Guild Wars 2

Dynamic Events are awesome, and they really do make the world feel alive… but that’s short lived.

If I were to return to a zone that I have 100% completed there is a likely chance that I will stumble upon at least one DE that I haven’t before. But if I go to Snowden Drifts the minotaurs will stampede and there will be DE’s to fight off the grawl, the svanir, the dredge. And I’ve done them all before. The illusion is shattered (pun intended) and you see just how static everything is. Is it as bad as WoW’s rigid quest structure? No, but it’s not all that better either.

I was running around Fields of Ruin and there was a champion branded devourer just standing there. I asked in map chat if anyone was interested, but the zone was pretty empty. So that devourer just stood there for who knows how long as I ran around and did heart quests instead.

1-80 your first time is great (even your second if you do different maps) But if you return to a previous zone be prepared for repetition. Now I know Anet said they will add DE’s to zones over time but I just don’t know if there can do it quick enough.

We have dynamic events, but can we have a dynamic world as well?

There’s that word again. “Quick”.

Makes me think of a phrase that my grandmother used to say, “Hurry up and wait.”

Building a world takes time. There’s a tremendously good start at our disposal already. If it’s not moving quickly enough for you, there’s no wasted monthly fee being burned. That frees you to do something else for awhile.

Pretty sure that’s asking way too much for any game developer until perhaps the year 2020.

Do you expect the devs to provide entirely new and fresh content on a weekly basis in every zone indefinitely? I understand your point. And yes the world is basically static. But the work required to constantly produce different and unique content every week(or even every month) in every zone is astronomical.

I thought everyone knew that. :/

While you break down the problem moderately well, you give no solution for fixing it except a vague “make the world dynamic”. Criticism is fine, but it’s mostly useless unless you give specifics on what causes you to feel this way and what would make you feel differently.

What I think is needed is to make the group DE harder so more people are needed to complete them. The World is dynamic but the events almost never fail because there are a lot of people there to make them succeed and then you can’t see the consequences of failing events.

Even so I’ve already passed through locations that were under centaur control and a few hours later it was occupied by the Seraphs.

This is probably asking for too much. I do agree, though, that some randomness to the events, given the amount of hype that “dynamic” was given, would make it seem a bit less static.

Dragon event in same spot with same mechanics every three hours is more like a farm than a dynamic event. Even a small variable in the number of mobs per wave, the length of time between waves, health pool, dps, event precursors, special mechanics etc would do wonders at making things appear less mechanical. I had expected to see all of the above when hearing “dynamic” explained.

The game your looking for is the sandbox genre, mainly those with good player generated content tools. As it would be impossible for a developer to create endless content before it is “eaten”.

This is a themepark game with some sandbox sprinkles. But it is still a themepark. Kinda sucks, but maybe it will get better? Doubt it, but you can always hope.

“Do you expect the devs to provide entirely new and fresh content on a weekly basis in every zone indefinitely?”

Yes.

“Devs” should be more like a Dungeon/Game Master. They should be “in the game” “controlling” things.

“Devs” should be more like a Dungeon/Game Master. They should be “in the game” “controlling” things.

Every MMO I’ve been in that has tried that has failed miserably at it. It always ends up being an event that everyone shows up to, causing massive lag, and a complete zerg fest, while the GM spawns waves of mobs.

Then you have people who missed the event, basically crying on the forums because they didn’t know about the event 1 week in advance.

I think the way dynamic events work now is pretty good, they’re just a bit too predictable. If they alternated which dynamic events were active in maps every few days, it would make it feel like things are changing.

They don’t need to add new stuff, yet.

They have a ton of stuff already to work with. Just make everything more challenging, interesting, and give a better reason to continue doing them once you’ve finished them. Such as better rewards even for higher levels, maybe not on the exact same level as Orr but close. Add some unique skins that are tied to the zones for people to do stuff in those zones.

Old zones just feel dead as I’m leveling. =/

Most Dynamic Events are just too simple and don’t have any chance to fail. If a zone is dead (i.e. no players) the events should reflect that, sh** should be hitting the fan. Not so much that it’s impossible to finish exploring or doing hearts or w/e. And DE’s should be a little more than just (spam waves of weak mobs).

Knote.2904:

Add some unique skins that are tied to the zones for people to do stuff in those zones.

That would be pretty sweet, but then they would have to add another currency system, basically a map specific coin or credit that you save up for doing events on a map.

At level 80, people are going to be working on map completions, or farming karma/gold for new gear. Since the karma/gold rewards in lower level events don’t scale up very well, you won’t see any level 80s doing them, unless they are working on map completion.

If they did decide to increase the karma rewards for low level events, people will eventually migrate to the easiest one (since let’s face it, even the most enjoyable dynamic event gets boring after doing it a few times)

The only true way that I can see this working, which I think they tried but failed with, is if they actually increase Diminishing Returns and force people to visit different maps rather than farming one event over and over. They would need to combine it with a system wide increase on the scaling of low level events for level 80s though.

That in itself would cause an uproar from the people who want to be able to play how they want though. It’s really a no-win situation for them over at ANet. The only thing we can do is “wait and see” really.

I wouldn’t want those “zone unique skins” to be tied to currency honestly.

I think you should have to actually hunt for them. Legendaries are there to be your currency grinding carrot.

Dead.7385:

The game your looking for is the sandbox genre, mainly those with good player generated content tools. As it would be impossible for a developer to create endless content before it is “eaten”.

This is a themepark game with some sandbox sprinkles. But it is still a themepark. Kinda sucks, but maybe it will get better? Doubt it, but you can always hope.

Yeah I’m going to continue to play GW2, but I think I’m done with Themeparks in general. Too bad there aren’t any AAA Sandboxes around.

Dead.7385:

The game your looking for is the sandbox genre, mainly those with good player generated content tools. As it would be impossible for a developer to create endless content before it is “eaten”.

You’re right that such a game would be a sandbox rather than a theme park model; the essential difference being that in a theme park, the player’s whole experience is designed carefully to move from one static attraction to another. In a sandbox game, players are encouraged or even expected to find things to amuse themselves.

I can see two different ways to accomplish this though.

1) Procedurally generated content is promising but still has severe drawbacks. Essentially, the idea is to set up a system to randomly (or pseudo-randomly) generate new content as needed, based on preset procedures. Instead of having someone create terrain by hand, for example, the terrain could be generated based on algorithms that determine how much variation in height should exist, what textures to use, etc. In theory, this can allow for world of infinite size. In practice, random environments aren’t generally as attractive as hand-made ones, while random quests aren’t as engaging. There’s a serious quality barrier to overcome here, but the concept is sound enough. Procedurally generated content is used quite often though, e.g. SpeedTree is a program used in a lot of video games to generate, well, trees; SWTOR for instance uses SpeedTree code. Minecraft uses procedural generation to create the initial world state, and so on.

2) Player generated content can provide high quantities of content, but there’s a massive variation in quality of output from one player to another. This kind of system can work, but there are numerous obstacles to overcome. For instance, player generated content can be used to create low-risk high-reward scenarios, out of balance with the rest of the game; the most rewarding and easiest content will be used VASTLY more than the less rewarding and more challenging content. Then there’s the urge to create something that’s obscene or perverse, and try to sneak it in somehow; to overcome this, all player content needs to be individually approved by content overseers. Then there’s the simple issue of whether the player generated content even fits within the genre, or fits the game’s atmosphere. Can player generated content improve MMOs? Yes, absolutely, but it’s far from a simple matter.

They don’t need to add new things. It’s just disappointing that the dynamic events aren’t really all that dynamic. They should have made their effects a lot heavier and slower. If the dredge take over an outpost, it should be very difficult to take it back, but, once retaken, should stay taken for a much longer time.

If a zone is abandoned, it would become so overrun that levels 80s would have reason to come in and clear out everything. Think of it like WvE.

Well these things are written on paper, converted to a PC screen, tossed in animation and sound effects.

To make it not seem static after multiple viewings would literally require magic.

The only thing they can really add is more randomization or more live content updates. The former could help a little (i.e. different boss shows up for the fight than you expect, a dynamic quest has several possible branches that might occur, etc) but random has limits too. Everything has to be made and bug tested and go through all that. Same reason live content takes awhile.

So we can hope they mix things up, but realistically we’re still playing something along a typical RPG model. It’s not likely to get TOO crazy out there in Tyria.

capnflummox.3082:

“Do you expect the devs to provide entirely new and fresh content on a weekly basis in every zone indefinitely?”

Yes.

“Devs” should be more like a Dungeon/Game Master. They should be “in the game” “controlling” things.

Well that’s just being unrealistic. By providing new content I don’t mean tweaking existing coding, I mean writing entirely new code for unique events…every week. It’s silly to think you deserve that level of development from any game.

A more realistic change would be to make the event cycles take a lot longer to fire, just like Shroom says here:

Shroom Mage.9410:

They don’t need to add new things. It’s just disappointing that the dynamic events aren’t really all that dynamic. They should have made their effects a lot heavier and slower. If the dredge take over an outpost, it should be very difficult to take it back, but, once retaken, should stay taken for a much longer time.

If a zone is abandoned, it would become so overrun that levels 80s would have reason to come in and clear out everything. Think of it like WvE.

Players get to enjoy a longer, more protracted DE, and devs don’t have to have to drink a gallon of coffee everyday.

capnflummox.3082:

“Do you expect the devs to provide entirely new and fresh content on a weekly basis in every zone indefinitely?”

Yes.

“Devs” should be more like a Dungeon/Game Master. They should be “in the game” “controlling” things.

that would be the dream of any gamer, but is just that, a dream. Can you imagine how many people you´d have to hire for this? Or to watch them being fair the players. A computer game with 100 of thousands of players just cannot emulate tabletop p&p – unless you are a multibillionaire who wants to donate large amounts of money for this cause.

I think it’s safe to say that what is there now will be up for change as time goes on.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/colin-johanson-outlines-guild-wars-2-live-game-development/

We think Guild Wars 2 is one of the most enthralling online worlds ever created, so we are dedicated to a live game that impacts this world with events and milestones that are immersive and possibly permanent.
…
Living World—The Living World team is focused on adding new content to the game world. This team will be adding and refining the types of content you already know in PvE and WvW, as well as developing new features and rewards.

It would be nice to see event chains that last a day or more though, so that when you put a lot of work into capturing that front line position, it’s not knocked back 15 minutes later because everyone moved on to the next event.

Foolsage.3019:

Dead.7385:

The game your looking for is the sandbox genre, mainly those with good player generated content tools. As it would be impossible for a developer to create endless content before it is “eaten”.

~~~

2) Player generated content can provide high quantities of content, but there’s a massive variation in quality of output from one player to another. This kind of system can work, but there are numerous obstacles to overcome. For instance, player generated content can be used to create low-risk high-reward scenarios, out of balance with the rest of the game; the most rewarding and easiest content will be used VASTLY more than the less rewarding and more challenging content. Then there’s the urge to create something that’s obscene or perverse, and try to sneak it in somehow; to overcome this, all player content needs to be individually approved by content overseers. Then there’s the simple issue of whether the player generated content even fits within the genre, or fits the game’s atmosphere. Can player generated content improve MMOs? Yes, absolutely, but it’s far from a simple matter.

I think having some player generated content can be great for the game, if done right. Is it easy? No, but I think it’s definitely worth the risk.

I prefer to think of the events as being dynamic (in no small part) due to the fact that they can play out differently every time. Not just in that you can win or lose (which is rare; events are too easy once too many players arrive on the scene, but that’s another topic), but that some wins are harder or more exciting than others. There are even different ways to respond to each event.. nobody is forcing you (for example) to always choosing the same spot to defend the same pair of tools on the ground from thieves when there are ten or more laying about.

You don’t even have to perform the same role in any given event. You can repeat the same event several times by focusing on damage one time, support another, etc, simply by swapping out your weapons.

Point is, you have at least some power to shake things up a little. It’s kind of like being presented with the task of walking from point A to point B and being told that there are a dozen different ways to get there, but choosing the same route each time and then complaining that it’s boring you. Try things a different way.

IMO; the most dynamic system I’ve seen in play was in Tabula Rasa. AI would attack player outposts in attempts to take and control them. Players would take to the walls, the gates, etc to defend these places. If players failed, the AI would boot the players out of the area.
Players would lose access to rez points, merchants, and even mission hubs. AI population in the surrounding area would also increase till the outpost would be re-taken (although that seemed to not always be the case in all zones).
These outposts would remain in AI control until players united to eject the AI.

It was a bit like WvW; but a lot more interesting. How so? Imagine Orr and the outposts there. Now throw the Giants and wave after wave of AI veterans and champions at the players. So, it wasn’t just “balanced” players attacking and retreating; it was AI relentlessly attacking with the biggest and baddest the area could throw at the players.

This resulted in a much more dynamic ebb and flow to the zones. We never knew when the AI would attack as it was completely random. There were times we would take an outpost and within five minutes the AI would try to take it back. There were times the AI would attack, fail and then attack again instantly.

This simple ebb and flow gave the world just enough to make it feel like players were making a real difference. And in all honesty; When I first heard about Orr, I assumed something like this would be in play.

WasAGuest.4973:

IMO; the most dynamic system I’ve seen in play was in Tabula Rasa. AI would attack player outposts in attempts to take and control them. Players would take to the walls, the gates, etc to defend these places. If players failed, the AI would boot the players out of the area.

I remember that. That was fun. GW2 can already be like that (it tries to, actually), but it’s just too darn difficult to fail an event. I don’t think, for example, I’ve ever seen the Seraph not occupying all the contested outposts in Kessex Hills. The Centaur can’t even rebuild the bridge.. the players always stop them effortlessly. How are they (the Centaurs) ever supposed to get to the stage where they’re assaulting the town across the bridge because of that?

You really shouldn’t be surprised by this. Rift had the exact same promise of “dynamic” game content and an “ever-changing world”, and it was all well and good until you realized that rift locations were static and there were only so many types of rift event in each zone/element.

Same thing with GW2’s dynamic events. They’re impressive the first time, but then you get used to it and you know that Event X spawns at Y location under Z conditions.

It’s really ruined Orr for me. I avoid the place like the plague and do my T5/6 material farming in Frostgorge Sound whenever feasible because of the disgusting, permanent throng of people (and bots) perpetually farming the Penitent/Sheltered/Jofast corridor events in Cursed Shore.

WasAGuest.4973:

IMO; the most dynamic system I’ve seen in play was in Tabula Rasa. AI would attack player outposts in attempts to take and control them. Players would take to the walls, the gates, etc to defend these places. If players failed, the AI would boot the players out of the area.
Players would lose access to rez points, merchants, and even mission hubs. AI population in the surrounding area would also increase till the outpost would be re-taken (although that seemed to not always be the case in all zones).
These outposts would remain in AI control until players united to eject the AI.

It was a bit like WvW; but a lot more interesting. How so? Imagine Orr and the outposts there. Now throw the Giants and wave after wave of AI veterans and champions at the players. So, it wasn’t just “balanced” players attacking and retreating; it was AI relentlessly attacking with the biggest and baddest the area could throw at the players.

This resulted in a much more dynamic ebb and flow to the zones. We never knew when the AI would attack as it was completely random. There were times we would take an outpost and within five minutes the AI would try to take it back. There were times the AI would attack, fail and then attack again instantly.

This simple ebb and flow gave the world just enough to make it feel like players were making a real difference. And in all honesty; When I first heard about Orr, I assumed something like this would be in play.

that sounds very interesting, why did the game fail though – no, seriously, I do not want to argue against you, I am just curious. Was it the weird rpg/fps hybridization or something within the system you described?

Treason.8417:

Dynamic Events are awesome, and they really do make the world feel alive… but that’s short lived.

If I were to return to a zone that I have 100% completed there is a likely chance that I will stumble upon at least one DE that I haven’t before. But if I go to Snowden Drifts the minotaurs will stampede and there will be DE’s to fight off the grawl, the svanir, the dredge. And I’ve done them all before. The illusion is shattered (pun intended) and you see just how static everything is. Is it as bad as WoW’s rigid quest structure? No, but it’s not all that better either.

I was running around Fields of Ruin and there was a champion branded devourer just standing there. I asked in map chat if anyone was interested, but the zone was pretty empty. So that devourer just stood there for who knows how long as I ran around and did heart quests instead.

1-80 your first time is great (even your second if you do different maps) But if you return to a previous zone be prepared for repetition. Now I know Anet said they will add DE’s to zones over time but I just don’t know if there can do it quick enough.

We have dynamic events, but can we have a dynamic world as well?

What you’re asking for is PERMANENCE. That is so difficult to do in any game and any genre, that involves multiplayer.

You want permanent changes to the world. You want permanent destruction or permanent raids on villages, etc.. Sorry, but you’ll be waiting forever for any company to implement this.

This game, along with RIFT, are far more dynamic than most other games out there that I am aware of.

The problem lies in repeating the content because of course then it becomes less dynamic as it is repeated.

Therefore the problem is user error, not development. If you decide to play alts or repeat content multiple times than you the player are taking away from the dynamic world the game offered your first time through.

@Algreg – Tabula Rasa had a lot of technical issues and some weird management choices. Richard Garriott (the owner), for example, took a Space Flight shortly after release.

However, since a lot of what happened is still unfolding in court (Richard Garriott even won a second suit vs NCSoft last year); much of the details are still unknown.

yes, I know good ol British was involved – makes you wonder, if even the allmighty Lord couldn´t do it, maybe its just not doable ?

Personally I’d say that Rift had a pretty good setup. For those who haven’t played Rift, every couple of months they would have mini-events and mega-events that spanned the entire landmass. These were not dynamic, they just used the current system that was in place, but basically ramped it up to 11. Players knew about the event weeks in advance, and the events lasted between 1 week and 1 month (roughly).

Making a game world completely ‘dynamic’ and ever-changing is possible but it also leads to a lot of content simply being missed out by new players. The way around this is phasing, but that’s not what GW2 needs.

I say, introduce dev-created events on a massive scale that span all areas of the world using the same mechanic (so as to avoid too many bugs etc) that do in fact change the way maps look/work and then have a major event after a couple of weeks that players can work towards!

I don’t believe you’ve seen more than 20-30% of all the dynamic chains in the game OP.

This is something that’s bothered me from the very beginning. I think even Rift felt more dynamic in a way, because events didn’t happen like clockwork, the way GW2 does. It just gets so predictable.

I think it could be a huge improvement, if they just added 2-3 random variables to every event. Just mix it up in different ways, so that players would never know exactly what was coming.

actually, Vzur, I think you are on to something, one big problem of the game (and many mmorpg in general) is a lack of randomness. GW2 wants to roll the scene with freshness, then why stick with fixed encounters and placements even outside of events? When you kill a monster, a short time later the exact monster spawns at its location. There is no reason why there shouldn´t be something like an old school “encounter roll”. Type x monster lives in type y habitat and can spawn there. And do not stop with the enemies, have resources spawn randomly after every server reset, not just orichalcum ore. Yes, that would lead to individual “unfair” situations probably, but would also really spice things up.

I haven’t read all the posts, but here are my 2cents: when the map is overtaken by the mobs like the dredge, then a strong unique boss/monster appears in the central fortress and a massive call to arms is sent to all players in the bordering maps, who then have to start an invasion of sort to liberate the affected map, and finally kill the boss/monster. Of course the loot from the boss/monster/dragon should be the carrot to attract even the most spoiled/bored players. The retake should present a significant challenge: mobs, several veterans and some champions should perform on the highest level of AI, including advanced tactics like range nests, traps, sneaky magic and so on. Imagine invasion on Normandy, set in the fantasy world.

“I don’t believe you’ve seen more than 20-30% of all the dynamic chains in the game OP.”

I don’t think many of us have seen more than 50% of the possible outcomes simply because the events are nearly always in a “player win” state.

I had suggested some time ago a progressive DE system that constantly increases difficulty each time the event resets. With each player win, the next time the event chain begins, it spawns slighter stronger enemies. Some of the normal spawns become vets; then later those vets become champions. This would continue until the event forced a player loss.

A player passing through randomly might one time see a simple encounter; yet the next time there may be pair of champions. Another time they might encounter the “loss state” where the AI has beaten back the players.
Players “camping” the spot will eventually get forced out by the constantly increasing difficulty. They will have to recruit more players to help them hold and or re-take the area at some point.

Anyway, the suggestion never picked up much support so I dropped it. But I do feel that few of us have seen more than 50% of the potential content because it’s stuck in a “Win” state. I think I’ve seen only 4 or 5 events ever really fail; and all of those I’m pretty sure had timers on them – and people running to them (in attempts to not have to pay the WP cost) just don’t make it there in time.

I think it could be a huge improvement, if they just added 2-3 random variables to every event. Just mix it up in different ways, so that players would never know exactly what was coming.

I’m sort of hoping that’s what the Live Team is going to focus on for the short-term. While I wouldn’t turn down more Dynamic Events, I think it’d be much better served to make the existing ones more dynamic. There was all this talk prior to release about going through the same zone multiple times and seeing different things every time you go there. I won’t deny that that isn’t necessarily the case, but it is definitely something that could be expanded upon.

I want to be able to do events and not know the outcome beforehand.

rook.4625:

Pretty sure that’s asking way too much for any game developer until perhaps the year 2020.

Then perhaps Anet should not have promised it.

they didn´t, the event system in game is pretty much what you had to expect when read about GW2 before launch.

I personally think they need some of that phasing tech from WOW. Have some event have some long standing semi-permanent effect on a zone (2 hours?) and make it possible to only obtain or obtain something quicker by doing this larger event. Possibly sought after crafting mats, skins, high karma events.

The dragon events are kind of like this but frankittenhose are pretty boring and have no effect on the zone as a whole whatsoever.

i dunno if they could do it or not. maybe when things slow down a bit for them, but it would be cool if they had like a new dynamic event of the week when they add patches would be cool. add new ones and remove old ones that dont get done much. have some new ones that offer special stuff only for that event then remove it after so long. also id like to have more heart quests in the game.

Stevoli.8795:

“Devs” should be more like a Dungeon/Game Master. They should be “in the game” “controlling” things.

Every MMO I’ve been in that has tried that has failed miserably at it. It always ends up being an event that everyone shows up to, causing massive lag, and a complete zerg fest, while the GM spawns waves of mobs.

Then you have people who missed the event, basically crying on the forums because they didn’t know about the event 1 week in advance.

I think the way dynamic events work now is pretty good, they’re just a bit too predictable. If they alternated which dynamic events were active in maps every few days, it would make it feel like things are changing.

doesn’t mean it cannot be done. THOSE MMOs did it wrong.

and if they had more of these events, then maybe it would be such a “ZOMG!!!!1 ZERG-ZE-EVENT!!!!1”

and… this:

instance

The world is neither static nor dynamic.

It is cyclic.

The thing is the DE’s arent supposed to be dynamic in that they change all the time, its that they change based on what is going on around them. The truth is, we the players are doing the same thing every day and so are the mobs, thus the events are always the same and the mobs never get to take a foothold back. The fight in this game isnt about fun or glory, its about subsistence. You are fighting for every inch of land in Orr so you can set up camp in Arah, you’re a soldier fighting the drudgery that is waves and waves of undead in order to kill an Ancient dragon. Most of the events are simply the constant attacks of the undead to take back what the Pact has established.

I think what you are asking for is flat out ‘live’ events, which is something they are working on. Live events can be awesome, it takes a great team in place to make them great though. I dont want an instanced live event…seems a bit silly to me, instances are preprogrammed too..so dunno if you could even have them live.