Guild Wars 2

Snowywonders.1378:

Daddicus.6128:

Hannelore.8153:

From my time on these forums I’ve determined that casual means the following:
- Completely flat map with uninteresting terrain that is easy to cross
- Speed across entire map in an instant, preferably by teleporting (somehow, having this ability is necessary alongside also having a flat map)
- Spend a few seconds only killing a mob by only pressing one button
- Overcome all challenges even in extremely inefficient gear and builds, without having to think about complexity
- Do not require other players for any event, not even group events
- No aggro from mobs, no skills from mobs, no danger from mobs
- No CC, no conditions, nothing that requires any kind of counter-play or quick thinking
- Everything as quick as possible, everyone is busy busy these days, can’t stop to actually play a game
- Always rewards, even for doing nothing at all
- Define fun as the embodiment of getting things for nothing, instead of immersion, challenge or time investment

More that I forget, but we all know what they are by now.

All 10 of your points are demonstrably false. Try again.

Except they are not. You need not look further than this thread. Try again. Actually, that would imply you already did. Just try, once.

Except they have been.
Right here.

mbhalo.1547:

I consider myself a casual player – 4000 hours played, 16k AP, 5 legendary weapons + legendary backpack, do T4 fractals almost every day and here and there dabble into raiding. I had some troubles with HoT initially and even posted angry rants about it. But after some time everything became piece of cake. I know all HoT maps like my own backyard, finished all HoT story and maps achievements and now i don’t have any trouble running in the jungle on pure glass builds.

Unless you all have done better, you have no say on anything negative about a casuals investment into a game.

STIHL.2489:

Vayne.8563:

STIHL.2489:

Vayne.8563:

STIHL.2489:

Rhanoa.3960:

Vayne.8563:

STIHL.2489:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Daddicus.6128:

Rhanoa.3960:

Has the game really failed? Far from it.

Nobody said it did; well, nobody other than you.

We said Heart of Thorns failed. Which it did.

It did not, not by any reasonable measure. It didn’t do as well as predicted, which is very different.

You realize that not meeting predictions, is Failure.. right?

forecast that’d we’d make a certain profit, but something would happen and we made less. But the business wasn’t failing. The prediction didn’t take into account certain realities we’d be unaware of.

Based off the OPs statements throughout this thread, I really hope he is not a hiring manager.

I’d be offended, but, I read what you think retaining clients means, and the fact that Vayne does not seem to grasp the very profound difference between RoI and just making a sales goal… I simply can’t be.

In order for HoT to be a failure, you’d have to prove a couple of things. First, that more people left because of HOT, or stopped playing because of it than people who came back or started ;playing. That’s almost impossible to prove either way.

You can say a certain percentage of people didn’t like HoT. It’s true.

As for ROI, unless you work for Anet’s account department or management, you have no way to know the ROI on HoT. You’d be guessing at best.

The nice flat casual friendly maps of PoE.. tell me all I need to know.

You saw a small section of one map and you judge the expansion by that. How about the very very large not flat vertical maps like Draconis Mons and Siren’s Landing, both of which took about six months to make if interviews are anything to go by.

Anet could have made flatter maps if maps being flat was an issue. They also said there would be 3d areas in the desert, so I’m thinking this is wishful thinking on your part.

You’re so convinced something is try you’re willing to use evidence to believe it while ignoring all the other evidence.

Mo did say that it takes about 6 months to build a new zone from scratch. HoT is going to 2 years old, which means it was a year old when the last two zones were designed and I would guess a flatter map would be faster to design.

So yeah, I’ll go with wishful thinking here.

So.. are you being wishful that there will be vertical maps to justify what you want to believe, or are you being wishful that the new maps being flatter and easier to transverse is just coincidence to justify what you want to believe?

In either case, that is why I am being very tentative with this new expansion.

I’m not being wishful. There are maps that have been in development for a short time that are vertical. If the verticality was so universally decried, these maps would have been different. It’s very simple.

Your statement is based on a tiny demo section on an expansion, an expansion that Mo said straight out would have areas with great verticality. He wouldn’t have said/stressed that if it was an issue for most.

This thread is still a jumbled mess because everyone has their own definition of the word casual.

OP, could you please give specific things that the developers need to do to “remember the casuals”

This request is just too vague.

Dashingsteel.3410:

This thread is still a jumbled mess because everyone has their own definition of the word casual.

OP, could you please give specific things that the developers need to do to “remember the casuals”

This request is just too vague.

We’ve already been through this in this thread.

already been through it???? What did everyone decide the definition of casual is?

Dashingsteel.3410:

already been through it???? What did everyone decide the definition of casual is?

Read the thread.

I did and there are a multitude of differing opinions on the subject. This serves to muddy the waters on what a casual actually is…… So how the heck are developers supposed to know

Some people are confused, some people aren’t.

Perhaps Anet has remembered the casuals…….. but unfortunately they remembered their version of casuals and not the ops version…… After all, there seems to be at least 5 different definitions on this thread.

STIHL.2489:

Lokki.1092:

Uhh… Casual doesn’t mean bad at the game.
Do you think casual means being bad at a game?

Casual means casual… relaxed and unconcerned, not regular or permanent, or a person who does something irregularly.

That isn’t the same as being bad at the game.

You can be casual, playing when you want, for short amounts of time, and never investing too much into the game, while also understanding how to play your character well. Just because I casually play Super Mario 3 one weekend doesn’t mean I’m bad at playing the game. It just means I played the game with no real goal, and likely didn’t beat it.

I’v already covered this, and said it better.

STIHL.2489:

“Casual” is a mindset, or more aptly put, an approach on how someone plays the game. In simple terms, “casual” defines their motive and drive, as opposed to being serious about the game, or hardcore. Truth is, being “Casual” is irrespective of skill or time played. As how many hours someone invests into a game or how skilled they are at playing a game, have no bearing the mindset they have or how they approach the game.

In short, a “Casual” is not looking for a something serious that they have to work at or treat like a job, they are looking to escape into a fantasy world as someone might take a casual stroll in the woods to escape the daily grind of life.

But feel free to bring your arguments to this person, who actually disagrees with you.

IndigoSundown.5419:

there is a specific definition of the word casual as it is used in video games which states that either skill, time commitment or both are defining factors.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/casual

Words evolve. We either adapt and use them as they are being used in specific contexts or we don’t. Stick with your definition if you like, but you will continue to be misunderstood by some posters and some of the information you get will be unhelpful as a result.

figured you missed at these exchanges, it would do you good to read the whole topic at leas before making all kinds of assumptions.

Either you understand that Casual does not mean bad at the game, but in spite of that understanding still maintain that you being bad at the game was implied by you saying you were casual.

Or you are just being contrary… for reasons.

My only point was that as a casual GW2 player, I liked HOT fine. As a casual player I Love the casual pace and play of GW2 as a whole and as a casual player I cannot wait to get to POF. And if you are a casual player you may enjoy it as well. So far it seems to be as casual as the rest of this game, which is likely the most casual MMO to ever exist. Unless you count zero player games.

Djinn.9245:

Dashingsteel.3410:

already been through it???? What did everyone decide the definition of casual is?

Read the thread.

I did and I’m still don’t see where people agreed about the definition. It’s a poor word choice to get the OP’s point across and I really wish y’all would stop using it. It distracts from the very conversation you’d like us to be having.

It would be better to restart the thread and state clearly, from the outset the things that the OP liked about the original game and which they haven’t found in HoT. In some cases, there might be a misunderstanding that can be cleared up; in some cases, there won’t be.

Also it would be better to avoid making claims that anyone can speak for anyone else. There are lots of different playstyles, lots of different ways of paying attention or not paying attention.

Right now, this thread is mostly people holding to their point of view and being unwilling to even consider changing their mind based on what others are saying. That’s not very useful to ANet and not all that interesting for those of us who would like to discuss what works, what should have worked, what doesn’t work, and so on.

Lokki.1092:

STIHL.2489:

Lokki.1092:

Uhh… Casual doesn’t mean bad at the game.
Do you think casual means being bad at a game?

Casual means casual… relaxed and unconcerned, not regular or permanent, or a person who does something irregularly.

That isn’t the same as being bad at the game.

You can be casual, playing when you want, for short amounts of time, and never investing too much into the game, while also understanding how to play your character well. Just because I casually play Super Mario 3 one weekend doesn’t mean I’m bad at playing the game. It just means I played the game with no real goal, and likely didn’t beat it.

I’v already covered this, and said it better.

STIHL.2489:

“Casual” is a mindset, or more aptly put, an approach on how someone plays the game. In simple terms, “casual” defines their motive and drive, as opposed to being serious about the game, or hardcore. Truth is, being “Casual” is irrespective of skill or time played. As how many hours someone invests into a game or how skilled they are at playing a game, have no bearing the mindset they have or how they approach the game.

In short, a “Casual” is not looking for a something serious that they have to work at or treat like a job, they are looking to escape into a fantasy world as someone might take a casual stroll in the woods to escape the daily grind of life.

But feel free to bring your arguments to this person, who actually disagrees with you.

IndigoSundown.5419:

there is a specific definition of the word casual as it is used in video games which states that either skill, time commitment or both are defining factors.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/casual

Words evolve. We either adapt and use them as they are being used in specific contexts or we don’t. Stick with your definition if you like, but you will continue to be misunderstood by some posters and some of the information you get will be unhelpful as a result.

figured you missed at these exchanges, it would do you good to read the whole topic at leas before making all kinds of assumptions.

Either you understand that Casual does not mean bad at the game, but in spite of that understanding still maintain that you being bad at the game was implied by you saying you were casual.

Or you are just being contrary… for reasons.

My only point was that as a casual GW2 player, I liked HOT fine. As a casual player I Love the casual pace and play of GW2 as a whole and as a casual player I cannot wait to get to POF. And if you are a casual player you may enjoy it as well. So far it seems to be as casual as the rest of this game, which is likely the most casual MMO to ever exist. Unless you count zero player games.

or maybe I was being sarcastic.

Dashingsteel.3410:

This thread is still a jumbled mess because everyone has their own definition of the word casual.

OP, could you please give specific things that the developers need to do to "remember the casuals"

This request is just too vague.

Stihl didn’t actually request anything. he simply asked if a certain gamer demographic had been remembered. a great amount of this thread has not actually addressed the question at hand, but instead has quibbled over word definitions and had plenty of accusatory finger pointing, wrong assumptions, and borderline trolling.

As of late, I have been trying to get back into playing the game again just in case the PoF expansion turns out to be really attractive to me. That being said, it’s a bit tricky to walk in the door at 80th, after a year of playing other games that are noting at all like this one, so I am going though a whole lot of leaning to play again, but, I stop in from time to time on this topic, as I play GW2 and other games. I have gotten a lot more of the HoT Story done this time around, as in.. I never got past the starting of the HoT story my first time in, so there is that, I also finally just got Gliding to the point that I on’t use stamina anymore.. and.. for as far as HoT goes, while it does directly look like they cut down on the mob density, but, I still do not like trying to transverse the multi-level maps.

Having some tiers to a map, to give caverns, high regions, that kind of thing adds depth to the game, and is a great fixture to any environment, but when the whole map is this knot-work of up and down, it’s far more an annoyance then an exploratory journey to me.

Simply put, after a year and giving the HoT maps another go, I can say, these maps will never grow on me.

I’ll be honest, since I only saw a sampling of PoF, I am still very tentative about buying it,
in case it does turn into a huge multi-layered confusing mess that HoT feels like, I will not be investing into it at all.

Now, I want to be clear, I am Not asking for any changes to be made , not asking to be catered to, I also am not going to regurgitate all the points across all the great many topics that had been made when HoT first came out. If anyone is wondering about the feels and reactions, they can read what was said by many of the other casual players around the same time I was making the decision to depart, but, truth be told, I left for the very reasons they all mentioned.

Now, This, this is just me checking the product and seeing if I like it. Either I will or I won’t.. I am not going to cry one way or another about it.

Wow, the thread lives on!

With regard to HoT and casuality, and I may well be imagining it, but it seems a lot more casual friendly than it did when it first landed. Maybe it was getting certain masteries to enable easier travel and exploration, I dunno.

Mobs feel easier. I certainly haven’t “git bedder” as they say in the vernacular. I even managed to do the vine meta thing a couple of times. Weird.

I don’t like the HoT maps. Even nowadays after them been made “easier” than before. None of my characters has a single elite spec maxed. I like the Core-Tyria maps. There I have the freedom of exploration and the tougher enemies all are in “their” places that are both easily reachable or avoidable.

In HoT maps I can’t get rid of the feeling to be in danger no matter where I go. Sure, there also are a few places where enemies are neutral, but to get there or leaving these means to get in danger again. It’s even possible to get instantly attacked and killed after teleporting to an uncontested waypoint. HoT maps still feel like huge open world dungeons that put me off rather than invite me to explore them. No other map ever made me wanting to leave it asap, but the HoT maps do.

I did the necessary steps to get the glider and, should the occasion arise do harvesting and panorama dailies there, but nothing else.

When leveling a character just by map completions one usually reaches level 80 in one of the 50-60 maps. It’s a pretty bad idea trying to get the glider immediately after hitting 80 this way. I did this a couple of months ago with my been there, done that character and it also felt pretty difficult. If the HoT difficulty would have been similar to core-tyria 80 maps, I probably would have enjoyed the expansion.

I hope PoF won’t put me off too.

Dashingsteel.3410:

Perhaps Anet has remembered the casuals…….. but unfortunately they remembered their version of casuals and not the ops version…… After all, there seems to be at least 5 different definitions on this thread.

Yeah but the OP gave their definition of the term, and hence anyone who feels they fall into that definition should be able to answer if they feel catered to or not.

The reason why this thread is a bit of a mess is that people have been more interested in going on unrelated tangents like extolling the virtues of one definition over another rather than actually answering the OP with the OP’s supplied definition of the term in mind. The other definitions are immaterial to the discussion because the discussion is (or should be) about the group categorised by the OP’s use of the term.

This post is probably no less messy than the rest of the thread, sorry. My brain hasn’t fully shifted into a useful gear yet.

*Edit, although in fairness, I do not blame anyone who doesn’t trawl through 7 pages of forum posts to find that definition at this stage. If the OP is still interested in an answer (they seemed to have been satisfied a couple of pages ago) they might want to try include their definition in the… OP… (ok I can’t remember if OP means original poster or original post or both but I am definitely not suggesting that the original poster inserts their definition in themselves =P )

don’t worry, if the last beta is anything representable to the real game, the enemies in PoF won’t be a threat, at all.
you can kill the warforged with a single auto-attack, and they barely do damage, you can literally stand still between them.

PoF is like the linear opposite of HoT, where HoT was somewhat a challenge at first, until they nerfed most of the mobs into the dirt, the warforged are made of butter, trying to survive in the burning sun of Elona, they die on their own, no need to attack them at all

katz.8376:

Dashingsteel.3410:

This thread is still a jumbled mess because everyone has their own definition of the word casual.

OP, could you please give specific things that the developers need to do to “remember the casuals”

This request is just too vague.

Stihl didn’t actually request anything. he simply asked if a certain gamer demographic had been remembered. a great amount of this thread has not actually addressed the question at hand, but instead has quibbled over word definitions and had plenty of accusatory finger pointing, wrong assumptions, and borderline trolling.

Driven by the OP’s responses as well, if we’re being fair.

I consider myself casual by virtue of being a solo player that doesn’t care about the meta. In other words, I “play the way I want to play”. And if you ask me, HoT was a great expansion.

The only reason I’m “quibbling over word definitions” is because I’m being challenged on my definition of “casual”. So let’s not pretend that the OP and those who agree with him own the definition and the rest of us are just trolling.

AliamRationem.5172:

katz.8376:

Dashingsteel.3410:

This thread is still a jumbled mess because everyone has their own definition of the word casual.

OP, could you please give specific things that the developers need to do to “remember the casuals”

This request is just too vague.

Stihl didn’t actually request anything. he simply asked if a certain gamer demographic had been remembered. a great amount of this thread has not actually addressed the question at hand, but instead has quibbled over word definitions and had plenty of accusatory finger pointing, wrong assumptions, and borderline trolling.

Driven by the OP’s responses as well, if we’re being fair.

I consider myself casual by virtue of being a solo player that doesn’t care about the meta. In other words, I “play the way I want to play”. And if you ask me, HoT was a great expansion.

The only reason I’m “quibbling over word definitions” is because I’m being challenged on my definition of “casual”. So let’s not pretend that the OP and those who agree with him own the definition and the rest of us are just trolling.

It’s not that one definition is right and the others are wrong, it’s that one definition is relevant to this thread and the others are less so.
I don’t have to agree with the OP’s definition of the term to use the OP’s definition of the term.

the literal definition of “casual” is actually kind of similar to relaxed/unconcerned/irregular.

soo by definition people who don’t play the game on a regular basis, don’t give a kitten about meta, and play the way they want, can be considered casual.

on the other hand, someone who plays lets say 2 or more hours a day, informs himself about current builds/the overall meta and adapts his playstyle to this is not “casual” anymore.

just my two cents.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Djinn.9245:

Dashingsteel.3410:

already been through it???? What did everyone decide the definition of casual is?

Read the thread.

I did and I’m still don’t see where people agreed about the definition. It’s a poor word choice to get the OP’s point across and I really wish y’all would stop using it.

I didn’t say we agreed about the definition, I said we had been through the discussion about it. Yes there were a variety of ideas about “casual”, but the general rule of forums is that you stick to the OP’s topic in a thread. The OP has defined what he means by “casual” so nothing more need be said. This thread is about the OP’s definition of “casual”. If people don’t agree with the OP’s definition or don’t want to talk about “casual” as the OP defines it they should not be replying to this thread. They should start their own thread. The only reason to continue arguing about “casual” is to be pedantic.

Rashagar.8349:

The reason why this thread is a bit of a mess is that people have been more interested in going on unrelated tangents like extolling the virtues of one definition over another rather than actually answering the OP with the OP’s supplied definition of the term in mind. The other definitions are immaterial to the discussion because the discussion is (or should be) about the group categorised by the OP’s use of the term.

Thank you, this is exactly the problem. The players that always argue in threads like these have tried their best to derail and muddy the issue. As usual.

By the OP’s definition of the term casual, I dont think that ANet ever forgot the casual portion of the player base.

Not all casuals will like the same content, even if it is casually playable. I disliked HoT, not because I am a casual player, but because I dont care for mazes and platformer aesthetics. This is the case despite the fact that mazes and platforming can be played casually.

I am not aware of anywhere else in the game, other than perhaps Silverwastes, where casual, laidback, participation was rewarded to a greater degree than in HoT. Being given more rewards for less dedicated, or hardcore, effort is a solid job of remembering casual players IMO.

If the content doesnt appeal to you, as it does not to me, its not because the developers have forgotten about some group or demographic that you have chosen to self identify as. Its because you just dont like that content.

Its not about labels, and whether or not a group label Ive chosen for myself is being ignored, picked, on, or forgotten.

Djinn.9245:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Djinn.9245:

Dashingsteel.3410:

already been through it???? What did everyone decide the definition of casual is?

Read the thread.

I did and I’m still don’t see where people agreed about the definition. It’s a poor word choice to get the OP’s point across and I really wish y’all would stop using it.

I didn’t say we agreed about the definition, I said we had been through the discussion about it. Yes there were a variety of ideas about “casual”, but the general rule of forums is that you stick to the OP’s topic in a thread. The OP has defined what he means by “casual” so nothing more need be said. This thread is about the OP’s definition of “casual”. If people don’t agree with the OP’s definition or don’t want to talk about “casual” as the OP defines it they should not be replying to this thread. They should start their own thread. The only reason to continue arguing about “casual” is to be pedantic.

The instant the OP chose to assign his definition of the label to others, a central tenet to the title and original post, he created the debate about the definition and applicability of the term.

Had he restricted his point to whether or not ANet remembered him, and his playstyle, I would agree with you.

Ashen.2907:

Djinn.9245:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Djinn.9245:

Dashingsteel.3410:

already been through it???? What did everyone decide the definition of casual is?

Read the thread.

I did and I’m still don’t see where people agreed about the definition. It’s a poor word choice to get the OP’s point across and I really wish y’all would stop using it.

I didn’t say we agreed about the definition, I said we had been through the discussion about it. Yes there were a variety of ideas about “casual”, but the general rule of forums is that you stick to the OP’s topic in a thread. The OP has defined what he means by “casual” so nothing more need be said. This thread is about the OP’s definition of “casual”. If people don’t agree with the OP’s definition or don’t want to talk about “casual” as the OP defines it they should not be replying to this thread. They should start their own thread. The only reason to continue arguing about “casual” is to be pedantic.

The instant the OP chose to assign his definition of the label to others, a central tenet to the title and original post, he created the debate about the definition and applicability of the term.

Had he restricted his point to whether or not ANet remembered him, and his playstyle, I would agree with you.

To be fair, I used the Term Casual, in it’s intended usage when applied to activities, I did not invent or try to re-define what Casual meant, I used Causal in the same application that it would be used to say “take a Casual walk” or a “Casual bike Ride”

While it seems that as far as games have gone, some people have tried to warp the term Casual into meaning a lack of skill or time, I would surmise o try and turn it into an Insult, Ergo “Filthy Casual”, but, since that is nothing more then a colloquialism, I am under no obligation to use or respect that terminology.

I used the Term casual as it would have been applied to any activity, I have no intention to give video games some special privileged that would not offer someone that plays Rugby Casually.

That being said, a lot of my reasons for leaving to the game were voiced when HoT came out by many other players self identifying as Casuals, as such, since I shared many feelings and points with that demographic, it stood to reason that I too was a casual.

I never just woke up and said “I’m casual gamer” or that “I identify with the Casual Gamers” I realized after reading their posts, that I feel into their demographic by virtue that we shared many of the same feelings about the game.

Now if someone wants to come to this topic and claim to be a casual, and yet, not share any traits with the other casuals posting here, it might be time to realize that you’re not really a casual players, maybe you are something else? The world is not Casual or Hardcore, you can take a Brisk walk, and not feel that it needed to be a Hardcore walk, or a Casual Walk.. Just saying.

Djinn.9245:

Thank you, this is exactly the problem. The players that always argue in threads like these have tried their best to derail and muddy the issue. As usual.

STIHL.2489:

#1
Well I just got back over a long absence, and have no idea how most of m skills work.. as such my play-style at time looks like this.. .

STIHL.2489:

#2
Now, I left because I was unhappy with the HoT expansion and as opposed to playing a game past its’ point of fun, I simply took my own advice and moved on to other games.

STIHL.2489:

#3
But, if you really had not idea of the many thing that were done that made HoT unfriendly towards casual players, so much so that you needed to ask this question, I am going to wager that you are nowhere near close to being a casual player yourself, so, no offence to you in any way, but it would be impossible for you to gauge if PoE was in fact casual friendly or not, thus you really could not answer my question.

STIHL.2489:

#4

If you don’t think Anet forgot about the casuals when making HoT.. then.. simply put.. you’re not a casual so would not notice it. No shame in that.

STIHL.2489:

#5
“Casual” is a mindset, or more aptly put, an approach on how someone plays the game. In simple terms, “casual” defines their motive and drive, as opposed to being serious about the game, or hardcore. Truth is, being “Casual” is irrespective of skill or time played. As how many hours someone invests into a game or how skilled they are at playing a game, have no bearing the mindset they have or how they approach the game.

In short, a “Casual” is not looking for a something serious that they have to work at or treat like a job, they are looking to escape into a fantasy world as someone might take a casual stroll in the woods to escape the daily grind of life.

STIHL.2489:

#6
However, HoT with its mob density, abundance of mobs with break bars, coupled with no clear path to what was around you, including not being able to get POIs, and MP’s that were, as far as the map goes, right next to you, in some cases, paths were totally blocked till timed dynamic events opened them, with no clear way to know how or when these events would come about, made exploring the zones tedium to get through and an exercise in frustration to complete, for me at least.

These statements all have a mutual relationship with number #1

STIHL.2489:

Ashen.2907:

Djinn.9245:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Djinn.9245:

Dashingsteel.3410:

already been through it???? What did everyone decide the definition of casual is?

Read the thread.

I did and I’m still don’t see where people agreed about the definition. It’s a poor word choice to get the OP’s point across and I really wish y’all would stop using it.

I didn’t say we agreed about the definition, I said we had been through the discussion about it. Yes there were a variety of ideas about “casual”, but the general rule of forums is that you stick to the OP’s topic in a thread. The OP has defined what he means by “casual” so nothing more need be said. This thread is about the OP’s definition of “casual”. If people don’t agree with the OP’s definition or don’t want to talk about “casual” as the OP defines it they should not be replying to this thread. They should start their own thread. The only reason to continue arguing about “casual” is to be pedantic.

The instant the OP chose to assign his definition of the label to others, a central tenet to the title and original post, he created the debate about the definition and applicability of the term.

Had he restricted his point to whether or not ANet remembered him, and his playstyle, I would agree with you.

Now if someone wants to come to this topic and claim to be a casual, and yet, not share any traits with the other casuals posting here, it might be time to realize that you’re not really a casual players, maybe you are something else? The world is not Casual or Hardcore, you can take a Brisk walk, and not feel that it needed to be a Hardcore walk, or a Casual Walk.. Just saying.

Or perhaps there is more than one definition of casual. Perhaps even a range.

I mean there is a pretty significant difference between a stroll and rugby.

I tend, when I bother going to HoT at all, to just wander around the maps killing mobs that get in my way. Jungle is not my favorite environmental theme, but ANet’s art team do a decent job of making it reasonably pretty IMO.

I dont really have goals when I go there. I have not maxed masteries and dont expect to ever do so. I have done the meta events, but have never looked up starting times to do so. In each case I happened to log into the zone on a whim at a time when the event was in progress or just starting. I stuck around to see what they were like and pitched in.

I did try the AB multiloot once to see what the fuss was about. Wasnt fun, didnt care to contine.

I have been here since beta and have not played all of the dungeons. Have not raided, dont expect to considering the dedication requirement.

Again, I dont care for HoT, but that has nothing to do with being casual. The maps just generally arent fun, no matter how readily I can casually, even aimlessly at times, play around in them.

To answer the original question: Yes, ANet has remembered the casuals. The issue is that ANet is also attempting to develop a game with broad appeal, and so they create content that, at least in theory, appeals to a wide group of gamers.

Part of the problem with Heart of Thorns is that many players (myself included) went into the expansion with no idea of how to really play the game. I don’t mean play as an experienced player, either: I mean play the game as it is built. I remember the first time I went to the jungle and fought Pocket Raptors. I thought: “Huh. I died FAST. Better put on some tankier gear and use more AoE-heavy weapons”. But that was largely because I’ve been playing GW2 since launch, and I remember running dungeons at launch, with level-appropriate characters and gear, and learning the hard way that dying is just what you’re supposed to do in the game, and if you want to NOT die you need to learn how to interact with the game.

But players that never had that experience, that really only ran dungeons when they were level 80 Zerker speed runs, didn’t or don’t PvP, or Raid, or tackle any of the challenging content in the game, don’t have anything in the core maps that teach them this. Yes, enemies in HoT use a LOT of burst and CC… at least, compared to core Tyria mobs. It’s not hard to deal with, but the game hasn’t taught the players HOW to deal with it. It’s amazing how swapping out a single trait line or utility skill can DRASTICALLY change your experience with HoT, and at times the new LW maps.

And that’s where the disconnect is: The difficulty jumps up in the expansion content, but the game itself doesn’t prepare you for this in a way that helps. This isn’t merely, “Git gud, scrub”; it’s the game not teaching casual players how to deal with content using skills they’ve likely never needed and traits that may at first seem pointless.

Hopefully PoF will solve this issue by having its first map act as a “tutorial” map, encouraging players to learn to tackle specific enemy and attack types, and preparing them for the types of encounters they’ll face in a way that supports skill growth.

The OP didn’t used the word “Casual” in the opening post to clarify his point and elaborate a clear question.

Quite the oposite.

He used the word “Casual” to give an artificial weight to his general opinion in the thread through a false sense of representation of a certain “group”. Then left an open ended question to generate debate.

His specific definition of “Casual” came in much later, when the thread had already devolved into a fist salad.

STIHL.2489:

To be fair, I used the Term Casual, in it’s intended usage when applied to activities, I did not invent or try to re-define what Casual meant, I used Causal in the same application that it would be used to say “take a Casual walk” or a “Casual bike Ride”

While it seems that as far as games have gone, some people have tried to warp the term Casual into meaning a lack of skill or time, I would surmise o try and turn it into an Insult, Ergo “Filthy Casual”, but, since that is nothing more then a colloquialism, I am under no obligation to use or respect that terminology.

I used the Term casual as it would have been applied to any activity, I have no intention to give video games some special privileged that would not offer someone that plays Rugby Casually.

That being said, a lot of my reasons for leaving to the game were voiced when HoT came out by many other players self identifying as Casuals, as such, since I shared many feelings and points with that demographic, it stood to reason that I too was a casual.

I never just woke up and said “I’m casual gamer” or that “I identify with the Casual Gamers” I realized after reading their posts, that I feel into their demographic by virtue that we shared many of the same feelings about the game.

Now if someone wants to come to this topic and claim to be a casual, and yet, not share any traits with the other casuals posting here, it might be time to realize that you’re not really a casual players, maybe you are something else? The world is not Casual or Hardcore, you can take a Brisk walk, and not feel that it needed to be a Hardcore walk, or a Casual Walk.. Just saying.

I’ve also identified as a casual, but somehow my 6k Achievement points did not qualify. Did I miss it by 3000 points?

How many definitions of casual are we up to now ?

and how many are constantly being rejected because #NotMyKindaCasual

TexZero.7910:

How many definitions of casual are we up to now ?

Eleventy hundred.

Rashagar.8349:

AliamRationem.5172:

katz.8376:

Dashingsteel.3410:

This thread is still a jumbled mess because everyone has their own definition of the word casual.

OP, could you please give specific things that the developers need to do to “remember the casuals”

This request is just too vague.

Stihl didn’t actually request anything. he simply asked if a certain gamer demographic had been remembered. a great amount of this thread has not actually addressed the question at hand, but instead has quibbled over word definitions and had plenty of accusatory finger pointing, wrong assumptions, and borderline trolling.

Driven by the OP’s responses as well, if we’re being fair.

I consider myself casual by virtue of being a solo player that doesn’t care about the meta. In other words, I “play the way I want to play”. And if you ask me, HoT was a great expansion.

The only reason I’m “quibbling over word definitions” is because I’m being challenged on my definition of “casual”. So let’s not pretend that the OP and those who agree with him own the definition and the rest of us are just trolling.

It’s not that one definition is right and the others are wrong, it’s that one definition is relevant to this thread and the others are less so.
I don’t have to agree with the OP’s definition of the term to use the OP’s definition of the term.

This is such a bunch of nonsense. Where has the OP been clear about his definition of casual?

According to him, it has nothing to do with time spent playing. Oh, but if you have too many legendary weapons and you happen to disagree with his outlook on HoT, that excludes you from the “casual” group.

Also according to him, it has nothing to do with skill. But if you make platinum in PvP and can solo HoT champions, you’re too “serious” and not “casual” enough.

Casual is a mind set, he says. It means playing the game casually, which I gather refers to not taking it too seriously. So when I say I am a solo player that doesn’t do the meta and I play the way I want to, how does that not meet the definition? Apparently, because he says so.

No. I think it’s clear that what the OP really wants is people to agree with him about HoT. He took his own advice and left, but he never got over it and he’s back to argue the merits of it. Has ANet remembered the casuals? Yes. But that doesn’t mean the OP is going to get what he wants.

Manijin.3428:

To answer the original question: Yes, ANet has remembered the casuals.

I didn’t see any evidence of this with HoT. The LS3 maps were more friendly, but those were already in production when HoT came out so are not necessarily in response to the problems people had with HoT. I will wait to see what PoF is like before coming to any conclusions about whether Anet still cares about all the casual players that made GW2 a success at launch.

AliamRationem.5172:

This is such a bunch of nonsense. Where has the OP been clear about his definition of casual?

In several posts, including just before your post here.

AliamRationem.5172:

He took his own advice and left, but he never got over it and he’s back to argue the merits of it. Has ANet remembered the casuals? Yes. But that doesn’t mean the OP is going to get what he wants.

If you actually read the OP’s posts, he’s back because of PoF and wants to determine whether Anet has changed direction any from HoT. It’s actually pretty clear.

Ardid.7203:

The OP didn’t used the word “Casual” in the opening post to clarify his point and elaborate a clear question.

Quite the oposite.

He used the word “Casual” to give an artificial weight to his general opinion in the thread through a false sense of representation of a certain “group”. Then left an open ended question to generate debate.

His specific definition of “Casual” came in much later, when the thread had already devolved into a fist salad.

As I am starting to see, so the problem with this topic is that I did not start it with one of those big red Q’s, as such it seems that many of the people coming to this topic can’t seem to figure out that I was asking a question, not making a statement.

I’ll have to keep that in mind in the future, and now it suddenly makes sense why Anet put in the option for those big red Q’s.

AliamRationem.5172:

No. I think it’s clear that what the OP really wants is people to agree with him about HoT. He took his own advice and left, but he never got over it and he’s back to argue the merits of it. Has ANet remembered the casuals? Yes. But that doesn’t mean the OP is going to get what he wants.

Are you a preacher by chance ?

Because truer words have never been said.

Djinn.9245:

Manijin.3428:

To answer the original question: Yes, ANet has remembered the casuals.

I didn’t see any evidence of this with HoT. The LS3 maps were more friendly, but those were already in production when HoT came out so are not necessarily in response to the problems people had with HoT. I will wait to see what PoF is like before coming to any conclusions about whether Anet still cares about all the casual players that made GW2 a success at launch.

Seems to me that they did.

The seamless cooperation is still in place. Unlike other games, where you have to be in a group with other players to share credit from kills, this game makes it so that players more or less only benefit from having other players present, rather than stepping on each other’s toes. The result is that it’s very solo friendly, even if players sometimes require other players to complete objectives.

There is still no gear treadmill. Players aren’t racing the clock until the next update, where they know their current gear will become irrelevant. Not only that, your gear can only be upgraded so much, so players will never find themselves at a severe disadvantage if they don’t focus all of their energy on upgrading gear.

The game is still decidedly focused on the personal story and open world content. They added raids, but there is no driving need to complete them. They’ve added a few fractals, but nothing to pressure players into participating in them unless they want to.

The game seems very much a “play the way you want to play” world to me. Of course, if you dislike HoT due to the difficulty of combat/navigation, then I can see why you might have issues. They didn’t offer you an alternative in the form of more straightforward maps with easier combat (at least until LS3). But nothing about the overall casual nature of the game has changed.

STIHL.2489:

As I am starting to see, so the problem with this topic is that I did not start it with one of those big red Q’s, as such it seems that many of the people coming to this topic can’t seem to figure out that I was asking a question, not making a statement.

If your question is this:

STIHL.2489:

I am wondering if PoF is more like the Core game, or is it more like HoT.

Then obviously nobody knows the answer because nobody actually played all the maps/content of PoF to answer it. For all we know the first zone, or even the part we’ve seen in the demo, is nothing like the last zone at all.

And the first story instance is nothing like the last one. You asked a hypothetical question that you know nobody has the answer to. And then complain when others pick apart what you typed and focus on other parts of it. Those other parts are worthy of discussion, that’s why it’s been 8 pages discussing that because your “actual” question has no answer.

Djinn.9245:

Manijin.3428:

To answer the original question: Yes, ANet has remembered the casuals.

I didn’t see any evidence of this with HoT. The LS3 maps were more friendly, but those were already in production when HoT came out so are not necessarily in response to the problems people had with HoT. I will wait to see what PoF is like before coming to any conclusions about whether Anet still cares about all the casual players that made GW2 a success at launch.

How? Each map has soloable content, the story has very few steps (arguably too few, but that’s another matter), the mobs all have fairly simple mechanics, and if your goal is simply sitting down to play for a little bit, the HoT maps are just as serviceable as most core maps, with the sole exception of Dragon’s Stand, which is more of a zerg map than anything else.

Getting mastery points isn’t terribly difficult, many hero points have multiple people working on them anyways, and there are lots that don’t require more than a button press, just like in core Tyria.

So what do you count as evidence that casual player’s needs are being met? Let’s get rid of the definition of the word “casual”, and just focus on the practical elements of the word. What content meets the satisfaction of casual play, and what content is lacking from HoT that would facilitate casual play?

Djinn.9245:

AliamRationem.5172:

This is such a bunch of nonsense. Where has the OP been clear about his definition of casual?

In several posts, including just before your post here.

AliamRationem.5172:

He took his own advice and left, but he never got over it and he’s back to argue the merits of it. Has ANet remembered the casuals? Yes. But that doesn’t mean the OP is going to get what he wants.

If you actually read the OP’s posts, he’s back because of PoF and wants to determine whether Anet has changed direction any from HoT. It’s actually pretty clear.

Well I thought it was pretty clear. which is making me wonder why it is acceptable to say things like “Learn to Play” or “git gud” when a player is struggling, but when people can’t seem to follow a simple point on a forum post, saying “learn to Read” is considered insulting and wrong?

Anet takes both the hardcore and casuals into account. You are very wrong on many points by the way.

Manijin.3428:

Djinn.9245:

Manijin.3428:

To answer the original question: Yes, ANet has remembered the casuals.

I didn’t see any evidence of this with HoT. The LS3 maps were more friendly, but those were already in production when HoT came out so are not necessarily in response to the problems people had with HoT. I will wait to see what PoF is like before coming to any conclusions about whether Anet still cares about all the casual players that made GW2 a success at launch.

How? Each map has soloable content, the story has very few steps (arguably too few, but that’s another matter), the mobs all have fairly simple mechanics, and if your goal is simply sitting down to play for a little bit, the HoT maps are just as serviceable as most core maps, with the sole exception of Dragon’s Stand, which is more of a zerg map than anything else.

Getting mastery points isn’t terribly difficult, many hero points have multiple people working on them anyways, and there are lots that don’t require more than a button press, just like in core Tyria.

So what do you count as evidence that casual player’s needs are being met? Let’s get rid of the definition of the word “casual”, and just focus on the practical elements of the word. What content meets the satisfaction of casual play, and what content is lacking from HoT that would facilitate casual play?

You’re about 2 years late for the kind of care to have that discussion anymore, and truth be told, I have zero desire to repeat what others before me already said, since for the most part, they said it better then I could.

I am sure the Topics are still round here someplace, maybe in the HoT sub forums, feel free to peruse them, I am sure there might be still be a dozen or so left that only got locked and not deleted.

it would be the same… with it or w/o it.,,,

If map design is the lowest level of “not catering to casuals” because 2/4 maps were a bit complex… I don’t really want to be elitist here and say the problem is you, but there is some base level of aptitude you should expect to bring to the table. I can’t go into something like bejeweled not understand the game, or be frustrated at the level of investment to reach certain levels, and then say it doesn’t cater to people on a casual level. I don’t think that is really a fair claim against the game.

That being said the new map designs seem to just be wide, long and relatively flat which shouldn’t be difficult to figure out. If you are bad at combat there will always be groups to pick you up and get you through it. If story is a problem surely you can get some assistance. Which I think on a whole does cater to a casual experience, since in away everyone wins.

If you were put off by the investment needed in the mastery system to progress, you probably will still have to do that here. Like any MMO there is some time investment expected to be made. To my understanding they are cutting down how long it takes to max elite specializations so you can play more of the new content with it. I do believe we will unlock the new mounts pretty fast, so you’ll probably be able to finish story with minimal investment.

AliamRationem.5172:

Rashagar.8349:

AliamRationem.5172:

katz.8376:

Dashingsteel.3410:

This thread is still a jumbled mess because everyone has their own definition of the word casual.

OP, could you please give specific things that the developers need to do to “remember the casuals”

This request is just too vague.

Stihl didn’t actually request anything. he simply asked if a certain gamer demographic had been remembered. a great amount of this thread has not actually addressed the question at hand, but instead has quibbled over word definitions and had plenty of accusatory finger pointing, wrong assumptions, and borderline trolling.

Driven by the OP’s responses as well, if we’re being fair.

I consider myself casual by virtue of being a solo player that doesn’t care about the meta. In other words, I “play the way I want to play”. And if you ask me, HoT was a great expansion.

The only reason I’m “quibbling over word definitions” is because I’m being challenged on my definition of “casual”. So let’s not pretend that the OP and those who agree with him own the definition and the rest of us are just trolling.

It’s not that one definition is right and the others are wrong, it’s that one definition is relevant to this thread and the others are less so.
I don’t have to agree with the OP’s definition of the term to use the OP’s definition of the term.

This is such a bunch of nonsense. Where has the OP been clear about his definition of casual?

According to him, it has nothing to do with time spent playing. Oh, but if you have too many legendary weapons and you happen to disagree with his outlook on HoT, that excludes you from the “casual” group.

Also according to him, it has nothing to do with skill. But if you make platinum in PvP and can solo HoT champions, you’re too “serious” and not “casual” enough.

Casual is a mind set, he says. It means playing the game casually, which I gather refers to not taking it too seriously. So when I say I am a solo player that doesn’t do the meta and I play the way I want to, how does that not meet the definition? Apparently, because he says so.

No. I think it’s clear that what the OP really wants is people to agree with him about HoT. He took his own advice and left, but he never got over it and he’s back to argue the merits of it. Has ANet remembered the casuals? Yes. But that doesn’t mean the OP is going to get what he wants.

It’s not nonsense, it’s… sense!

*sigh *
Ok, take a breath (as much telling myself as anyone else here).

You said

The only reason I’m “quibbling over word definitions” is because I’m being challenged on my definition of “casual”.

That might be how you feel. But that is not what is happening here. What is happening is people are experiencing first hand how useless and confusing words can be at getting across meanings, sometimes.
Because the meanings associated with words have those associations because of life experiences that not everyone shares.
There is no right or wrong definition. There is “my” definition and a vast spectrum of other definitions that range from “close to mine” to “what the hell are you even talking about”.
In this case the definition of relevance is the OP’s, because it is the only one that provides a clue as to what their past experiences have been and what point of view they are approaching the topic from, both vital pieces of information for determining how best to provide an answer for their question.

If this is still nonsense to you then either I’m doing a terrible job at explaining myself or you’re just not in a mood to listen. It does sound a little like you’re making some reference to some previous unquoted post of your’s here that I have no recollection of. And I’m sorry to say that words cannot express how uninterested I am in opening myself up to that.

As an aside, if your main point of contention with the OP is over the OP getting a little defensive that their definition of “casual” was being constantly “challenged”, then I’m quite sure that you can empathise with their position.

Daishi.6027:

That being said the new map designs seem to just be wide, long and relatively flat which shouldn’t be difficult to figure out.

I really doubt the rest of the maps will also be flat.

If you notice the mounts give you abilities similar to the zephyrite crystals, the Raptor is the purple crystal and the Springer is the blue one. Why add mounts with such abilities if the map is all flat?

This looks very Dry Top-ish with long and high canyons:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/loadinginfo/uploads/pof/2017/07/26/1501094063-GW2-POF-map_pic_6-630x354.jpg

while this one has bridges up high, similar to the Desert Borderland:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/loadinginfo/uploads/pof/2017/07/26/1501094096-GW2-POF-map_pic_8-630x354.jpg

It’s hard to imagine that the maps in PoF will all be flat like most Core Tyria maps after giving us mounts with vertical abilities and posting these screenshots.

STIHL.2489:

You’re about 2 years late for the kind of care to have that discussion anymore, and truth be told, I have zero desire to repeat what others before me already said, since for the most part, they said it better then I could.

I am sure the Topics are still round here someplace, maybe in the HoT sub forums, feel free to peruse them, I am sure there might be still be a dozen or so left that only got locked and not deleted.

So… basically, instead of answering my questions, you claim that I don’t really care? I mean, you can have your opinion about whether or not I’m in a position to care about it, but that doesn’t invalidate the questions themselves. If casual players’ needs aren’t being met, those needs first need to be stated. That’s what I’m saying.

Additionally, we can all go back and talk about things we didn’t like at launch, but the game is very different from what it was back then. Similarly, it doesn’t matter what HoT was like when it launched, because it is actually quite different from what it was when it launched, and my comments are meant to reflect the current state of the game.

So, for someone coming into the game now, or recently returning, what are the kinds of content that casual players are looking for, and does the current game fail to provide this content? If so, how?

It shouldn’t be a terribly difficult question to answer if people are clearly upset about it.

STIHL.2489:

Djinn.9245:

AliamRationem.5172:

This is such a bunch of nonsense. Where has the OP been clear about his definition of casual?

In several posts, including just before your post here.

AliamRationem.5172:

He took his own advice and left, but he never got over it and he’s back to argue the merits of it. Has ANet remembered the casuals? Yes. But that doesn’t mean the OP is going to get what he wants.

If you actually read the OP’s posts, he’s back because of PoF and wants to determine whether Anet has changed direction any from HoT. It’s actually pretty clear.

Well I thought it was pretty clear. which is making me wonder why it is acceptable to say things like “Learn to Play” or “git gud” when a player is struggling, but when people can’t seem to follow a simple point on a forum post, saying “learn to Read” is considered insulting and wrong?

I never said “learn to play” or “git gud”. As a self-described casual player, I don’t consider it important to validate myself by tearing down the skills of others in the game I play. I play the way I want to and I don’t have any issue with others doing the same.

You know perfectly well that nobody can answer the “simple question” you asked based upon nothing more than a brief demo. And you’re being disingenuous by suggesting that’s all you were looking for when you chose the thread title. You may not like what some of the people in this thread have to say, but you’re wasting your time trying to suggest that they don’t have the right to say it.