Guild Wars 2

Lets say dev time was limited and they could only do one thing.

The choices are:

1. Go back and completely fix all the existing bugs in the game. Fix dynamic events all over the world to be balanced and appropriately completable.
Introduce more cyclical dynamic events rather than one-directional.
Balance sPvP and add reward systems, ladders, a meaningful item aquisition system and multiple new game modes.
Dramatically increase the depth of WvW to feature more mechanics other than cap-the-node and encourage smaller scale skirmishes, along with more meaningful reward systems.
Incentivize all the dungeons with appropriate loot and fights that require coordination and require performing specific roles to alleviate the absence of the old trinity.
Get loot to a position where there are frequently released skins and stats no longer matter
Make all maps relevant and important to play in. Such as a random group finder which creates a daily dynamic event chain for you to complete.

2. Alternatively, devs are to create new, permanent content for the game. Create entire new zones, new mobs, new mechanics. New playable races with playable lore. Add new dungeons and monster mechanics to those dungeons. New jumping puzzles with crazy new ideas. New repeatable content and maps that theoretically alleviates the misgivings of the older content. New itemization and progression systems and skins that come with the new content.

Out of the two, if you had to choose one. What would you choose?

Out of the two, I’d go for #1 since that is the game I thought I paid my money for, but the question is moot since we aren’t getting either and apparently never will.

Why dont they just divide their living story team into #1 and #2. So far living story is nothing but poorly thought out. I am referring to the story and the zergfest.

The living quality patch are not bad. Rest are pretty junk.

Honestly, I do not want to see anymore from Scarlet. Worst story I am forced to know due to the fact I play this game and participate in some event.

Scarlet story feel almost like an insult.

Why not both?

………….

hum… to the sake of this thread i’ll say first, but it hurts my heart saying so…

Your dad bought you a brand new car, and it was so shiny everyone wanted to ride on it. Then all of a sudden a friend smashed it into a wall, FUBAR to the highest degree…
Those who wanted to ride it, now feels unease with it.
You paint the car so it can be shiny with it, to make everyone believe it’s as good as it was in the beginning.

.1) would you fix all of the car?
.2) would you buy a brand new car?

Well… this is how I see your question…

LHound.8964:

hum… to the sake of this thread i’ll say first, but it hurts my heart saying so…

Your dad bought you a brand new car, and it was so shiny everyone wanted to ride on it. Then all of a sudden a friend smashed it into a wall, FUBAR to the highest degree…
Those who wanted to ride it, now feels unease with it.
You paint the car so it can be shiny with it, to make everyone believe it’s as good as it was in the beginning.

.1) would you fix all of the car?
.2) would you buy a brand new car?

Well… this is how I see your question…

Issue with your analogy. You still have to drive your old cars.

Looks like you don’t know how Game Development Companies work.

They have multiple teams for everything, they have PvP and WvW Team, Bug fixing Teams, Expansion Teams and 4 Living Story Teams. They are working on everything at the same time, with every patch come patch fixes, you just have to pay attention.

If you go for #1, by the time #2 comes along the quality of the content will be 100 time better because of the learning process that took place in #1. If you however, go for #2 first by the time #1 comes along it will take forever to fix and review #1 AND #2

The reason we have threads like this is that the development vision is not working well. The answer is simple. Bring the LS/LW teams together into one cohesive team, evolving one cohesive world, and telling one cohesive and deeper story. Extend the development cycle to three months, with bug fixing between releases as needed.

Focus on deeper story telling, game balance, and polish—i.e., focus on the true game in the game. Make mini-games and features that empty the living world minor—the game in the game needs to be demonstrably major.

Anet can make a great game, but they have weaknesses around the reality-testing needed to manage a game over time. I would strongly recommend an internal effort to raise the average age of the development staff. I don’t say that to denigrate the dev staff in any way, but rather to realize that good reality-testing is born of experience. That should be fairly straightforward and non-controversial (but it won’t be).

If i had to choose between death to bugs, and death to stagnation, i’d quit.

1. without even reading #2.

Game designers work on the game design, they don’t do programming (to that extent), they don’t do bugs (to that extent).
Programmers work on the game code. They do programming and they are the ones who know how to fix the bugs.
Programmers on the party system may not have a clue how the black lion trading post works.
Different people are assigned to do different things because that’s needed and they have different skills and a lot of things need to happen simultaneously.
An elementalist cannot use Aegis and a guardian can’t use Meteor Shower and that’s basically the same thing.

OP is asking leading questions without realistic alternativesm so I see no point in answering the question at all since it leads to nothing.

Jatacid.3725:

1. Go back and completely fix all the existing bugs in the game. Fix dynamic events all over the world to be balanced and appropriately completable.

Introduce more cyclical dynamic events rather than one-directional.
Balance sPvP and add reward systems, ladders, a meaningful item aquisition system and multiple new game modes.

Dramatically increase the depth of WvW to feature more mechanics other than cap-the-node and encourage smaller scale skirmishes, along with more meaningful reward systems.

Incentivize all the dungeons with appropriate loot and fights that require coordination and require performing specific roles to alleviate the absence of the old trinity.
Get loot to a position where there are frequently released skins and stats no longer matter

Make all maps relevant and important to play in. Such as a random group finder which creates a daily dynamic event chain for you to complete.

I pick both, for the simple fact both are obtainable.

I would pick to go with #1 first and foremost without hesitation. Gunning for those goals should be something to strive for. In doing all the things stated above it makes the game overall much more meaningful, once it is complete it allows for doing option #2 in a much more flawless manner.

Jatacid.3725:

2. Alternatively, devs are to create new, permanent content for the game. Create entire new zones, new mobs, new mechanics. New playable races with playable lore. Add new dungeons and monster mechanics to those dungeons. New jumping puzzles with crazy new ideas. New repeatable content and maps that theoretically alleviates the misgivings of the older content. New itemization and progression systems and skins that come with the new content.

With option #1 achieved it would mean that it make all of the things in option #2, much more realistic and meaningful overall without making previous content outdated and and unworthy.

Mikuchan.7261:

Game designers work on the game design, they don’t do programming (to that extent), they don’t do bugs (to that extent).
Programmers work on the game code. They do programming and they are the ones who know how to fix the bugs.
Programmers on the party system may not have a clue how the black lion trading post works.
Different people are assigned to do different things because that’s needed and they have different skills and a lot of things need to happen simultaneously.
An elementalist cannot use Aegis and a guardian can’t use Meteor Shower and that’s basically the same thing.

OP is asking leading questions without realistic alternativesm so I see no point in answering the question at all since it leads to nothing.

How would programmer know what he’s doing, unless he understand the games mechanic. I guess they need to have the programmer start playing the game.

I’d choose #1 – quality over quantity.
Don’t infect new elements with today’s imperfections.

1. would be my preference.

A combination of both options (obvious leaning toward #2) is what we’ve mostly seen so far, and it has not gone well. Every release has had notable bugs. That really is no way to release new content, and it’s creating a very negative aura around the 2-week LS cycles.

@ANet:
Fix the core issues first, then spread your LS updates far enough that you can make them flawless and keep the community positive. There might be people that complain about “not enough content”, but you cannot allow them to push you to release content before it is ready. You’ll end up with more negativity from poor QA than you will from “not enough content”.

2 is going to happen one way or another so 1 is my choice

They are kind of already doing both.

They take an old issue with the game an improve it and add new content to show it off.

Mini-Games/Zephyr Sanctum
Champs/Pavilion
Culling-removed/Scarlet invasions
Boss events/Tequatl

So we can dream about stuff like:
First person screenshots/Some asura invented a camera
New weapon options/Twilight Arbor overhaul
][Feature or fix][/][Some new content to show it off][

1 is going to happen one way or another so 2 is my choice.