Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: Blog Spotlight: Competitive PvE
Stradden
Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
In this week's Community Blog Spotlight, Community Manager Laura Genender highlights two blogs with opposing viewpoints about PvE and the competitive nature of MMOs.
This week’s blog spotlight is a head to head debate between poster Vajuras, author of I Have a Dream; and poster NetSapiens, the mind behind Family Man Gamer. These two bloggers take differing standpoints on the competitive nature of gamers even in PvE: parsers, braggarts, and the optimal build.
In his blog, NetSapiens states that “people in a competitive environment will want to optimize their characters, in order to compete. You can’t compete in a game of Tennis if one guy brings a tennis racket and the other brings a gun and a basket of oranges.” For NetSapiens, gear analysis and DPS data makes perfect sense when it’s PvP.
Read the whole column here.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Comments
We are a competitive people... especially those of us who enjoy gaming. Perhaps the current PvE setup of MMO's is not conducive to true competition, but I don't see the answer as making players Less competitive.
Instead game developers should strive to make the PvE aspect of the game MORE competitive in a way that matters. Honestly I could care less about DPS, I never ranked #1 in DPS on guild raids and it did not matter to me. The "point" was to play my class well and do my part well. The reason that you see people bragging about things like DPS is the same reason MMO's were created in the first place: Competing against the computer gets OLD fast.
Lets take the Solitaire example. Of course it is silly to get up and scream "Owned" if you beat Solitaire. But, what if you and 10 others are given the Same deck and you are the first to win the game then... all of a sudden you have a real "victory" of sorts. In one simple move the stale game of Solitaire has become a competition of sorts, and it could add new life to an old pass time.
There is no easy answer of how to make things like Instanced Raids and Mob Kills competitive without using meaningless things like DPS... but I think it is a much better path to follow than just hoping people will become less competitive by nature.
I can honestly say I am not at all competitive in a PvE situation. It doesn't even make sense to me. I have a lot more respect for someone who is good at working with a group or who has good leadership skills than someone who has massive DPS.
In CoH, I am far more impressed by someone who has written an imaginative, refined character bio to fit the concept of their powers than by someone who has copied an "optimal" cookie-cutter build from some forum.
In fact, the race for uber equipment is what makes me enjoy most other games a lot less than I enjoy CoH. In CoH, your enhancements are not public knowledge, so there's nobody putting you down for your less-than-uber gear or bragging about their own. Some of the most prestigious items are actually costume pieces, items that have no game functionality, but are only as useful as the imagination of the one who wears them.
In my opinion, as long as there are raid-based 'end games' in MMOs, competition will always be a factor. It allows players to get VERY far ahead of others who don't have as much time to dedicate to it as they do.
The problem with players like netsapiens is that they are confused about games and genre. They try to treat all MMO's as FPS's. They should stick to the FPS games, MMO's are not their style.
Now some games like Fury bill themselves as MMO's but are literally FPS's in sheeps clothing.
When reading this I do not get the sense that you are "not at all competitive", but that you merely define competition with other terms. You list teamwork, leadership, and creativity as your grounds for "competition". You even state that you see and, in your own mind anyway, declare winners and losers.
The issue is NOT that we have a whole group of people playing games that lack any competitive nature... but that the current Factors that game devs have chosen to give us (IE - DPS, Armor, stats) appeal to only a certain sector of the community. Might there be a way to let a Team compete against itself or against other teams in a way that measures their "teamwork" and not just their combined DPS? Might there be a way to let groups compete that measures their leadership skills or creativity? I think people would find such things enjoyable... not because you get to put down the losers, but because the Competition itself makes the gaming more fun many times. Perhaps it is just me, but I enjoy the game more when it "counts" even if I lose. And, the current crop of PvE seems like endless Practice (playing against NPCs) with no Game (playing against other People).
I see nothing wrong with friendly rivalry in a PvE setting. Legolas and Gimli counting the numbers of orcs they've slain for example - it builds relationships (a mostly male thing I suppose). I'm doing the same thing when I announce to the group that I parsed 300dps in the last fight.
If someone parses higher than me, then suddenly I feel compelled to better myself. Could I be more efficient, do I need to change my talent build, or do I just need to get better gear? This element of the game for me is essential for overcoming the repetitiveness of PvE in MMOs. I bit like trying to beat your old high score in Tetris or whatever score-based game you enjoy.
As for enjoying PvE just for "what it is", I've played a dozen variants of : Fantasy Adventure: Noun of Noun. You and your band of brave adventurers bravely battle the hordes of <insert bad dudes here>, who threaten the land of <insert fantasy land here>, lead by <insert boss mob here>. I've heard it all before, graphics and storyline are what pull you in, but it's other people that keep you interested.
My point of view is that friendly rivalry improves teamwork, and drives us to achieve better. And by the way, I got a crit of 2400 on that last mob!
Still waiting for your Holy Grail MMORPG? Interesting...
Usually if i have to hear some arse tell me what his dps in the middle of a battle is or even after in some bragging fashion I can' t help but go "so what?" or better yet "who cares" or my personal favorite "I really dont' give a fuck". Half the time the people who have time to even brag about stats are the worst team players to group with (not all but alot in my personal experience).
My only concern when grouping with people for PvE content is to have fun and hope everyone else has fun too. Team work's always been far more important to me than stats, (unless that person is lvl 20 wearing say lvl 5 year then I actually do care!).
I've never really understood the need to be competitive in PvE combat when usually the point of PvE combat is to work together (has always ignored players sending me their dps in order to secure a spot in groups, unless there is a dire need for that particular spot to be filled). If your competiting to say be the first person to solve a puzzle or find make some discovery (like EQ2's system) or even in who finishes some quest first thats one thing but over your damage to me just seems silly and better reserved for PvP combat mentality. I'd rather choose to group with a friendly person wanting to improve or that compensates for a lesser DPS by being a fantastic team player and knowing how to work with their weaknesses over someone who's only concern is to wag their epeen around.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
I don't think it is a far stretch to say that most gamers are against bragging and general annoying behavior from others... but Competitive PvE goes well beyond that factor.
Take a game like WoW where much of your end-game experience is done by guilds. They are "competing" against dungeons. That gets so old so fast that many guilds experience huuuge drop off (mine is currently gone from WoW completely). But, one of the things that made dungeon running bearable was "competing" against ourselves. We would start to keep track of things like "# of deaths" and "Time needed to complete dungeon" just to have something to strive for. Once you get the whole "clearing the dungeon" down then there is little else to work for except loot... which is just another way of saying "dps" or "stats".
The thing is that there is an innate desire to compete built into us... most of us use Competition for our Entertainment (you know, that whole Professional Sports industry that a few hundred million people participate in each week). So, instead of just saying "competitive people are so annoying", we need to look at ways to define competition, especially in a PvE world.
What i don't understand is how DPS is more of a PVP competition.
Surely PVP is dynamic, complex and has too many variables for DPS to be in any way relevant or comperable. PVE content is static, unchanging and predictable. Giving players only one way to better themselvse at it, kill it faster.
As others have said, most of the problem is the game design. Sure some people are jerks about it but most people are bored and need a way to better themselves an measure themselves against others. The players are just being human, if anything is at fault, its the games.
With that said, i find it quite depressing looking at of the newer titles that are due out in the next year or so that seem to have not learned from the past, or are simply trying to get their slice of MMO pie.
PvE-wise, i don't feel competitive at all. I just enjoy learning my class at my own pace, exploring and participating.
If i start to feel competitive it is normally in response to someone else being blatantly competitive... If i'm a healer and i do 10k of healing and someone gets 30k of healing and shouts "i'm imba, anyone below 25k sucks big time" then in the future i will feel more pressured.
In PvE though i think it is more counter-productive to revolve around stats. Players become self-concious and stop doing the tasks that won't boost their stats... i think they stop enjoying the game at this point. Pressure is a real fun killer.
When it comes to loot, i like having the best stuff, but not to show off, just to be able to be more efficient at doing my job... If the right person asked in the right way to have some kit before me, i wouldn't give it a second thought.
If i need to move it up a gear to still be included and to be actually able to help my guild then that is what i'll do, but i don't class it as competing.
Thanks excellent write up Laura. Perhaps one day if God's willing I can find the time to at least draft up a simple prototype whereas everything is tweaked. But yes like you implied here- I am indeed thinking of diverse, hybrid builds. Hybrid builds work much better with dynamic encounters then a group of specialists. Right now I'm picturing 8 pure Warrior types trying to handle an emergency situation or 8 squishies (CoX slang for cloth wearers) trying to handle a hoarde of melee using monsters.
So yes I would indeed recommend hybrid builds and straying away from hard defined Class roles.
This way, grouping can be a lot more casual.
My two cents on it are this. I enjoy the MMORPG genre for the story that goes with the game. I've played, and spent an obscene amount of money, on a good sampling of the games that are out there. The games that I enjoy most are those that have a well thought out, interesting back story, that myself, and my friends can explore. Surely, there is repetition, it's unavoidable if you are building a game that isn't going to have a live person dictating all the actions of the NPCs, or live people working as actors, who play the NPCs. There will be repetition, because that's what's programmed.
I don't think the root of the problem is the game, or the devs, or the players, but the mix of all of them. The imagination of the players has to be engaged, so the player can react and enjoy the game. When the player fails to use that imagination, or the game fails to provide enough fodder for it, people default to the mechanics of the game. Look back at the roots, the real roots, of most MMORPG games, and it's the table top RPGs that you can point to. Those games engaged people and players for YEARS. There were still the min/max players, that looked to eek out the best kit, or build, but in the end, it was the imagination of the players and the GM that made the whole thing work. When your mage/fighter/rogue/priest or whatever class you played stepped into the room with a number of slavering orcs looking for its head, the imagination was triggered and the fight played out in your mind. At that point, you weren't worried about how much damage you did as a whole, you were worried about making it out with your hide intact. Your vicious sword swings, and daring parries played out in your head. To a degree we lose that tapestry when we turn towards the computer screen. Now the orc is right in front of us, your sword swing is there for all to see. No longer do we need to think about where, or what, or how the character is going to do something, or the random mishaps or benefits that can occur during a table top fight. The other difference is the fact that in the tabletop game, it was your group against the world, and your accomplisments were your own. In the MMO, your accomplishments are yours, and everyone else in the world who is about your same level. That lack of dynamic content waters down the individual accomplishments to the point that the mechanic becomes the unique thing about the character. In my opinion the only way to combat that is for games to start putting in dynamic play. Quests or events that not everyone can accomplish. Things that happen that have impact on the world. Make completing the event or quest the reward itself. If only 50 people on a server of 100's of thousands can get the title from the quest, the competition would be fierce. The trick would be to make that content available to everyone, and not just the "elite" guilds that would snatch them up.
Until the time that that starts to happen, it's up to the players to use their imaginations to rise above the "number crunching" that's the easy crutch. Engage your imagination, and like one person pointed out, turn it into the competition like Gimli and Legolas had. There's no reason your "I did more dps, you were pwned!" couldn't just as easily become "Hah, I waded knee deep in the gore of our enemy, I see only your ankles are wet!" You can bet the next time you raid with that person, they'll be doing their damnedest to try to out damage you, if only so they can come up with the epithet. Keep in mind also, that even with all their bragging, and competition, Gimli and Legolas were great friends, and when all the fighting was finished they sat together ale in hand....(and then started a drinking contest)
I understand that you are supporting the argument that hybrid builds would efficiently succeed in dynamic encounters over a group of pure archetypes. I was wondering if this aspect applied to the PvP environment. Personally, I'd prefer a group of cooperative specialists that are tightly operated with strategy and tactics.
By the way, thanks for the great article Laura. Fortier's been acting quite....
... with his articles.
www.oblinq.com/SnowmonkeysTemple/
By and large, I think much of the type competition being discussed here in a PvE environment is silly. How does someone's DPS numbers compare to my healing or tanking if I am not a DPS class? The only way that would make sense to me is if two players of the same class had identical gear. At least then, the base line starts the same.
As far as guild competition goes, I despise having to repeat encounters in instances (a la WoW) until the guild gets the encounter "down". To me, this equates to having the computer program you. "You stand here and block the blue beam until a count of 22, at which case Bob can jump in and take that beam. I'll take the red beam until a count of 30...." God, I despise encounters like that. All mobs, including boss mobs, should have multiple and varied ways of being defeated.
For some, having to reattempt an encounter repeatedly until they get finally beat it is great enjoyment. They love that challenge. I dislike having to repeat an encounter even once. I want to defeat every single mob/boss/encounter on the first try. I am the hero of the story. I am undefeatable. Having to reattempt an encounter is like telling me "you didn't read that book chapter properly, you have to reread it". I don't want to reread it, I want to see the next chapter. (talk about burning through content, though)
To the OP, how do you define "meaningful gameplay"? I have to think this would be different from player to player. The only real reason to play any game is for fun, and obviously we each find our fun in different ways. Some enjoy the competitive nature of which you speak, while some enjoy PvP.
Personally, I don't like either. For me, the competitive part is against the computer. I like to try to come up with a build/gear combo that makes me near invincible. I want to feel uber and godlike against most of the mobs with only the odd mob offering any kind of difficulty at all.
Finally, this isn't to say that this is the right way to play, only that it is the right way for me. And that means that the ultimate definitions that many of these blog essays strive for are unachievable, because the players' definitions vary so greatly.
I read some of the most obnoxious ideas/comments about PvE here. (I use SOME so peoples don't feel attacked individually, you made the links you want)
I will compete in PvE. Like it or not.
I won't scream: PWNED, 99% of the players will not even notice it, the 1% who will, they are competing with me or screaming PWNED themselves when they think they are better, so it is originating from a win/win scenario, where a cooperative player always enjoying to group, help and defeat the computer in a better way then before, will at the same time compete to better itself individually.
You want me not to compete in PvE? Sure, I won't play any game that even remotedly think that way! Commitment to grouping and to PvE, must be total and unconditional for me to commit to a game. We are not talking about a casual game I will play for a week or two, thereby I require total and unconditional commitment to grouping, and PvE. I don't require much for an afternoon walk, but if I am to walk this path thousands of times, then yes, I will either find a path which is more enjoyable, or make sure the necessary changes are applied.
Telling me to not compete in PvE makes as much sense as asking me to walk without shoes.
Competition is submisive to cooperation on every layer for a grouper, but it is still there. I will be happy to help a player, even if that player becomes better then me and raise the bar of competition...in fact, it appeal to me on every layer...I help the new BEST player, and now I am facing a challenge I may or not be able to overcome, all while been grouping and helping each other (and trying to defeat the computer in new more uber ways)...and guess what, that new BEST player is probably helping me, along with everyone else that is receptive to this "help". If I beat him, it fueling him to do better and re-beat me. Competition is submissive to cooperation, but it is there. Some PvE players doesn't care about it, but they do care about the fact I am in game grouping them...thereby they will be affected by this lack of some PvE players. They will laugh with a good hearth at my silliness, but they will enjoy it nonetheless...a lot more then been LFG and in need to start a new character cause nobody is high level enough for their character they like soo much.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
If you're on a team of 8 or more, it doesn't make sense to have each team member "gimp" their builds by spreading attribute points around on attributes or skills that are going to provide a net loss of effectiveness to the team ("hybrid") .
For example, I just finished a high-level mission in Guild Wars using heroes and henchmen. My team consisted of a minion master (hero), a fire mage (me), an earth mage (hero), another fire mage (hero), a healing monk (hench) protecting monk (hench) a blood necro (hench), and a sword/shield wielding warrior.
In the case of myself and my three heroes, I maxed out attribute points on their primary attributes (fire, death, and earth) and on their unique attributes (energy storage and soul reaping). I did this because in a team environment, you have other players or, in this case heroes, that each bring skills and powers to the table that one player couldn't possibly do alone. There's no reason to even try.
It wouldn't have made sense - when I was able to bring an earth hero - to put any earth skills on my skill bar. Better that I do what I do (fire), and do it better than anyone else on the team, and let my other heroes do what they do best.
So when I'm building a team in GW, for a specific mission, I want each player on that team to apportion attribute points and to bring skills that both make them effective at what they do best, and synergize well with the other members on the team. Hybrids may be fun to play or to experiment with, but when I'm building a team to achieve a specific goal, I don't have much patience for people who want to "try something new" when I know - given my experience in that game - what works best for a given mission or situation.
Don't get me wrong: I like to try new builds and "hybridize" when I'm not teaming with other people. But when it's time to get into a mission to complete it, I don't want to be the guy the rest of my teammates are having to carry because I gimped myself experimenting with a new build. Save that kind of stuff for a team hunting or engaging in some other casual pursuit.
When reading this I do not get the sense that you are "not at all competitive", but that you merely define competition with other terms. You list teamwork, leadership, and creativity as your grounds for "competition". You even state that you see and, in your own mind anyway, declare winners and losers.
The issue is NOT that we have a whole group of people playing games that lack any competitive nature... but that the current Factors that game devs have chosen to give us (IE - DPS, Armor, stats) appeal to only a certain sector of the community. Might there be a way to let a Team compete against itself or against other teams in a way that measures their "teamwork" and not just their combined DPS? Might there be a way to let groups compete that measures their leadership skills or creativity? I think people would find such things enjoyable... not because you get to put down the losers, but because the Competition itself makes the gaming more fun many times. Perhaps it is just me, but I enjoy the game more when it "counts" even if I lose. And, the current crop of PvE seems like endless Practice (playing against NPCs) with no Game (playing against other People).
You may have a point. I am a sucker for costume contests, and I have to admit I do feel good when I win (or even place).I'm not sure how you'd have an actual game-based way to compete on these levels, though. Computers cannot judge that which cannot be quantified.
But on the other hand, this sort of thing is what PvE is already all about. Tackling a tough mission with a less-than-optimal team is already a good measure of leadership and teamwork. You "win" if you complete the mission. What I was originally saying is that for these purposes, I really don't need to compete against another human team to feel gratified.
The difference between my "declaring winners and losers in my head" and an actual competition is that no one can game the rules, no one gets bragging rights, and no one gets to appeal when they lose ... because only I know who the winners are. Real competition has to be voluntary.
{edit} this reply was to GW_Junkie
What I am proposing my blogs is move away from Classes/builds and embrace more freeform, skill based systems whereas any player can walk up and contribute to a team
'The barrier and segregations imposed by Classes should be investigated further and knocked down.
What is better- sit around waiting for 1+ hour,
"Looking for one more Healer!"
or
"We just need 1 more player"
Casual Grouping would no doubt be a lot better this way. No more segregation between players would really exist. Builds are artificial restrictions put in place by Developers to gain replay value (synergizes well with Levels to get players to reroll). Skill based turns the game into more of a sandbox in which we're all more free to explore the game
Uniqueness takes a hit true- but uniqueness does not exist in games like World Of Warcraft and such anyway. Perhaps Guild Wars is the most unique title in this regard but its a hybrid system
I don't even know where to start on this topic. I personally agree with vajuras when he speaks about optimization. Even if you aren't intentionally competing against other players, I think to be the best at what you wanna do you will be competing against yourself. Definitely competing against the game itself. Kinda goes without saying doesn't it?
Skill, talent, weapon and gear utilization I think will always meet head on with the question: How do I maximize this to produce the best results? If your build or gear isn't cutting it you will obviously want to upgrade or change till you produce results getting you over that hump. That's competition in itself.
I think the problem here is that the greatest output will always be found rather quickly by the truly intelligent people out there. Once these roads are uncovered; they spread like brush fires in SoCAL.
The key to offsetting this a bit would pretty much have to run along the line of a larger pool of skills to use.
Guild Wars still has a cookie cutter game to it, but was harder to reach because of the multitude of skills. It's hybrid gameplay just widened what could be done. When these cookie cutters are overused, Arena-net nerfs which then produces more of the same and the cycle repeats itself.
I have to kinda disagree with the poster who said that his group of specialist were better off than a supposed gimped hybrid group. Only because the classes themselves can be hybrids. Specific group builds to beat missions are always being changed also(if you follow FotM) How many times have you heard of runners in this game? Or invincibility builds? They do what any group can do on their own. As long as the hybrid portion enhances what can be done then you aren't gimped at all and in many-most occasions will produce greater results. My example to defend this can revolve mainly around a 1v1 of the same primary class and what they may offer to a group. If you play guild wars then you know that you can only bring 8 skills to the table. Lets take a fire el specialist and a fire el/mo hybrid. You can't always say that the specialist(only has elementalist skills) will out perform the latter. Attributes in damage(the fire part) can be maximized on both characters. The all fire ele only brought fire skills though, while the fire ele/mo brought party healing skills also to back up healers. They put out the same damage, but one helps out the group in other ways. ***Side Note**** I have heard of all Mesmer groups, All Ele, groups, All ranger groups, All Necro groups. How many times have you heard of all trapper groups doing some underworld farming or elite mission farming? Granted that's just an example of Fotm stuff, but hey.
If hybrid play can't be done to break up some of the staleness towards choosing whats more viable in pve then I truly believe that randomness of mob skills may actually be a great alternative.
Example: Mob boss has x skills and was a warrior when you saw him the first time, round two is totally a different story, he now has y skills and is now a mage. Maybe he's harder...or maybe he is easier. same could go for regular mob encounters. Loot is random, why can't mobs be?
All in all I agree with vajuras though.
I play Guild Wars too, and it's interesting what they do, to some degree. Whilst they have numerous good ideas for Hybrid builds, aside from the simple monk secondary for infite resurrection, they do underestimate the community's competetive nature, so if there is a build to be "invincible" or "solo" entire areas, it will be found rather fast, and skills ultimately have to be changed, or simply nerfed.
What is also done, is that various monsters can appear or not, some of which come out the ground randomly. Bosses also occasionally share spawn points with each other, some of which also have patrol routes. In the end, though. I reckon the only way to create a truly challenging group of monsters, without simply making them rediculously overpowered, is to base numbers and the skills they use on the skills the team takes with them. If, say, there are lots of enchantments, the enemies should have some good enchantment removal, or if a tank has high armour skills, there should be shadow (armour-ignoring) damage. It sounds mean, but it would, in some cases, mean that the party would have to be tactical, pick their targets carefully and work on timing. Although, unfortunately, it also underestimates the competetive nature of the community. No doubt people will investigate the mechanics of it, work out what skills are used within parameters, and post "perfect" builds on the official wiki once again.
The need to be competetive is within us all, and anyone who says they arent competetive, even in just pve, will be at times. Any time you set a goal, or work towards something, you compete against yourself. You strive to do better than you currently are. You feel that if you reach the goal it will be great. You will be stronger, cooler, more effective at what you do, or even just be able to carry on the story. But with goals like this, once youre there, youre there. it's one step less of the story to take, one less goal to achieve. The difference between the two types of people youre all thinking about, the ones that dont waste time, spam the chat 24/7 asking for specific party members *LFP MISSION + BONUS 7/8 NEED NUKER*, and those that simply assemble a general team and work on skills to be effective, is that yes the moron spamming chat has the potential to get the mission done faster, at the expense of time looking around, but it's what they desire to do thats really different. the spammer thinks of the mission itself as nothing, he may have done it before, he may just not care about it and want to do whatever is after it. They are void of the journey to success. They do not choose to take an interest in it, they simply want to get it done and reach the goal.
I admit i am competetive at times, mostly just personally, trying to kill things faster than my party, get in the last hit, get some nice looking armour (partly for alternative stats though, to maximise potential). I tend to make my own builds, but i sometimes check the official wiki for builds and tweak/combine them for what i feel is something more effective. As impatient as i can be with missions ive done 5,000 times, I strive for the journey, both in PvE and life. I am more aware than some that the journey is the best bit. there is no true joy to farming 800k, wasting about 5 months of my life in shear boredom for some armour that is as effective as something 1/100th of its price. Even if it was better armour, I wouldnt farm it, because more fun can be obtained from getting there than the armour itself. I would sooner farm it on and off for 10 years with friends and enjoy it, have a laugh, die at times because we all forget the odd spawning monster or something. Surely some of us have some good memories of, say, running from a absolutely huge group of monsters; it can be hilarious if the whole battle looks good, then goes downhill fast because of something no-one noticed.
I think it's about time. Whether youre willing to spend time to be better without copying a build you dont know how to use, gather a team of random people and work with them to be effective in the upcoming battles, or resort to the simple calling for general profession combinations, excluding every other. *MUST HAVE 2 MONKS + 2 NUKER ELES*. You do get worse people, seeking to potentially waste less time fighting, looking for virtually specific builds. a "bonder" is pretty much a specific build, for example.
In the end, competetiveness is to blame. Monster groups are made hardish to beat -> pefect build developed -> many use it, some dont -> buffs/nerfs/skill changes put in place to combat the perfect builds -> perfect build tweaked, but normal builds are now more difficult to use. the level of competition for perfection is beyond any level, with Guild Wars as a prime example. This perfection is in the form of titles, type of armour, weapons used etc. a "55 monk" is still able to solo parts of the underworld, but a group of monsters put in place near the start, at times, can mess up a normal party if it goes badly. Because of competetive people seeking to make the most in the shortest time, it is difficult to hinder these without affecting the time takers.
They recently introduced scaled looting, which gives parties more loot if the party is nearer its maximum size. I feel it is a great idea, but at the end of the day, one can only do so much to combat the desire for perfection as fast as possible. its up to the players to slow down and enjoy the ride`