Is pve too easy/hard? Or maybe both at the same time?

[Xar.6279]

I saw some posts about pve difficulty in GW2. A lot of them was complaining and even Boneskinner from the Strike Missions was given as an example of too hard boss.

Others says that everything is too easy. Let's be real: this discussion has been going on here since I remember.

 

IMO both groups are right. That's huge problem of gw2 pve and I think it's because classes and whole game was designed mainly for pvp here. Not for pve.

As I remeber in early days ArenaNet decided that they don't want to have Holy Trinity in Guild Wars 2. Each class had to be self-reliant and it was always more about players personal skill than playing as a group. And why I think its designed more for PvP? Because typical Holy Trinity is jsut not good for PvP. It's really good for group pve, but not for pvp at all.

 

Meantime ArenaNet let players to create really strong healers&supports which changes almost everything becasue you can overheal mechanics in pve. They also added some bosses which in some way requires having healers/supports to actually success (especially for average groups). Or at least these healers makes it much easier. And lets look at this honestly: support classes started to carry people in pve content. Non-support players wasn't forced to focus on their own that much, because there was always strong healer/support on their back (and if there wasn't then group was falling apart). So they get used to avoid mechanics and just doing dps (or even auto-attack).

 

You can see it for example on Boneskinner. Some groups will ignore all mechanics and will be overhealed by support players. They will claim that boss is too easy.

Meantime many groups will go there with small support or even none (Because GW2 is advertised as a mmo where you can play whatever you want, and they don't promote Holy Trinity) and then boss will be a lot harder for them. And while some boss mechanics are designed for a game with strong healers then some mechanics may be really even too hard. Then they starts to complain about difficulty.

 

IMO unfortunately ArenaNet made some huge mistake if it comes to pve and right now it's probably too late to fix it :/ They should choose one of the ways:

- Go fully into Holy Trinity (only in pve) and build whole pve around it to let people learn their roles from the beginning.

- Or really let classes to be self-reliant and then force players to focus mainly on themselves - their personal skill. Where every single player in the group (5/10) have to do every single mechanic or they wipe.

 

Both ways IMO would be good. Because players would learn it from the start in GW2 and they would know exactly what they can expect in the late game. They would be prepared for that.

Of course some players will tell that it's about GW2 players. Because they're too casual and that's the problem. But I can't agree tbh. IMO even casuals are able to do challenging content.

Right now we're somewhere between Holy Trinity and being self-reliant. And IMO that's the worst solution for pve, because it makes everything very unreadable (especially for new or more casual players which are huge % of gw2). Of course for hardcore players it don't matter that much becasue they'll adapt anyway.

[Randulf.7614]

There is no need for yet another thread in this. No consensus will get found and it will devolve into people labelling each other casuals and elitists (you already killed the discussion using the terms yourself despite not understanding what casual even means). As soon as those words get pulled out, the conversation is dead. Look at the embarrassment the other threads turned into from just a handful of players on both sides of the argument desp trying to reinforce their point (badly) and hoping Anet will listen only to them. I mean someone actually had the audacity to say that complaints are unwarranted, despite only anecdotal data

 

Anet have the metrics and will know if content is not being played because it is too hard. If something like Boneskinner gets nerfed then players can cry all they want but it’s because it isn’t fulfilling a wider goal we can’t see. Likewise, if it stays as it is, it is because it is only aimed at the skilled player.

 

We don’t need trinities. Hard and easy mode is too black and white for most situations with this wide a skill base as well.

 

At the end of the day, the skill gap is enormous. Absolutely massive and players rarely have much regard for one another’s play style for a mature sensible and useful discussion

[maddoctor.2738]

The correct answer is that difficulty depends on the player. Also, your "solutions" are impossible to implement at this point, even if I agreed with them, but I don't. It's also worth noting that "bunker builds", or builds that are very hard to kill, in order to contest points in Conquest, existed in PVP for a very long time, long before healers appeared in PVE content. PVP had varied roles since the first few months after release, while PVE was in the "zerker meta" period for a very long time, at least until Heart of Thorns.

[Xar.6279]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> The correct answer is that difficulty depends on the player. Also, your "solutions" are impossible to implement at this point, even if I agreed with them, but I don't. It's also worth noting that "bunker builds", or builds that are very hard to kill, in order to contest points in Conquest, existed in PVP for a very long time, long before healers appeared in PVE content. PVP had varied roles since the first few months after release, while PVE was in the "zerker meta" period for a very long time, at least until Heart of Thorns.

 

Bunker =/= Support/Healer

 

And you're right. At this point it's probably almost impossible to change it. They would have to change a lot of things. From boss mechanics to classes.

[Dadnir.5038]

PvE issue isn't a matter of being to easy or to hard, the issue is that it's "rigid". As long as you know the paterns of what you face, what was once hard become easy. The lack of flexibility for PvE mobs/boss (which is natural) make content with long term challenge in PvE something difficult to create.

 

Elitism is born from the fact that some players tend to adapt faster and lack the patience, time or will to accept that not everyone adapt as well as them.

 

The "PvE meta" is also born from the fact that PvE is rigid. ANet tried to add some flexibility by introducing instabilities in fractal (and it was a smart try) but it doesn't change the fact that the rigid behavior of the mobs/boss is where the challenge is lost as players adapt. (and this is true for all mmorpg)

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

There were the same laments, long before there were the healing and support builds we have now. I don't think that is the cause.

It's just a difference in skill among players.

[Ashen.2907]

The difference in performance between a half-a$$ed concept build and a high tier performance build are such that the too easy/too difficult argument can never be really settled. When min/maxers squeeze out an extra 5-10% DPS (etc) over a more casual build it is one thing. When a top build produces an order of magnitude more effect it is something else entirely.

[Virdo.1540]

Everything is too easy. An PvE-Enemy buff of +30%health and +80% damage wouldnt be bad

 

The main problem of pve is ,that many things REQUIRE more than 1 person to do, like most of the raids.

[Skotlex.7580]

Trinity wouldn't work for GW2 because the most popular PvE content is open world, and that's full ad-hoc grouping, you can't organize team composition that way.

 

In my opinion classes are all possible to build as self reliant, it's just that players don't gear up that way (few people use toughness in PvE). Many prefer to spec full glass and rely on others to heal them when down. Others have before said that this reviving mechanic is what makes the game too easy: once you have enough people, no challenge can fail as long as they can res up each another.

 

On the other hand, speccing for a support build makes regular content boringly slow (little point in having, say, a support firebrand when there's no nearby player to buff), so that may push players further into full damage specs.

 

I personally would spec for a hybrid between damage and support, the only way to be of use to others without taking forever to solo things. Yet I am aware that a full damage oriented build will do at least 50% more damage. If my support can let said players stay alive whereas my absence would mean them spending more time downed, then it's reasonable to have support amid the chaos.

 

Fortunately, build templates have allowed me to have two setups for open world: one for when I am alone (focusing more on power with a bit of self support) and a second for group events (focusing more on a hybrid of damage and support). Sadly, this only works for people who PvE exclusively, since PvP / WvW would need even more templates.

 

My suggestion to improve PvE content difficulty is to increase the downed penalties, so that dying is actually a threat. I would also prevent reviving while in combat (like in WvW), as I see still too many people lay down dead waiting for a charitable soul when it's almost always a lot easier to respawn and return to the event.

 

And for the love of all things holy, improve scaling of core Tyria events. Not only are they laughably bad at large scale, it gets to the point where it's hard to even get credit after an event. Getting those dailies done in lower level maps is such a horrible chore because of this.

[Game of Bones.8975]

An instance of "too hard" can be altered by modifying the build or even the number of characters attempting to complete the mission.

 

Guild Wars2 is not meant to be a solo only game. Yes, much of the core content is based on the single character. The LW content and Expansions are more focusing upon characters helping each other.

[Josiah.2967]

I think the difficultly is just right.

 

To be honest...I have no sympathy to those that want a harder game! You can change gear or play an unoptimized build... Those players can easily do something about it.

 

I can sympathize more with the players that struggle playing the build they enjoy over the meta build, and those that are new to genre or the game in general.

 

I know an equal amount of people that think it's to hard to those that think it's to easy. I actually probably know more that thing the game is to hard, but they aren't as vocal.

[ugrakarma.9416]

> @"Xar.6279" said:

> IMO both groups are right. That's huge problem of gw2 pve and I think it's because classes and whole game was designed mainly for pvp here. Not for pve. > As I remeber in early days ArenaNet decided that they don't want to have Holy Trinity in Guild Wars 2. Each class had to be self-reliant and it was always more about players personal skill than playing as a group. And why I think its designed more for PvP? Because typical Holy Trinity is jsut not good for PvP. It's really good for group pve, but not for pvp at all.

 

this is the dumbest decision by Anet, if every class can have everything, its mean that a mode like WvW u can overstack any games mechanics that is a "meta" at moment... just look how happened in pre-nerf conditions.

 

Thats why the "metas" is always shifting in a 8/80 mode, or is everything about damage, if they nerf damage, everyone go bunker.

 

In games that had strong class identity, this never happen because the matchmaker grants professions granularity.

 

 

[Teratus.2859]

It really depends on the kind of builds people are running and how well they know how to use them.

[Astralporing.1957]

It is both. At the same time. Why? Because developers, when designing this game, decided to make the player skill the main factor, which resulted in even small skill differences having a massive impact on player effectiveness. Thus, the same content can be extremely hard for player A, and laughably easy for player B. And, what makes it worse, it's done in such a way that player B may not even understand how player A can have any difficulty with the content, while at the same time player A may think they are trying really hard, putting lot of effort into it, and are not doing any errors they can recognize.

 

Something so simple as fraction-of-a-second difference in timing on skill use on the same class, build and rotation (so, something that basically cannot be easily even seen) can result in significant dps (and survivability) gaps. And that's when following the rotation precisely. Things like using the same skills in different order, even small changes in skills selected/used, small differences in trait selection, small deviations in _positioning_ - all of those will result in differences that are even bigger.

 

Like Xar said, it might have been a good design for a purely PvP game. It is however a very bad design for a game that is primarily PvE-centered.

[FOX.3582]

There is NOTHING in this game that’s even remotely hard. And if you think this game has difficult stuff, you simply never played a difficult game and/or are born after the 90’s.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

it depends on how old you are

[Brycar.2651]

No change is needed. Anet on the right path. I only do PVE. 88% of PVE is soloable. I like that I have to work hard at some stuff. I like that I have to be social, make friends, rely on guild mates for help with the hard stuff and learn the mechanics. I was/am afraid of raids cuz I’m just a so so player. But these strike missions are teaching me. That’s the intent.

 

Cuz I REALLY REALLY want that raid mushroom hammer. ;)

[Rubedo.8769]

The thing with difficulty in this game is no matter what Anet does it won't appease everyone. As far as PvE difficulty, imo, solo instances such as story mode things should have a difficulty slider, so people who want a challenge can set it high while those who want a simple experience and are only there for the story itself can enjoy it without wanting to throw their computer out the window because a fight has too much going on to actually enjoy it playing the class and build they want to play. Difficulty sliders would be fine in SOLO instances only, as it would have little to no affect outside of that instance since story mode fights rarely actually reward anything impressive that it would matter.

 

As far as group content goes, there should only be single difficulties, unless you want to follow an example like WoW where you could have say a normal and heroic mode, which honestly most dungeons in this game already have with story mode and exploration modes. The biggest problem setting different difficulty levels to this game for group content would lay in the balancing of classes. In other games, like WoW, FFXIV, etc..., you can balance healers to healer, tanks to tanks, and dps to dps then balance the groups to their purpose. In GW2 you can't do that because they didn't want that Holy Trinity of tank/dps/heals. So you can't balance content to roles since every class can be every role to an extent. It makes it impossible to balance properly, since once you nerf one thing everyone stacks something else.

 

Remember one of the big selling points of this game was that you could play whatever you want however you want, which should still hold true, at least in solo play, solo play includes solo instances. People shouldn't be shoved into a build they don't enjoy just to clear solo content when thats not how the game is marketed. In group content then yes, people should play the builds/setups that complements the groups composition, and that is the sacrifice you make if you want to play the high end group content.

 

But like i said before, nothing Anet does will appease everyone. If they gave difficulty options to people in solo instances there would be people on the forums screaming that its not a good thing, even if it wouldn't have any effect on them and then the people who want the difficulty changes made would come back screaming that their being elitist gatekeepers. That's just the nature of the forums. There is no win here for anyone honestly.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Josiah.2967" said:

> I think the difficultly is just right.

 

It can't be "right" because it's all over the place, there isn't one set difficulty for the entire game, as it should obviously, this is an mmorpg appealing to lots of different players, therefore it needs varied content.

 

> To be honest...I have no sympathy to those that want a harder game!

 

Don't worry, the Icebrood Saga is mostly a walking simulator so far and if it's any indicator of future difficulty of the game, those begging for an easier game would love it and overflow Arenanet's bank account with their money.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Rubedo.8769" said:

> Remember one of the big selling points of this game was that you could play whatever you want however you want

 

That was never a selling point of the game.

[Super Hayes.6890]

> @"FOX.3582" said:

> There is NOTHING in this game that’s even remotely hard. And if you think this game has difficult stuff, you simply never played a difficult game and/or are born after the 90’s.

 

Can we see your sources for this claim? It is impressive how much you know about the rest of the game's population.

 

Anyway, I find that PvE content difficulty in this game varies due mostly to the profession I'm using. I own everything on my warrior. I get owned by everything on my mesmer. My friend swears by his mesmer and I just have not been able to achieve what he does with that class.

 

We were both born in the early 80's if that helps with anyone's "research" into why we are good or bad players ;)

[Randulf.7614]

> @"FOX.3582" said:

> There is NOTHING in this game that’s even remotely hard. And if you think this game has difficult stuff, you simply never played a difficult game and/or are born after the 90’s.

 

I was born in the early 80's. I've played hard games from that era, the 90's and very era since. I find a select few things in this game hard. Not for the most part, but Boneskinner, higher fractals etc are beyond me. Certainly it's not up there in difficulty with genuinely hard games or games that have hard and frustrating mechanics, but there will always be things I can't do. I also find as I get older, my skills are dwindling more and more as well

 

If you find nothing hard that's a reflection on your skill, not some highly bizarre definition put on the rest of the population which suddenly must be tarnished with the same brush stroke, despite of course, us all being different.

 

Saying that there is nothing hard in this game when difficulty is purely subjective is a narrative that doesn't belong in this discussion.

[kharmin.7683]

> @"Randulf.7614" said:

> > @"FOX.3582" said:

> > There is NOTHING in this game that’s even remotely hard. And if you think this game has difficult stuff, you simply never played a difficult game and/or are born after the 90’s.

>

> I was born in the early 80's. I've played hard games from that era, the 90's and very era since. I find a select few things in this game hard. Not for the most part, but Boneskinner, higher fractals etc are beyond me. Certainly it's not up there in difficulty with genuinely hard games or games that have hard and frustrating mechanics, but there will always be things I can't do. I also find as I get older, my skills are dwindling more and more as well

>

> If you find nothing hard that's a reflection on your skill, not some highly bizarre definition put on the rest of the population which suddenly must be tarnished with the same brush stroke, despite of course, us all being different.

>

> Saying that there is nothing hard in this game when difficulty is purely subjective is a narrative that doesn't belong in this discussion.

 

Agreed. Having been born decades before the 80s, I concur with this point of view.

[Xar.6279]

It looks like 80% of people writing here didn't understand what I actually meant :P It is probably because my english is not that good to explain some things correctly and also I guess some players just don't understand some things.

 

W/e.

[LucianDK.8615]

Current Wow is pretty much the result of catering to the lowest skilled, resulting in a snoozefest of a game in most pve content. Classic takes far more effort, but suffers greatly from a lack of many modern coniviences, and a dead end content wise. But you can see the two design philosophies between the past and present.

 

Anet should not easyfy the game even further, look at wow for the cautionary example it has become.