PC Gaming News
Page 147 of 161 FirstFirst ... 4797137143144145146147148149150151157 ... LastLast
Results 1,461 to 1,470 of 1607
  1. #1461
    Quote Originally Posted by raspberry jam View Post
    What ****ing rule of cool? Rule of retarded, more like it, trust me you will grow tired of that roaring and "neat" looking giant laser animations.
    Trust me, you're absolutely clueless about what anyone will get tired of. You don't understand how anyone enjoys sports, and yet look at the popularity of the Super Bowl, or the World Cup. Please, I'm sure you're good at what you do, but there's a damn good reason you're a programmer, not a marketer or a producer.

    Yes, you can make a battle feel epic the first time you play it, regardless of how retarded the enemy actually is. In fact, you can make it feel epic the second or fifth time. But you can't make the feeling of epicness outlast that moment when the majority realizes how retarded the enemy is.
    Again, your idea of what "the majority" will think is...well, wrong.

    It is interesting that you admit that he looks disappointing in the demo, yet disagree with me.
    I said he looks too easy (which I think will get fixed) and that he could use a wider variety and frequency of attacks (which I hope gets fixed). I disagree with your thesis that he's "retarded" because he's not belly flopping on the PCs, and that his behavior will pull people so far out of the experience that it won't be fun/epic for them. This really is not a confusing distinction; I'm not splitting hairs here in the least.

    It's also interesting that you admit that movie villains are stupid to tell the hero about their entire clever plan before they fail to kill them. It's something most people can agree is ****ing retarded behaviour, you even admit that, then you say that you still disagree with me. This passes beyond even fanboyism into the land of pure deluded idiocy, sorry to say.
    Nope. Sorry, this just shows that you really are out of touch. Yes, movie villains explaining their plots is stupid. Yes, stormtroopers being unable to hit Luke is stupid. Yes, a lone warrior (or 100) that is able to take down a giant dragon in Dark Souls (or GW2) is stupid. It doesn't matter. People still enjoy the work of fiction because of the Rule of Cool! (warning: TV Tropes) You don't seem to understand that; you didn't even understand the reference.

    *tips hat* I'm done. We're on different wavelengths. You're unduly confident that "the majority" will be pulled out of the experience by the Shatterer's behavior, in spite of citations of similarly oversized stationary bosses in other games not having that effect on people. It's clear you're not interested in having a discussion, you just keep repeating the same point over and over again ("But he shouldn't act that waaaaaay!"). Moreover, you're not interested in even entertaining the notion that other people do not share your opinion (or, if they do, they're a minority, wrong, stupid, fanbois, and/or "deluded idiots"). Which, again, is your problem: you think far too much of yourself, and far too little of others. You claim to know what "the majority" enjoy, and yet you openly and vehemently disdain activities that the majority find entertaining. You are, to sum up, supremely arrogant, and it's not a coincidence that Alaris tried to tell you this a few pages ago. Maybe you should try to take it as the honest counsel that it is, and stop acting like this. It really would make you much nicer to talk to.

  2. #1462
    Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteran1,000 Posts10000 Experience Points6 months registered
    CHIPS's Avatar
    Server

    Tarnished Coast
    Guild

    The Order of Dii (Commander)
    Posts

    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Ringsgold View Post
    Tanking isn't realistic but it can actually be a fun gameplay mechanic, trying to keep aggro from all those burst-happy DPS squishies.
    From what I understand, tanking in GW2 is replaced by knock down, cripple and interrupts. So it is "active" tanking instead of "passive" tanking. The player cannot rely on dumb AI; Only hitting front line tanks because, like you said, that isn't realistic.
    Last edited by CHIPS; 10-02-2012 at 06:12.

  3. #1463
    GWOnline Content Team Achievements:
    100 Posts10 Posts1 year registeredBlogger1000 Experience Points
    Shrandar's Avatar
    Posts

    427
    Though i would like to stay out of the debate wether the shatterer is retarded or not I cant help but think that the 'common sense' or 'lore' argument is a little deluted. Common sense or lore relating to dragons is what we know from stories, legends etc. In those stories there is often one person defeating them, the so called dragon slayer (fx the Ring of the Nibelung) so it stands to reason that multiple hero's should be able to defeat a dragon with more ease (assuming they are smart enough ofc).

    Building on more pragmatical reasoning I would say that belly flopping would be the last a dragon does, in most accounts the belly of the dragon is its most vurnerable part, the risk of sustaining injury on things by flopping down on things you cannot even see (since they are under you) is far too hight to be an efficent fighting technique. Also once flopped down it leaves the dragon rather vurnerable, ofc it could use its wings to quickly get up but that is only assuming it could spread them enough to do so.

    That leads me to another point and that is their mobility on land, seeing how big they are I would say that turning and quick response to small moving targets is naturally impaired by their physique. Now we can continue the debate wether landing on the ground would actually be a smart technique to start with if you can fly and use your firebreath but I think we can all agree that just shooting arrows or fireballs at a flying dargon would be even more boring then fighting a more or less static target.


    In short, applying common sense or lore isnt the same as just wanting the dragon to do what you would expect them to do, and it certainly doesnt nesecarily contradict what happens in the shatterer movie. What would contradict common sense imo would be if I was stupid enugh to be hit by his claw and would still have 3/4 of my health left (or any unreasonable amount). My biggest problem in MMO's is often that the size doesnt correspond to the damage mobs do, sure a giant might proportionaly hit harder then a regular humanoid but honestly if he swings me in the face with a tree I expect to feel it.
    Last edited by Shrandar; 10-02-2012 at 08:52.

  4. #1464
    ^ I agree that the dragons/their champions should be possible to defeat; I just don't agree with the way in which that is done.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skyy High View Post
    Trust me, you're absolutely clueless about what anyone will get tired of. You don't understand how anyone enjoys sports, and yet look at the popularity of the Super Bowl, or the World Cup. Please, I'm sure you're good at what you do, but there's a damn good reason you're a programmer, not a marketer or a producer.


    Again, your idea of what "the majority" will think is...well, wrong.


    I said he looks too easy (which I think will get fixed) and that he could use a wider variety and frequency of attacks (which I hope gets fixed). I disagree with your thesis that he's "retarded" because he's not belly flopping on the PCs, and that his behavior will pull people so far out of the experience that it won't be fun/epic for them. This really is not a confusing distinction; I'm not splitting hairs here in the least.


    Nope. Sorry, this just shows that you really are out of touch. Yes, movie villains explaining their plots is stupid. Yes, stormtroopers being unable to hit Luke is stupid. Yes, a lone warrior (or 100) that is able to take down a giant dragon in Dark Souls (or GW2) is stupid. It doesn't matter. People still enjoy the work of fiction because of the Rule of Cool! (warning: TV Tropes) You don't seem to understand that; you didn't even understand the reference.

    *tips hat* I'm done. We're on different wavelengths. You're unduly confident that "the majority" will be pulled out of the experience by the Shatterer's behavior, in spite of citations of similarly oversized stationary bosses in other games not having that effect on people. It's clear you're not interested in having a discussion, you just keep repeating the same point over and over again ("But he shouldn't act that waaaaaay!"). Moreover, you're not interested in even entertaining the notion that other people do not share your opinion (or, if they do, they're a minority, wrong, stupid, fanbois, and/or "deluded idiots"). Which, again, is your problem: you think far too much of yourself, and far too little of others. You claim to know what "the majority" enjoy, and yet you openly and vehemently disdain activities that the majority find entertaining. You are, to sum up, supremely arrogant, and it's not a coincidence that Alaris tried to tell you this a few pages ago. Maybe you should try to take it as the honest counsel that it is, and stop acting like this. It really would make you much nicer to talk to.
    If I were wrong about these things, people wouldn't pay me to find them. The popularity of the Super Bowl has nothing to do with this; nor does the fact that the supposedly best soldiers in the galaxy can't hit a guy at 30 meters. Because that is governed by the "rule of cool". The Shatterer isn't, since it's not cool.

  5. #1465
    GWOnline Content Team Achievements:
    100 Posts10 Posts1 year registeredBlogger1000 Experience Points
    Shrandar's Avatar
    Posts

    427
    Quote Originally Posted by raspberry jam View Post
    ^ I agree that the dragons/their champions should be possible to defeat; I just don't agree with the way in which that is done.

    We should split the argument in two then maybe. The fight is dependent on the mobs behaviour and on what the players need to do to defeat him. The first was debated exhaustively, the second only touched upon. Lets look for a minute at the activities required from the player: mortars to shoot (and in line of that: making sure the mortars are supplied, repaired if damaged etc), adds to fight off, breaking free allies and ressing them. If all those things are actually a nessecity to beat the shatterer (or rather make him flee) then I am quite satisfied, both on the level of the availlable activities and on the common sense part of what it requires to defeat a dragon of that size.

    This ofcourse has its repercussions on the behaviour of the dragon, mostly in the sense that it should be able to delay or effectively shut down these activities so that active attention of the players is required in order to win the fight (and thus not making it a guaranteed win). I agree that a certain amount of randomness would be welcome here, if he was sending adds after the mortars at predictable intervals and only freezing people every 5 minutes then no amount of 'roaring' would help him feeling very dangerous after a few tries. That being said though the unpredictability of player skill/concentration span will probably (hopefully) make up for a lot of predictable behaviour of the dragon.

    In short I wouldn't mind a more mobile/natural behaviour of the dragon either but in the end its about the amount of conditions that need to be met in order to beat a fight (and hopefully the condition involves more then just a gazillion hitpoints to wither down) and the ability of the dragon to manipulate these conditions to its advantage, wether that is done by moving around, breathing fire, using his tail or sending adds. Balance this right and the fight can still be epic.

    PS I probably didnt add anything really new here but I think the distinction between mob and player behaviour is relevant to the discussion.
    Last edited by Shrandar; 10-02-2012 at 13:00.

  6. #1466
    GWOnline Content Team
    GWOnline Site Pal
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranCreated Blog entry10K Posts
    Alaris's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    The Order of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    29,751
    Quote Originally Posted by Skyy High View Post
    your thesis that he's "retarded" because he's not belly flopping on the PCs
    Come to think of it, whether effective or not, it would look retarded. I can see the hordes of people crying how retarded the dragon is doing belly flops all over the place and how they want it fixed. GW2 would become the laughing stock of MMOs.

    That would NOT be cool.

    Quote Originally Posted by CHIPS View Post
    From what I understand, tanking in GW2 is replaced by knock down, cripple and interrupts. So it is "active" tanking instead of "passive" tanking. The player cannot rely on dumb AI; Only hitting front line tanks because, like you said, that isn't realistic.
    Yes, yes, active tanking is part of it. But there's also the "dodge tanking" where you distract a foe and dodge his attacks, thereby you get to fulfill the tank role yet nobody gets hit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shrandar View Post
    the belly of the dragon is its most vurnerable part (...)

    My biggest problem in MMO's is often that the size doesnt correspond to the damage mobs do
    Two good points worth quoting.
    == Alaris & clone ==
    Proud Officer of The Order Of Dii [Dii] - join us
    You can tell the quality of life of people by what they complain about

  7. #1467
    Quote Originally Posted by Shrandar View Post
    We should split the argument in two then maybe. The fight is dependent on the mobs behaviour and on what the players need to do to defeat him. The first was debated exhaustively, the second only touched upon. Lets look for a minute at the activities required from the player: mortars to shoot (and in line of that: making sure the mortars are supplied, repaired if damaged etc), adds to fight off, breaking free allies and ressing them. If all those things are actually a nessecity to beat the shatterer (or rather make him flee) then I am quite satisfied, both on the level of the availlable activities and on the common sense part of what it requires to defeat a dragon of that size.

    This ofcourse has its repercussions on the behaviour of the dragon, mostly in the sense that it should be able to delay or effectively shut down these activities so that active attention of the players is required in order to win the fight (and thus not making it a guaranteed win). I agree that a certain amount of randomness would be welcome here, if he was sending adds after the mortars at predictable intervals and only freezing people every 5 minutes then no amount of 'roaring' would help him feeling very dangerous after a few tries. That being said though the unpredictability of player skill/concentration span will probably (hopefully) make up for a lot of predictable behaviour of the dragon.

    In short I wouldn't mind a more mobile/natural behaviour of the dragon either but in the end its about the amount of conditions that need to be met in order to beat a fight (and hopefully the condition involves more then just a gazillion hitpoints to wither down) and the ability of the dragon to manipulate these conditions to its advantage, wether that is done by moving around, breathing fire, using his tail or sending adds. Balance this right and the fight can still be epic.

    PS I probably didnt add anything really new here but I think the distinction between mob and player behaviour is relevant to the discussion.
    You're good at this and I agree. Sure, randomness helps, but that should not be taken to the extreme either. Rather, semi-unpredictability together with opportunism should be the formula (as in: keep to a certain tactic, but keep it a little unpredictable so that players can't latch onto a pattern. Also, as soon as there is an opportunity to hurt the players that is too good to pass up on, there's a (relatively large) chance that it is taken).

    Look at other dragon fights in other media: Whenever the dragon stays immobile, it's because he is confined, in a cave or similar. When he's in the open, he moves around, primarily he uses his capability of flight to great advantage: anything else makes no sense!

    Still, you're absolutely right in that the two should be separated. The purely mechanical part of the battle, as in what do the players need to do, how difficult should it be, etc., is probably as always when it comes to ANet, quite well made, that's why I wasn't concerned about that part.

  8. #1468
    GWOnline Content Team
    GWOnline Site Pal
    Achievements:
    Social10 PostsVeteranCreated Blog entry10K Posts
    Alaris's Avatar
    Server

    Kaineng
    Guild

    The Order of Dii [Dii]
    Posts

    29,751
    Dragons normally fly around and destroy stuff for lulz, but they are not there to specifically kill some foes (especially not humans, who are not worth their interest). If there is any real danger, they can just fly away. Landing might be more efficient against given land foes (as with flying it's hard to target given foes).

    But this is not so with the current dragon. The quest chain is probably much like in the 2nd GW2 book, you do a bunch of things to specifically anger that dragon so he comes at you. He's not interested in random rampage, this fight is personal. And so he lands where he can do the most damage, even if that puts him at danger. I'm not 100% sure what the motivation is, but he knows he has to make that last stand.
    == Alaris & clone ==
    Proud Officer of The Order Of Dii [Dii] - join us
    You can tell the quality of life of people by what they complain about

  9. #1469
    Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteran1,000 Posts10000 Experience Points6 months registered
    CHIPS's Avatar
    Server

    Tarnished Coast
    Guild

    The Order of Dii (Commander)
    Posts

    2,389
    For lore purposes, the player could have wounded the dragon's wings before the fight, so that dragon can't just fly off and shoot fireballs from a mile in the air.

  10. #1470
    GWOnline Site Pal Achievements:
    10 PostsVeteranBlogger10000 Experience Points6 months registered
    sorudo's Avatar
    Server

    far shiverpeak
    Guild

    the legendary alterans
    Posts

    10,574
    and how do you suppose to do that, you can't even reach the dragon let alone get to the wings when it's on the ground.
    and then you have to deal with the factor that dragon scales shatters almost every single weapon there is, they are even better in maneuvering trough the air then the pterosaurs is.
    and what if you get him on the ground, are you just gonna bash your sword against the scales in the hope you can even make a scratch?

    there are only 2 ways to take down a dragon:
    1.) have a dragon-slayer weapon.
    2.) have a dragon control wand.

    1 is really effective but you still need to reach the dragon, 2 is a better option but you are more likely to use the dragon for your own benefit.
    it's alive but cannot be living, it's dead but lives a mortal life.

    sorudo.9054

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •