| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (60)

Posted: Sep 5th 2011 11:39PM ClassicCrime said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm not sure if i like this idea >.< I like having my guild, my one guild with a tight group of friends who are always there, all devoted to the same goals, all loyal to each other etc.
Wouldn't the ability to be in more than one guild end up making each individual guild less.. together and strong?

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 7:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ClassicCrime

Not if it's a good group of people. And it will have the added benefit of making the community as a whole stronger. Having only one guild per character means that guilds mostly play and communicate amongst themselves, which means you end up with several "cliques" playing the game alongside each other but not interacting outside of their own groups much.

With multiple guild groups, there can be easy intercommunication between guilds. If one PvP guild wants to form an alliance with another PvP guild to accomplish a goal they just have to have one or more "liaison" players who are a member of both guilds and can communicate back and forth.

If someone wants to plan an big event for the server, they can form a communication chain across guilds to help plan it, help provide supplies and resources, etc.

In a traditional system, how many people do you regularly communicate and play with outside of your guild? In the GW2 system you can play with your guild, but if you meet someone cool during a dynamic event who is already in another guild, you can join their group too and make more friends.

I think people get scared of this because maybe it's a social system that's more like what we have in the outside world, where people can associate with whoever they choose. If you're socially awkward the traditional guild system is probably comforting because it is easier and more secure to have one group that is your set group of friends and that's it and unless there's drama you don't have to worry about being left alone or having people wnat to hang out with other groups more than yours.

I could see how this system could make social anxieties flare up and lead to talk of "loyalty" and "dedication" but honestly I don't think it's anything to worry about. If you are part of a few different guilds it means you never have to worry about your guild dying or being the only one online because if no one's around you can just switch tags.

And if you WANT to have a guild that is just yourself and your friends, I am sure you can do that by mutual agreement among the guild, but I bet that people will ultimately end up wanting to join other guilds too, and it's going to be hard to get strangers to join you with an exclusivity requirement. Particularly not at first when outsiders don't know you so it's not like there's any reason for people to desperately want to be in your guild to the point of exclusivity just on your reputation, because you won't have one yet.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 3:04AM Enyeto said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The ability to form a network of guilds as it were could be highly beneficial. Splitting a guild into multiple parts for social, raiding, crafting when the time comes is great, as is combining several smaller guilds in an alliance. It's not only about jumping from one guild to another unrelated one, building bridges between guilds for a number of reasons could be a great new mechanic to take advantage of.
In the first MMO I played (Legend of Mir 2, they advertised it on a TV channel over here, with live game play sessions as shows) I was part of a guild called 'The NHG Knights', NHG standing for newbie helper group. The main purpose of our guild was to take in the players no-one else would, help them along and send them on their way. Of course, some stuck around but in the long run, most left.
The benefit of this was that most other guilds had ex-knights and the Knights name carried weight. The game had open PvP in the form of PKing yet being a Knight offered you a little protection. The larger 'boss' battles undertaken by the higher level Knights and their lowbie companions was often bolstered by members of bigger guilds who were ex-knights.
There was no system to support a 'multiguild membership' but the players just treated themselves as such and it worked. It could work here too.

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 8:18AM GW2waiting said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There are no absolutes here.

Clearly there is a difference between the hardcore, controlling pvp guilds of the type who demand absolute loyalty to their Furer until death to ensure competitiveness in the pvp game; and the more relaxed pve guild that is there to help players have fun, relax and provide assistance.

Pve guilds don’t need such a controlling requirement, because there is no need for competitiveness in the GW2 pve world. I mean who are you competing against in GW2 pve? There are no traditional 'Raids' as other games have, with dynamic events the whole world is a giant raid (exhibit A: The Shatterer: Tequatl the Sunless; Shadow Behemoth). So those looking for gear-grinding raiding guilds better look elsewhere. Unlike other games, you dont need to be some uber elitist-jerk raider to experience everything the game has to offer. Additionally, you can't time your guild members to go raid a world boss like the Shatterer because he is not stuck in some dungeon instance, he just appears when the time is right..... not sitting around waiting until you are ready.

The answer is clear; a Guild has a published 'type' which indicates which kind it is. A pvp Guild could, if the leader wanted it to, to impose strict conditions on membership like, for example, no other guild affiliations; guild fees etc. While a pve guild would have a more open structure without access to the controls the pvp guilds have.

It is then up to the guild leader which type she/he creates, but you can’t change it afterwards. This then allows players to easily see exactly what the guild expects, and they have a choice about the type of guild they want to join.

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 3:37PM Soulstitchmmo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@GW2waiting As guilds evolve I don't believe the type should be determined at creation. It should be a toggle inside the guild that can be switched off/on and could also be based on rank.

For example my guild's council and senior members will probably be members of other guilds for social reasons, but we've already proven our dedication to our guild over multiple games.

New recruits however I would like to have them be exclusive until they've proven that they are there for the guild and not selfish reasons, then we can relax the restrictions.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 3:59PM ArcherAvatar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Soulstitchmmo
Wow... so now it's not only that you want to control how other people play... it's also "do as I say, not as I do."

Do you even hear yourself?

You know what... I've changed my mind, I agree that you should be able to post your guild as "exclusive" or designate it with some other CLEARLY visible tag... sort of as a warning sign for folks who would like to avoid the particular social poison you're swilling.

If the members of your guild aren't there "when you need them" and can't be counted upon unless they are FORCED to be there... maybe there's a problem with how you're running your guild.

Maybe it's just me... when I feel good about a group of people, and enjoy their companionship online, they can count on me having their back whenever they need support... no Stalinistic regime or artificial force needed.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 4:55PM Soulstitchmmo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ArcherAvatar You are reading too much into this. Players won't join our guild if they don't agree with our positions. With the addition of the toggle this will eliminate the players that will join guilds under the premise and then just swap tags anyways. We aren't forcing the players to play the way we want, we are ensuring that members that do join our guild are clear on what we expect of them and that we do not want our members swapping tags until they've proven their loyalty to the guild.

Many guilds will run like this, some might never let their guild members change tags, and instead of having a rule ANet can include a mechanic to save all the guild drama.

There is a massive thread on the gw2guru forums where players freely admit that this is the case.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 12:58PM Soulstitchmmo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think this system is great, as long as guilds are able to make their tag exclusive. When you join a guild on a character you won't be able to switch tags unless you leave the guild.

That simple fix would eliminate so many of the downsides of the system. There will be guild leaders that make exclusivity a requirement for the guild, and we should be allowed to do this because some guilds require a lot of investment from members and leaderships, and those that are loyal to the guild would like to know that when members join, they are there for the long haul.

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 2:37PM ArcherAvatar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Soulstitchmmo
I still think you're looking at this through the perspective of an old paradigm. The type of exclusivity and restrictive guild structure you're advocating was applicable to the game mechanics and systems of other games... not GW2.

Exactly how much "raiding" do you think you're going to be doing in GW2? The style of game-play is different, the ease of ad-hoc groups forming is higher, the pace of combat is faster and far less dependent on restrictive class roles.

Character classes are more versatile - no more trinity.
Oganized groups are smaller - 5 man for both explorable dungeons and competitive PvP.
Cooperation among players who are not even in "group" with one another is easier and fluid... seen a demo of the large scale dynamic events lately?

So... exactly how much is the *old* style of highly regimented, restrictive guild needed? Not at all.
Not.... at.... all.......

Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 3:33PM Soulstitchmmo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ArcherAvatar Yet guilds are still going to maintain the same systems. Guilds span Games not just GW2. When you join some guilds, like ours, you're not just joining for GW2. You're joining our guild. So when we recruit people we recruit with that in mind.

Also just within the guilds themselves you can't deny that there will be guilds who demand exclusivity. Regardless of what sense it makes to you, there are guild leaders and guild members who put in a lot of work and will ask that members that join will be there when they are needed.

While the system as a whole will be great, there should still be a mechanic in place that allows guilds to make them exclusive. If you want to drop the tag then you must leave the guild. Guilds are going to demand it anyways and this makes it clear to members joining that this is that kind of guild so people can't make promises they do not intend to keep.

The "exclusivity" mechanic will help ensure honesty.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 4:06PM ArcherAvatar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Soulstitchmmo
force
control
help ensure honesty

You keep using the same wording and phrases and they paint a VERY clear picture of how you view your guild and it's membership.

fascist
stalinistic
orwellian

Not an accurate picture of your guild or how they operate? It might not be accurate in your mind but, it is most definitely how you're depicting them and yourself. Not very favorable... but definitely accurate by your own account.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 4:21PM Soulstitchmmo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ArcherAvatar Yet our guild retains members and has no problem with membership and applications, we must be doing something right.

And you're the one using those words. Not me. We are a traditional guild and that works for us. We would like the option of remaining a traditional guild when we launch, and a proper mechanic to ensure that our guild remains the way we like it.

We will make it clear to people when they join this is the way we are because we want people that our like us.

You can make it sound like we're some kind of political idea, but we like our system and it's made us a strong guild that has been run this way since SWG.

Our system is not broke, and is what's best for us. All we're asking for is a toggle. Why are you so defensive over this?
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 7:26PM ArcherAvatar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Soulstitchmmo
I had the exact same reaction towards folks who were not satisfied with competitive PvP and large scale PvP in WvW format in GW2. There were many who were quite loudly wanting "open world PvP" included in GW2 so they could perpetuate their flawed, outdated form of PvP "ganking noobs" and generally fouling the water of the social interaction in the game.

This latest outcry against the proposed guild system with it's flexibility and shift in power towards the individual players as well as towards a more open and interconnected social framework is exactly the same as the PvP shouts for ganking opportunities. I told the PvPers there were plenty of games out there with the flawed system design they desired, and they were welcome to them imo, and I'm saying the same thing to folks shouting for old, outdated guilds as well.

The structure of gameplay in GW2 is different from those previous games. The gameplay is faster paced, more fluid, and it is tremendously easier to work with others in the game even without actually forming a group to do so. No ally targeting, no trinity class restrictions, faster combat, each player helping towards a common goal but none of them confined to narrowly focused group role... it's a DIFFERENT game. Yet you insist on needing the same OLD style guild structure to support... to support... um, what exactly do you think need it to support?!? There are no WOW raids... if you want that sort of thing SWTOR is perpetuating the trinity class system with open world PvP and "end-game" raiding, and I have no doubt that ridiculously restrictive, hyper organized and controlling guilds will be all the rage there.... but there is no need for them in GW2.

And btw, I did NOT choose those words... those words were taken from your posts, and VERY much reflected the sentiment you were expressing. You want to control other players... you've said it yourself in no uncertain terms, and you've also expressed how you're not happy about the fact that the guild system proposed for GW2 doesn't allow you to exert as much control over others... Too bad. Go join the "open world PvP gankers" in one of the many, many games that still design those sorts of flaws in.

GW2 is innovating new design concepts... ones which promote a healthier, more positive social atmosphere, and which do not require concepts such as "controlling guild members" and "forcing honesty" in order to be a successful and organized group that is capable of enjoying all of the content the game offers.

This is the part where you pause and reflect... realize you were mistaken... change your mind and drop the pretense of needing inappropriate, out-dated models to have success and enjoy an entirely new and different style of game...
OR
You have the option of continuing to be wrong... your choice.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 7:47PM Soulstitchmmo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ArcherAvatar Geeze archer you sound mad. I'm not trying to destroy the system. I think its' great. For guilds that like it.

Do you honestly think that guilds are not going to implement this feature themselves?

Why not give them the tool to do so. Let the social guilds be social guilds and let the exclusive guilds govern themselves appropriate.

Why all of the hostility? It's going to happen whether you like it or not. I don't understand why you are acting like it's not going to happen. Whether the tool is put in place is the only unknown.

Guilds put a lot of effort and work into being who they are, from both the members of that guild and the leadership of that guild.

I am truly sorry that you appear to have never known a good guild. A good guild where the members and the leadership run the guild and like to expect a certain kind of behavior from new recruits.

It is not ownership or forcing players to do anything. I am not forcing anyone to apply or even stay in our guild. If you want to leave please feel free. If you're not willing to sit through a period of being exclusive to one guild how dedicated can we expect you to be down the road?
Reply

Posted: Sep 7th 2011 4:06PM Ordegar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ArcherAvatar

Although I agree with much of what you are saying; I do believe that Soulstitchmmo is ONLY saying that he wants to have a way to flag his guild as being a restrictive one. I think they should go a step further and use a recruiting tool similar to what is in EQ2; guilds specify their style by checking criteria like "Mature", "Raiding", or "Casual", or "Family Friendly", so when you're looking for a guild you can filter what you're looking for in a guild without having to go to the website of every guild that you think you're interested in.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 8:59PM Genkides said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well as much fun as I enjoy seeing this go on.....and I really do. I think the options to be in different groups is good,and far outweighs any percieved 'negatives'. One being, that as Archer has said......gw2 will be and is designed totally different then 'traditional' mmos. That it is a game that truly feels like we can all play together. There truly is no reason to, or mechanic to compete with each other. To me its a series of when a player overcomes the obstacles there to just enjoy.

The only place to compete, for fun or competitvily is PvP and WvWvW. And I am sure many guilds will form with that focus. Which is where I think you will see the Groups working/playing together.
For Soul, alot of understand how and why there were reasons to be in ONE group/guild in other games. It was to ensure you had enough people to do the eg content. ( from my experience was FFxi and you needed a good pool of people to get things done) but even there mulitple groups are stilk ok to have.
Sure Anet "MAY" have something to make people only be in one guild but I doubt it. What you talk about and how you say it...... is a 'gang' mentality. GUILD 4 LIFE!! Sure if thats what you want need or expect knock yourself out. You will only attract those of like mind. If you are such a good group of people......... you dont NEED to have outside mehcanics to 'keep people honest' A need to have those in place to control others is truly a issue with trusting others no matter how you spin in. You can say, " you can only be in our group, and even though you say ok.... we are still putting these "chains' on you here... to keep you honest , until we 'trust' you enough" But people will see that for what it is. I doubt you will keep alot of new people that way.

Most people will have a few groups due to many reasons, rp, location, time zones, freinds and that empowers people alot more then limiting them to one group. If you have not known in personal experience... familiarity breeds comtempt. We all need to get away from those we spend way to much time with to be able to appreciate them. Most people will naturally gravitate towards one of the guilds they have , if they feel it serves them better. That does not mean they do not enjoy or like being in other guilds also. So the fact that you need some way to limit those in your group seems silly. You will attract and keep those of like mind... if someone comes into your 'guild' and doesnt like it..they will move on. So why would you want them anyways, since they are not of your like mindset?

I sort of rambled but again, yes many people want one group due to many reasons....for the same reasons one wants to have a few options or groups. Neither is better then the other...... options and choices empower people.

Posted: Sep 6th 2011 9:27PM Soulstitchmmo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Genkides Because a number of players have admitted they would still join a guild like mine and feign exclusivity, and even hope to have systems implemented so they can appear invisible to guilds that they promised to be exclusive to so they can "hide" from them or promise to be exclusive, and then still swap tags.

There is a reason why end game guilds have trial players. If a trial player is not willing to go through what a guild requires of them then it's best it's known at the start.

Players lie, as evidenced by the gw2guru forums. They say they want something and then they don't.

This mechanic would make it easier for myself and my other guild leaders to monitor new recruits instead of having to stalk them full time. Instead of having to friends them and monitor their play time.

It's easier to just implement a mechanic that allows guilds to add by rank or by guild the ability to drop the guild tag without leaving guild. Because if they don't then guilds will find ways of keeping track of players up to and including screen shots of character select screens which is a practice done in many competitive pvp guilds.
Reply

Posted: Sep 7th 2011 1:36AM ArcherAvatar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Soulstitchmmo
"...monitor new recruits instead of having to stalk them..."

Again... your words, not mine... and again; f***ing orwellian! In the creepiest way possible! I wish you could objectively hear how you sound.

I hope with every fiber of my being that your wishes on the guild system are not granted... if for no other reason than giving you an opportunity to learn how horribly twisted what you're advocating is, and how much more enjoyable playing MMOs can be without all that b.s.

@Genkides
TY for your response... calm, reasonable, and I hope, accurate.
(and I guess YW for the "entertainment." Sometimes I argue/debate/attempt to reason with folks beyond the point where there is any real hope of getting through to them. I recognize most folks don't see this topic as much of an issue, but to me, there is a deeper, truly unhealthy mindset involved here, and I felt compelled to at least try to bring some light into that darkness. Unfortunately for some folks, if you sit in the darkness for long enough, I guess your eyes adjust so-to-speak. Even if unsuccessful I personally feel better for having made the attempt.)
Reply

Posted: Sep 7th 2011 9:14AM Genkides said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ArcherAvatar As much as alot of people can see some views as 'negative' or unhealthy when we see how certain behavior can be linked to other issues we do not like. As much as we don't subscribe to it, there still should be some options available even if we would not use them. If anything, it gives me, or shows me exactly who I do not want to be, or a 'group' I would not want to be a part of.

As far as following Anet and their philosophy, and talking to them at PAX, we can assume that having , or leaning towards players having control over others........'may' not be a direction they go. But then again, we don't know.
So as far as we dont agree with it, we can not really change anyone. There are people that feel that this isis the kind of group they need and for them its fine. For the majority of others, we can see that there are more healthier options. It's just that a small minority have to label things they don't agree with as 'bad' or 'terrible', and want others to accept that as fact.
I rambled again... but to finish, like attracts like. And only through example , or from a lack of growing support for groups like that , will people change. When others realize ,at least for GW2 , that some stale ,stagnant concepts are not a good fit for this game.
Reply

Posted: Oct 2nd 2011 5:27AM Fuzzz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
if you only want to play in one guild do that, no one is forcing people to have a guild for each char. Of course that might lead to some members being inactive a lot, but that is that.
I have a feeling that after a short while people will lodge into having 1-3 guilds per account, obviously I might be wrong

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW