there's no one giving out band-aids, the bosses will only give love-taps. Well for a demo experience, where the majority of the content was toned down for the players, this particular boss wasn't really giving love-taps.
wow,the combat in the first video looks dumb as hell.I thought GW2 had action combat?,but all i see there is the same old tab targeting 123. :S
Real action combat without tab targeting,where you actually have to aim your spells and skills:
Sorry,but the "action combat" of GW2 doesn't look like this at all.
Well Arenanet never advertise their combat as action combat. They usually describe it as "dynamic combat", "active combat" or "innovative combat", which it is for the themepark MMORPG genre. Also what is action combat exactly? Does action combat entail having to aim my cursor at an enemy (Tera style) in order to hit? Then what about God of War and all the similar games, where it auto-aims my projectile moves.
Well then back to the whole dedicated healer crap...
Above in my previous quote I provided a link to an example of a boss in the open-world of Guild Wars 2, where it's only attack is equivalent to a one-shot kill. So I know that trinity games may have a few bosses that randomly one-shot players in a dungeon/raid. So how would a trinity game fair against a boss that will one-shot players with every attack?
I couldnt agree more, the days of having to work together as a team where each player represents and brings to the table some unique aspect are forever history! Rejoice! For we usher in a new era of homogeneous classes where everyone can do everything and specialization can die the over due and painfull death that it deserves. Bring it on!
EDIT: Hark! Come to think of it, how quickly can we kill tanks, DPS classes, buffers and CC specs. I cant count the number of times I couldnt group due to the absence of one of these ridiculously specialized classes. Snap to it DEVS!
I don't see how this ends working together as a team at all. In fact, it both defines and strengthens it.
Typical role-based MMOs (that is, the tank/heal/dps variety) don't really have much in the way of "teamwork". Players simply do what they are supposed to do: the tank gets the big bad guy to hit him, the dps furiously hits his/her damage buttons, and the healer presses the heal button when somebody's health bar changes color.
That isn't teamwork. That's pre-defined behavior. Therefore, games introduce gameplay gimmicks: make the players have to all run over there, or have somebody run from point A to point B and click something, etc. That's more like synchronized swimming than anything. It also doesn't increase the player skill required to accomplish something by much.
Freeing people from so narrowly-defined roles enables developers to make the game much more dynamic. Throwing the requirement of self-preservation into the mix also increases the skill level required by a huge margin. Now you truly do have to work as a team: if somebody is in trouble, the rest of the group will have to work together to help him if his own healing isn't going to be enough, not just ignore him and hope the healer deals with it.
Personally, I think this (and many of GW2's other bold departures from "typical" MMO design) is a great step forward for MMO design and has been a long time coming.
Rom I know you are excited and are a big fan of GW2 and that's perfectly fine. But all I am doing is pointing out a few things about what to expect in a game that does not have a true decated healer. You cannot add by subtraction, sure GW2 will be fun and exciting (at least we all hope so) but it will be scaled to what the classes can and cannot do. Think of the possabilities of what GW2 could do with there current setup and then throwing in a healer class = Harder content.
You know, it's harder to win in show dog contests , because in addition to having physical skills like running around and jumping, the dog also has to be well groomed and trimmed.
So... what you're saying is... MMORPGs are insufficiently hard because they don't take into account grooming and styling, which would make it harder content?
... things can be hard in different ways. Healer doesn't make something hard, and it doesn't make it NOT hard either. All that adding a healer does is add a healer.
It can lead to more or less teamwork, and make a game harder or easier.
Difficutly is part of game design, and a game can be made arbitrarily hard, no matter whether there's healers or not.
I completely disagree with sfc1971 here, because if a person is good at socialising, then they'll end up in a group no matter what tools they have or don't have, and they'll have friends to game with if--to say it again--they're good at socialising. So in a game like, say, Champions Online, if you see certain people grouping often, it probably means that they're great at dealing with other people, very extroverted, and generally just likeable. They don't need to be something specific to get into a group. And in Champions Online, you don't have to group if you don't want to, so you won't have to deal with nasty, sociopathic people.
Now let's take Final Fantasy XI as the opposite example. It featured a system where healers were necessary, and usually they weren't nice people, very rarely so in fact, and you needed a team of six with a healer to do anything. So what did this mean? I needed certain people on my party whether I liked it or not. I had to listen to them making nasty homophobic, racist, and misogynist comments and I couldn't just get pissed off at them because I'd get dumped from the party. So what happened in XI is that you had the dregs of humanity, the worst of the worst, the psychopaths, the sociopaths, the real nutjobs with no end of hate speech, using healers as a tool to force people to team up with them.
I quit Final Fantasy XI fast. I don't want that. No thanks. What are healers? A tool to force level-headed people to group with imbalanced, nutty, no-lifers, because no-lifers are customers too and we should have to endure them because they're customers! Well, that attitude forced away most reasonable players, it often does, until you have only that crazed minority left. That's pretty much what happened to Final Fantasy XI, and why it quickly became a ghost town (at least, on the Western servers). So no, people probably object to a healer due to having memories of being forced to group with the worst examples of humanity that they've ever encountered, not because they're bad at socialising.
So I'm going to call projecting, here. I think that perhaps sfc1971 can't get a group without tools, and he thinks that because he can't get a group without tools, it must be the fault of every other human alive. Well; Here's some news for you. People group up to do things naturally anyway, if you just let it happen then it happens organically. I team up plenty in Champions Online because I feel comfortable with doing so, if I don't like the team I'm with, I just leave it and either continue on my own or find another, what it means is that I don't have to deal with really nasty people. Now, if those nasty people want a group, then the option is simple: They need to learn to not be hateful or to keep their trap shut.
It's easy to blame everyone else for your problems, but it's very rarely the case. i've gone through shit before and I've seen how it's had a very negative effect on my personality, to the point where I've pushed all my friends away, and no one has wanted to know me. I didn't blame anyone for that but me, and I got better. Blaming other people for your own shortcomings and feeling that tools need to be implemented to counter your shortcomings is a very myopic way of looking at things. You should work with the people who want to be with you and try and get better, if you're a nicer person, then people will want to group with you regardless. You won't need to be a healer, you won't need anything.
So, to me, having tools around to force people to group as opposed to letting it happen naturally is basically something that a person with no social skills would need, rather than someone with the social skills enough to befriend a group of people, possibly a guild, and to be likeable enough for them to want to game with that person frequently. Be a better person and you won't need healing.
(Quote follows.)
Originally posted by sfc1971
The reason a lot of people hate the healing class is that they lack the social skills to work in a group. That isn't suprising, a LOT of effort is spend by businesses trying to get their employees to learn to work together after they are out of their teens. Yes highly trained specialist person, your contribution to the companies success is useful, so is the contribution of the average intelligence office worker who makes sure everyones birthday is remembered and the office does not come to resemble a student dorm room.
The no-healer thing has been tried before. Age of Conan tried it partly by making healers worthy of DPS in their own right and making heals group based rather then target based. So instead of emergency heals the healers in AoC did constant boost healing while in the process of DPS. It worked, one healing class, forgot which, was so good it could out DPS and out tank anything.
AoC you might have noticed failed. Because of this? Well. Partly. You see, while twitch gaming used to get a lot of press, not everyone likes it. Some people like a slower pace and actually have to use tactics and strategy. The triad of tank, dps, healer (with additional specialized classes) creates this.
If everyone is roughly the same, if you remove the tank, and the healer (because the tank is there to protect the healer so no healer means no requirement for a tank) everyone becomes a DPS class. And that is what killed AoC for me (apart from all the other issues), once you played it and got into a group it was boring as hell. Just spam the same attacks over and over again, it was even more boring then the macro combat of doc-buffed SWG.
Compared to that, in Lotro, each class has a role and mix matching them requires different approaches. Some players can do that. All burglar rift? Why not. LM for the heals? Can be done. Have you seen the power of 3 captains working together?
But that requires players who know their own class and that of others and can adjust their style to work with it. Yes, I see many a group in Lotro begging for a minstrel (the standard healing class) even when they are a captain themselves and they could team up with other secondary healers or more tanks or more crowd control and get the job done just as well.
The type who cry "we need healers and can't find any" are often the people who can't adjust their tactics and who are black listed by healers because they are not nice to group with.
I am a healer myself but also play other classes. So I know quite a few healers. Often when trying to help out a group by calling on a friendly healer I am told they are happy to help me out, but ditch the group I am with because the champ/huntard spamming LFG with "need healer" is someone they don't want to group with.
I am very intrested in seeing what GW2 is going to be like. But a game with no tactics, no strategy, is going to be very boring. And don't say that lack of a healer class means that all classes won't be the same. If all classes are not the same, then the "need healer" will just be replaced by "need crowd control" or "need dps" or "need class X I will never roll, never thank, to come and help me out".
SWTOR might suffer from the same. When everyone can heal themselves, you got a lot of people playing essentially with themselves. I am to old to play with myself.
It featured a system where healers were necessary, and usually they weren't nice people, very rarely so in fact, and you needed a team of six with a healer to do anything. So what did this mean? I needed certain people on my party whether I liked it or not. I had to listen to them making nasty homophobic, racist, and misogynist comments and I couldn't just get pissed off at them because I'd get dumped from the party. So what happened in XI is that you had the dregs of humanity, the worst of the worst, the psychopaths, the sociopaths, the real nutjobs with no end of hate speech, using healers as a tool to force people to team up with them.
Grats on what is quite possibly the most absurd straw man in the history of the internet.
I'm done with this thread. It's not worth it to argue in circles. Seeing is believing and when the game comes out and every single one of the people who came to this thread and made up some inane reason for why you need a dedicated healer (Yes, ALL of you) buys GW2 and plays it - they will see a game that works.
It featured a system where healers were necessary, and usually they weren't nice people, very rarely so in fact, and you needed a team of six with a healer to do anything. So what did this mean? I needed certain people on my party whether I liked it or not. I had to listen to them making nasty homophobic, racist, and misogynist comments and I couldn't just get pissed off at them because I'd get dumped from the party. So what happened in XI is that you had the dregs of humanity, the worst of the worst, the psychopaths, the sociopaths, the real nutjobs with no end of hate speech, using healers as a tool to force people to team up with them.
Grats on what is quite possibly the most absurd straw man in the history of the internet.
And the person Dream Chaser was quoting wasn’t using a strawman argument “people that do not want healers are anti-social”, so what was your point here?
Thanks for providing such a great example of non-fanboys of being unbiased and open-minded. /sarcasm off
Originally posted by cali59 Originally posted by madeux LOL you're not going to convince anyone that this game isn't EASY MODE by pointing to annoying facts like the ability for anybody to rez anybody. It doesn't get much more Easy Mode than that.
Snip ... chances are the more fun the encounters are going to be. Because it forces people into a survivable scramble mode, not just immediately calling it a wipe.
This is what excites me. My most fun encounters in MMOs to date have been ones where something horrible happened and left us in an awkward position, and we had to try something unusual in order to complete the fight. In early WoW, I spent some time with some raiding guilds as a primary healer, and as we were progressing, it was fun because we tried to stay alive as long as we could to learn a fight, but once a place was "on farm," when we made a mistake, often the raid leader would call a wipe because, often, it would save time.
The old mechanics are stale in any case. This game is worth trying to just see how it works out.
And I am going to criticise all of you who are making assumptions without having played the game. Shame on you. And especially the people saying it will be easy. Have you place Guild Wars the first? Some places were easy, but some were quite difficult. I don't want to assume, but I would like to think they are not going to make their new game very much easier than their first.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
And I am going to criticise all of you who are making assumptions without having played the game. Shame on you. And especially the people saying it will be easy. Have you place Guild Wars the first? Some places were easy, but some were quite difficult. I don't want to assume, but I would like to think they are not going to make their new game very much easier than their first.
I personally don't have much doubts that ANet will be able to get their balance right.
They managed to do a pretty decent job on GW which includes a lot of skills that are very hard to balance ( is there any other game where things like 55 monks and such are even possible? ). GW2 seems to have a lot fewer skills ( not a bad thing probably ) so combined with the experience the ANet devs arleady have I'm not expecting any problems here.
GW Healing was one of the rarer occurances where even PvE healing was challenging, dynamic and fun. If they can make that, on average, most hated aspect of MMOs exciting and challenging then making other things exicitng and challenging should be easy.
Anyway, I'm going to do some SWToR loving now. Can't be upsetting the balance by being too positive about GW2.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
AoC you might have noticed failed. Because of this? Well. Partly. You see, while twitch gaming used to get a lot of press, not everyone likes it. Some people like a slower pace and actually have to use tactics and strategy. The triad of tank, dps, healer (with additional specialized classes) creates this.
AOC didn't have twitch combat, it had guitar hero combat. Pressing the same 3-4 keys over and over to do your special attacks was not thrilling action oriented combat, it was an even more boring version of what is already out there. It was still basically GCD combat only with extra keys added.
It featured a system where healers were necessary, and usually they weren't nice people, very rarely so in fact, and you needed a team of six with a healer to do anything. So what did this mean? I needed certain people on my party whether I liked it or not. I had to listen to them making nasty homophobic, racist, and misogynist comments and I couldn't just get pissed off at them because I'd get dumped from the party. So what happened in XI is that you had the dregs of humanity, the worst of the worst, the psychopaths, the sociopaths, the real nutjobs with no end of hate speech, using healers as a tool to force people to team up with them.
Grats on what is quite possibly the most absurd straw man in the history of the internet.
Grats on perfectly illustrating an example of How to Make Pointless Comments on the Internet 101. Anyone can say something, and without actual reasoning to back it up, it just comes across as sound and fury signifying nothing. For someone to attempt to troll like that, well... I must have really hit a nerve. And for that to happen, I must have been speaking the trusth.
You were so flustered that you even screwed up the quoting. >_>
That said, I hate games with healers for the reasons specified - it forces me to play based on class, rather than with the people I want to game with. I don't have that problem with playing Magicka or TF2, so why should it be a problem in an MMORPG? If a bunch of friends and I choose to play a game together, it shouldn't matter what classes we pick, we shouldn't have to pull in a likely very antisocial/rude person just because they're a bloody healer.
Good riddance to healers, I say! Let this game be their death knell. A death that the majority of us will celebrate. No more having to put up with people based on class! If you can't pull your weight and act decently, then you're out of my team! And I suspect a lot of you are thinking the same. It's tiresome to have a system of grouping based on class priority. I'm glad it's gone - healers, the trinity, the lot.
Want a group? Don't roll a healer, just be nice to people! Good grief, it's not hard. You just treat them like human beings, with all the respect and courtesy that that entails.
Right, leaving this thread alone because I don't really need to say anything else, do I?
I'm glad I can pick a class and play 3 different roles in numerous different ways than other classes. Classes aren't supposed to be roles. They're supposed to play all the roles differently.
Comments
it seems this thread has turned into a classic case of "The earth is flat vs. the earth is round!" .
It's strange because there's plenty of video evidence out there that not just show but explain the challenge and teamwork involved in combat.
Watch this video for instance.
The best part of it is: We see a character getting dropped multiple times and even dying. Reviving a player also fails for a bit. As in there is a challenge minus the dead end of a total wipe. What do you guys have to say to this?
For me a challenge isn't beating on a monster in a group for 20 mins while a healer heals. Well, it is a challenge - as in it's a challenge to handle the headache it gives me playing a game like that. But I think this video shows that claims that this game is easy mode because of reviving abilities are unfounded. So it's hard mode to run back to your corpse and start a fight again and spend your whole evening trying to kill a boss because of wiping but it's easy mode to take all the painstaking time of the equation? Time spent doesn't equal challenge. If I can get back into the fight and take on the boss instead of wiping over and over that says nothing about how hard that boss is.
I would say the healer sucked... oh wait... there is none... sooo, maybe that's the reason those players actually performed quite badly.
What I see in that video is a bunch of players doing a dynamic event, but as you said yourelf it is complete chaos and most of the the time none of the players pays any attention to any action of those others players. They don't coordinate their attacks, they don't heal each other.
Then some guy tries to revive another player. Of course he fails reviving because he got no support whatsoever (where is the tank when you need one) and gets also killed by a mob. More group play failures. Ok, sorry, there is no real "group play"... call it what you want.
All in all it looks to me just like a warhammer public quest or a rift in RIFT.
But anyway, I guess anyone can see in that video what he wants to see. Let's just wait for game release or some open beta. Peace.
The point about seeing what people want to see is valid.
That being said, I look at this video as a positive because it shows failure. Too many of the human starter area and charr mid area videos seemed easymode to me. It doesn't look like people worked together very much, but I also don't think the thief player showed a lot of skill either. The guy who dies trying to rez, I'm pretty sure he shouldn't have been trying to rez with those two mobs around him, lol.
I guess I see the potential in the system; how skillful, cooperative players might have been able to win here. That's the lesson I want to take away, if you play badly, you get beaten. Having the capability to rez people doesn't make it easymode, especially if you can't even pull it off without dying yourself.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Good points.
I too liked the video, because of the failure. It shows a more realistic vision of what the game will probably mostly be like in the early days. People are going to have to learn to work together, or things are just going to be that much more difficult. If history has taught us anything is that people will whine and complain at anything new, but they'll learn to adapt. Once they've become comfortable in the new system, they'll wonder why they ever liked the old system.
In the earlier areas, the events will most likely be forgiving, but at the higher end of things will also more likely require far more cooperation.
The funny thing is that I've linked this same video, showing a solid team tackling the same tough event, a countless number of times in this thread that I might as well stick the link in my sig. This really shows that the game is exactly as ANet have advertised it to be. A game with no traditional trinity, has dynamic combat and revolves around cooperation. If you don't cooperate, you will likely fail. So of course newbie's who aren't used to the game will fail, but the devs already know that cooperation is key to survival.
Also I had to laugh at whoever said that because there are no dedicated healers, the mobs & bosses won't do much damage. It doesn't matter that I as a player can actively avoid damage by dodging and other means, since there's no one giving out band-aids, the bosses will only give love-taps. Well for a demo experience, where the majority of the content was toned down for the players, this particular boss wasn't really giving love-taps.
Exactly. Cooperation is key. If everyone could just run around and be stupid and still win, people would, and rightfully so, complain that the game takes no skill or teamwork.
Also, grouping with people in a trinity-based game doesn't exactly guarentee teamwork and communication. I can't count how many WoW dungeons I've done where stupid tanks would just run around gathering up more mobs they can handle while the healer had no mana because they couldn't be bothered to look at their allies mana bars or ask "are you ready?" in group chat. I was a part of some pretty chaotic, no-real-teamwork fail-raids on multiple servers as well. I.e., the "chaos" and lack of teamwork/support in the video is hardly the result of absent healers or tanks.
lol @ 1:55
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I'm smiling so much right now. Because I know you will be buying GW2.
***edit: Oh, and those videos you posted: lol (I haven't typed "lol" in 12 years. So it's kinda a big deal that you inspired that.)
Oh God, now we'll have 20 pages of arguing over what "action combat" means, like people argue over "themepark", "sandbox" or "trinity".
All of these games have their own styles, and none is right or wrong, it's just personal preference. I don't even know off the top of my head what claims GW2 has made about it's combat. I often think of it as "more active", as in "more active than WoW." By this I mean that you can cast while moving and dodge attacks. That's enough for me. I have a friend with bad carpal tunnel problems. I'm already a little worried that GW2's combat will be too active for him. I can't even consider TERA as an option. But if those kinds of games you linked are more your speed, I wish you all the best with them.
For what it's worth, GW1 has a system where tab targeting is there, but it's also got auto targeting. If you activate an ability with no target selected, it will select the one closest to the center of your screen or nearest to you. I'm pretty sure I heard GW2 has a similar system. This video might not be the best example, but there seems to be two times that a target pops up at exactly the moment they start casting.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I really do love MMO fanatics, there logic is the best. So according to the logic here any game that does not have a dedicated healer is easier than a holy trinity MMO. I did not know MMO design was the pinnacle of the gaming industry and that every other game is less then it, since only MMO with the trinity can be hard. Thank you so very much for informing us of this open minded and brilliant outlook.
So that means Diablo 2 in nightmare is easy mode compared to trinity based MMO since it does not have a dedicated healer. I am sure all you MMO fanatics that champion the industry beat Bhaal on nightmare, with both hands tied behind your back while blindfolded, because it was so much easier than trinity based MMOs. Oh and I guess that means ever single player game without a healer is easy mode and does not offer the challenge of trinity based MMO.
After all if we are going to assume that GW2 is easier because it does not have a dedicated healer, then all games without a dedicated healer are easier. I am so glad MMO fanatics have played every single player game ever made and can give us this unbiased open-minded opinion. Plus how they just ignore that the Developers said that the demo was made easier and only the pirate boss in the PAX east demo was at the proper difficulty (and he was killing people left and right that did not know how to play the game yet). But the MMO fanatics are open-minded and unbiased and we should listen to them and not the developers. Since they know without playing the game how difficult it is even more than the developers.
I love how you just over looked all the people in this thread saying that any game without the trinity is a zergfest and easy mode. But the minute one person pokes fun at the trinity you are right there to defend it and say how people that put down the trinity are wrong. Apparently it is all right too bad mouth one type of game play to champion another as long as it is not a type you enjoy.
Or did I miss you lecturing all the people in this thread that say lack of holy trinity = suck?
This is not directed at you personally Gobla but the MMO fanatics are so right it is only the fanboys that are biased and narrow-minded, you all are just perfect no bias here at all.
There's plenty of people already defending GW2 that are far more capable then I am.
I don't have Master10k's extensive library of videos, developer quotes and articles about GW2 to show to the uninformed. I don't have Romanator0's excitement and patience to argue in long quote wars about the effects of GW2's design decisions. And I'm sure there's far more that are rationally excited about GW2 and willing to discuss it on these forums. GW2 is, imho, well represented.
I do have my own preference for the trinity, my annoyance with all the trinity & healer bashing and, hopefully, the rationality to argue against it. So I'll focus my efforts on defending the things I care about and I'll trust others to defend the things they care about. And if nobody cares about something then, as far as MMOs are concerned, it's not really worth defending anyway.
Besides, everyone's biased. If they say that's not the case then that's just their bias speaking. Even if they say it's the case then it's still their bias speaking. And open-mindedness isn't all it's made out to be, we really don't have enough time to explore each new idea in it's totality. Nothing would ever get done. So, sometimes, it's best to just consider something shortly and then decide it's utter and total bullshit. And then focus on the more important things in life, like calling everyone who doesn't think it's utter and total bullshit an idiot so we can get that nice feeling of righteous indignation when they start explaining their point of view.
In the end just read the posts you want to read, take the things from them you deem usefull and comment if you believe your comments are worth reading.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
Well Arenanet never advertise their combat as action combat. They usually describe it as "dynamic combat", "active combat" or "innovative combat", which it is for the themepark MMORPG genre. Also what is action combat exactly? Does action combat entail having to aim my cursor at an enemy (Tera style) in order to hit? Then what about God of War and all the similar games, where it auto-aims my projectile moves.
Well then back to the whole dedicated healer crap...
Above in my previous quote I provided a link to an example of a boss in the open-world of Guild Wars 2, where it's only attack is equivalent to a one-shot kill. So I know that trinity games may have a few bosses that randomly one-shot players in a dungeon/raid. So how would a trinity game fair against a boss that will one-shot players with every attack?
I don't see how this ends working together as a team at all. In fact, it both defines and strengthens it.
Typical role-based MMOs (that is, the tank/heal/dps variety) don't really have much in the way of "teamwork". Players simply do what they are supposed to do: the tank gets the big bad guy to hit him, the dps furiously hits his/her damage buttons, and the healer presses the heal button when somebody's health bar changes color.
That isn't teamwork. That's pre-defined behavior. Therefore, games introduce gameplay gimmicks: make the players have to all run over there, or have somebody run from point A to point B and click something, etc. That's more like synchronized swimming than anything. It also doesn't increase the player skill required to accomplish something by much.
Freeing people from so narrowly-defined roles enables developers to make the game much more dynamic. Throwing the requirement of self-preservation into the mix also increases the skill level required by a huge margin. Now you truly do have to work as a team: if somebody is in trouble, the rest of the group will have to work together to help him if his own healing isn't going to be enough, not just ignore him and hope the healer deals with it.
Personally, I think this (and many of GW2's other bold departures from "typical" MMO design) is a great step forward for MMO design and has been a long time coming.
You know, it's harder to win in show dog contests , because in addition to having physical skills like running around and jumping, the dog also has to be well groomed and trimmed.
So... what you're saying is... MMORPGs are insufficiently hard because they don't take into account grooming and styling, which would make it harder content?
... things can be hard in different ways. Healer doesn't make something hard, and it doesn't make it NOT hard either. All that adding a healer does is add a healer.
It can lead to more or less teamwork, and make a game harder or easier.
Difficutly is part of game design, and a game can be made arbitrarily hard, no matter whether there's healers or not.
@sfc1971 (Quote below.)
I had to respond to this one when I spotted it.
I completely disagree with sfc1971 here, because if a person is good at socialising, then they'll end up in a group no matter what tools they have or don't have, and they'll have friends to game with if--to say it again--they're good at socialising. So in a game like, say, Champions Online, if you see certain people grouping often, it probably means that they're great at dealing with other people, very extroverted, and generally just likeable. They don't need to be something specific to get into a group. And in Champions Online, you don't have to group if you don't want to, so you won't have to deal with nasty, sociopathic people.
Now let's take Final Fantasy XI as the opposite example. It featured a system where healers were necessary, and usually they weren't nice people, very rarely so in fact, and you needed a team of six with a healer to do anything. So what did this mean? I needed certain people on my party whether I liked it or not. I had to listen to them making nasty homophobic, racist, and misogynist comments and I couldn't just get pissed off at them because I'd get dumped from the party. So what happened in XI is that you had the dregs of humanity, the worst of the worst, the psychopaths, the sociopaths, the real nutjobs with no end of hate speech, using healers as a tool to force people to team up with them.
I quit Final Fantasy XI fast. I don't want that. No thanks. What are healers? A tool to force level-headed people to group with imbalanced, nutty, no-lifers, because no-lifers are customers too and we should have to endure them because they're customers! Well, that attitude forced away most reasonable players, it often does, until you have only that crazed minority left. That's pretty much what happened to Final Fantasy XI, and why it quickly became a ghost town (at least, on the Western servers). So no, people probably object to a healer due to having memories of being forced to group with the worst examples of humanity that they've ever encountered, not because they're bad at socialising.
So I'm going to call projecting, here. I think that perhaps sfc1971 can't get a group without tools, and he thinks that because he can't get a group without tools, it must be the fault of every other human alive. Well; Here's some news for you. People group up to do things naturally anyway, if you just let it happen then it happens organically. I team up plenty in Champions Online because I feel comfortable with doing so, if I don't like the team I'm with, I just leave it and either continue on my own or find another, what it means is that I don't have to deal with really nasty people. Now, if those nasty people want a group, then the option is simple: They need to learn to not be hateful or to keep their trap shut.
It's easy to blame everyone else for your problems, but it's very rarely the case. i've gone through shit before and I've seen how it's had a very negative effect on my personality, to the point where I've pushed all my friends away, and no one has wanted to know me. I didn't blame anyone for that but me, and I got better. Blaming other people for your own shortcomings and feeling that tools need to be implemented to counter your shortcomings is a very myopic way of looking at things. You should work with the people who want to be with you and try and get better, if you're a nicer person, then people will want to group with you regardless. You won't need to be a healer, you won't need anything.
So, to me, having tools around to force people to group as opposed to letting it happen naturally is basically something that a person with no social skills would need, rather than someone with the social skills enough to befriend a group of people, possibly a guild, and to be likeable enough for them to want to game with that person frequently. Be a better person and you won't need healing.
(Quote follows.)
Grats on what is quite possibly the most absurd straw man in the history of the internet.
I'm done with this thread. It's not worth it to argue in circles. Seeing is believing and when the game comes out and every single one of the people who came to this thread and made up some inane reason for why you need a dedicated healer (Yes, ALL of you) buys GW2 and plays it - they will see a game that works.
I'm not worried. See you guys in game.
And the person Dream Chaser was quoting wasn’t using a strawman argument “people that do not want healers are anti-social”, so what was your point here?
Thanks for providing such a great example of non-fanboys of being unbiased and open-minded. /sarcasm off
This is what excites me. My most fun encounters in MMOs to date have been ones where something horrible happened and left us in an awkward position, and we had to try something unusual in order to complete the fight. In early WoW, I spent some time with some raiding guilds as a primary healer, and as we were progressing, it was fun because we tried to stay alive as long as we could to learn a fight, but once a place was "on farm," when we made a mistake, often the raid leader would call a wipe because, often, it would save time.
The old mechanics are stale in any case. This game is worth trying to just see how it works out.
And I am going to criticise all of you who are making assumptions without having played the game. Shame on you. And especially the people saying it will be easy. Have you place Guild Wars the first? Some places were easy, but some were quite difficult. I don't want to assume, but I would like to think they are not going to make their new game very much easier than their first.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
WTF? No subscription fee?
I personally don't have much doubts that ANet will be able to get their balance right.
They managed to do a pretty decent job on GW which includes a lot of skills that are very hard to balance ( is there any other game where things like 55 monks and such are even possible? ). GW2 seems to have a lot fewer skills ( not a bad thing probably ) so combined with the experience the ANet devs arleady have I'm not expecting any problems here.
GW Healing was one of the rarer occurances where even PvE healing was challenging, dynamic and fun. If they can make that, on average, most hated aspect of MMOs exciting and challenging then making other things exicitng and challenging should be easy.
Anyway, I'm going to do some SWToR loving now. Can't be upsetting the balance by being too positive about GW2.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
AOC didn't have twitch combat, it had guitar hero combat. Pressing the same 3-4 keys over and over to do your special attacks was not thrilling action oriented combat, it was an even more boring version of what is already out there. It was still basically GCD combat only with extra keys added.
Grats on perfectly illustrating an example of How to Make Pointless Comments on the Internet 101. Anyone can say something, and without actual reasoning to back it up, it just comes across as sound and fury signifying nothing. For someone to attempt to troll like that, well... I must have really hit a nerve. And for that to happen, I must have been speaking the trusth.
You were so flustered that you even screwed up the quoting. >_>
That said, I hate games with healers for the reasons specified - it forces me to play based on class, rather than with the people I want to game with. I don't have that problem with playing Magicka or TF2, so why should it be a problem in an MMORPG? If a bunch of friends and I choose to play a game together, it shouldn't matter what classes we pick, we shouldn't have to pull in a likely very antisocial/rude person just because they're a bloody healer.
Good riddance to healers, I say! Let this game be their death knell. A death that the majority of us will celebrate. No more having to put up with people based on class! If you can't pull your weight and act decently, then you're out of my team! And I suspect a lot of you are thinking the same. It's tiresome to have a system of grouping based on class priority. I'm glad it's gone - healers, the trinity, the lot.
Want a group? Don't roll a healer, just be nice to people! Good grief, it's not hard. You just treat them like human beings, with all the respect and courtesy that that entails.
Right, leaving this thread alone because I don't really need to say anything else, do I?
I'm glad I can pick a class and play 3 different roles in numerous different ways than other classes. Classes aren't supposed to be roles. They're supposed to play all the roles differently.
They don't wanna see bunches of healers in game, simly for the balance, anyway healers are assis in most of the MMOs.