Guild Wars 2

Since nobody posted a link to the official announcement, I will.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Legendary-weapons-6/first#post6061605

Mike O Brien.4613:

Hi all,

In the upcoming Spring 2016 Quarterly Update, we’ll launch the new legendary short bow, Chuka and Champawat. The team outdid themselves on this one. This new precursor journey takes you through a memorable experience inspired by a real-world story, and the bow you craft at the end is the perfect commemoration of that journey. I hope you all check it out.

Last year we talked about plans to gradually build out a second set of legendary weapons through live content updates. That’s a big responsibility. We have a team of six developers working on that, who could work on it for years to come.

As game director I have to make tough trade-offs. One thing I believe is that we have to focus on the core game first before taking on additional responsibilities. I wrote in the Guild Wars 2 Design Manifesto in 2010 that our vision was to create a living, dynamic world, where there’s always something to do. Let’s ensure we succeed on that front.

So, after shipping Chuka and Champawat, I’ve asked that we indefinitely suspend work on new legendary weapons. This team of developers will instead shift their efforts back to Living World style content, building new journeys and events for everyone to participate in.

I know this will be a controversial decision. I’ll hang out with you here on the forums for a little while today to discuss it. And I’m always available by email.

Mo

Artanis.4963:

BrotherBelial.3094:

They are on hold untill some time in the future.

Not on hold. Indefinitely suspended.

That’s what I said, we are saying the same thing……

BrotherBelial.3094:

Artanis.4963:

BrotherBelial.3094:

They are on hold untill some time in the future.

Not on hold. Indefinitely suspended.

That’s what I said, we are saying the same thing……

One of you (almost) quoted Mike O’Brien; one of you didn’t. Both phrases mean the same in English, but O’Brien chose one over the other — that might mean something or it might not. (My feeling: probably not — his rhetoric often leads to more confusion instead of less.)

Regardless, the point is moot: all we know is that no one is working on legendaries; everything else is speculation.

> I wrote in the Guild Wars 2 Design Manifesto in 2010 that our vision was to create a living, dynamic world, where there’s always something to do. Let’s ensure we succeed on that front.

Personal stories or self-content(single player) is ANTI MMO, don’t do that please, and stop with raid, it is just co-op not MMO

Focus on the core game, wich is a MMO, not a single player game, don’t forget this please

The game is looking more and more like a single player/co-op advanture wich is sad..

And WTF 13 legendary in one year ? just one per weapon type? c’mon even pure F2P do better than this

Just look at WoW, they are superior in term of content, this is disapointing, stat isn’t a thing in the game, so please triple the ammount of legendary you’ll release, or there is no point in waiting 1 year

GW2 has potential, but you focus on single player stuff..

Elric Of Melnibone.4781:

Sartharina.3542:

Elric Of Melnibone.4781:

I personally will be upset if they start hyping another expansion before they start putting out new Legendary weapons and I bet a lot of others feel the same way.

You can be as upset as you want, but that’s the way it’s going to be.

You don’t know that. Losing customers over this is a very real possibility.

I know this … they aren’t developing Legendary weapons … they are thinking about the next expansion though and delivering on LS, like the Spring announcement said they would. They might lose a few people because of Legendary weapons .. but not more than they would lose not having another expansion or LS, hence their decision. I mean, they told us the lowdown. Being in denial is not healthy. Don’t convince yourself of something that isn’t going to happen.

Never understood how they couldnt do the legendary weapons. They spam the Gem shop with skins over skins, armors and weapons. Doesn`t that take really much time to design whole armor sets and weapons? Why cant you then design a collection and a weapon vs like 20 skins in the gemshop? Just my opinion though.

It’s not the skins IIRC … it’s all the activities linked to crafting and that part.

yes so they are wasting time for single player features, THIS IS A MMO, not a single player game

People forgot this

Scellow.1596:

yes so they are wasting time for single player features, THIS IS A MMO, not a single player game

People forgot this

That’s not a good argument against it. All MMO have things for single play, that is stuff you do without other people being able to help you progress. The hearts
are single play. The personal story is designed to be done by single players. Adventures are single play. A lot of MMOs have quests that are single play. So saying Legendaries shouldn’t be made for that reason ignores all the single play they have made and will make.

Scellow.1596:

yes so they are wasting time for single player features, THIS IS A MMO, not a single player game

People forgot this

Ok I really need to ask this: in what universe is developing current events in core tyria and hot zones also, part of a single-player experience? Have you managed to solo bandits? Have you soloed bloodstone crazed foes? Have you soloed the leyline events?

Scellow.1596:

yes so they are wasting time for single player features, THIS IS A MMO, not a single player game

People forgot this

The term MMO does not imply everyone must play in a group all the time. It simply means there are a large amount of players in the same game world.

I still don’t understand why this was so difficult that it had to be shelved. Certainly they planned this before they started working on it and the collections are just script templates with a checklist of what items are needed to complete it? It should just involve making a skin, assigning stats and putting the item IDs required for the weapon on the list.

Scellow.1596:

Personal stories or self-content(single player) is ANTI MMO, don’t do that please, and stop with raid, it is just co-op not MMO

Focus on the core game, wich is a MMO, not a single player game, don’t forget this please

Ok so the personal story which is part of the core game is Schrödinger’s MMO? If raids are co-op, then so are fractals and dungeons as most people do these in groups (albeit half the size of raid squads). Which are core game. You also mention WoW in a positive light which has more raids than we do. Is your definition of ‘core game’ just running around Central Tyria and doing World Bosses/Orr metas/SW? I honestly don’t understand what it is you’re saying the game should be.

Also, Legendary collections require you to do various fractals, most people class those as group content. Doing WvW for a Gift of Battle involves playing with other people, even if you’re solo roaming.

Building precursors takes quite a while for a handful of devs. I mean, don’t you see what goes into them??

Scellow.1596:

yes so they are wasting time for single player features, THIS IS A MMO, not a single player game

People forgot this

Actually, I think the real issue isn’t that there is single player features … I mean, in other MMO’s, no one crafts your gear for you, or camps a spawn for that rare drop you want … those are single player features too. MMO’s are full of them. They wouldn’t function if they didn’t.

The real issue is if there was a focus on delivering content that had a poor return on Anet’s investment to develop. Clearly Anet felt Legendaries fell into that category. It was little do to with single player features.

Obtena.7952:

Scellow.1596:

yes so they are wasting time for single player features, THIS IS A MMO, not a single player game

People forgot this

Actually, I think the real issue isn’t that there is single player features … I mean, in other MMO’s, no one crafts your gear for you, or camps a spawn for that rare drop you want … those are single player features too. MMO’s are full of them. They wouldn’t function if they didn’t.

The real issue is if there was a focus on delivering content that had a poor return on Anet’s investment to develop. Clearly Anet felt Legendaries fell into that category. It was little do to with single player features.

That may have been the reason they did this, but still they had no right to short change customers on advertised content. Look at Volkswagen for instance, they delivered great cars people love them and they still do but they advertised certain emission numbers that were fictitious and even though these cars were otherwise great they still were forced to buy back or make cash offers to every person that bought one of those models that they failed to or couldn’t deliver on advertised features. I cant see how this is any different.

I believe the community is actually reaping what we sowed:

• We asked for demanded scavenger hunts.
• Arenanet constantly tell us that it’s easier to make a weapon than it is a suit of armour.
• The problem with the amount of time invested in making legendary weapons MUST therefore be because of the time required to make the scavenger hunt we demanded (and not the weapon model).

cosmicegg.8502:

That may have been the reason they did this, but still they had no right to short change customers on advertised content. Look at Volkswagen for instance, they delivered great cars people love them and they still do but they advertised certain emission numbers that were fictitious and even though these cars were otherwise great they still were forced to buy back or make cash offers to every person that bought one of those models that they failed to or couldn’t deliver on advertised features. I cant see how this is any different.

So start a class-action lawsuit. I’m sure there’s a lawyer out there somewhere who could use a good laugh.

cosmicegg.8502:

Obtena.7952:

Scellow.1596:

yes so they are wasting time for single player features, THIS IS A MMO, not a single player game

People forgot this

Actually, I think the real issue isn’t that there is single player features … I mean, in other MMO’s, no one crafts your gear for you, or camps a spawn for that rare drop you want … those are single player features too. MMO’s are full of them. They wouldn’t function if they didn’t.

The real issue is if there was a focus on delivering content that had a poor return on Anet’s investment to develop. Clearly Anet felt Legendaries fell into that category. It was little do to with single player features.

That may have been the reason they did this, but still they had no right to short change customers on advertised content. Look at Volkswagen for instance, they delivered great cars people love them and they still do but they advertised certain emission numbers that were fictitious and even though these cars were otherwise great they still were forced to buy back or make cash offers to every person that bought one of those models that they failed to or couldn’t deliver on advertised features. I cant see how this is any different.

Not like this hasn’t been covered yet but when you pay, you don’t buy content, you buy access. You can’t see how this is any different because you don’t understand what you paid for.

Not like this hasn’t been covered yet but when you pay, you don’t buy content, you buy access. You can’t see how this is any different because you don’t understand what you paid for. [/quote]

i would agree with you if this were a subscription based game, which it is not. an expansion like any other good you find in a store needs to be as described. you wouldn’t buy a bike with only half the gears and one wheel.

this is the first time posting on this topic. while i bought the expansion half for the precursor collections alone, they know our discontent and complaining about it further wont change anything. hopefully they’ll get back to them in a few months when the living story 3 ends.

Khailyn.6248:

Not like this hasn’t been covered yet but when you pay, you don’t buy content, you buy access. You can’t see how this is any different because you don’t understand what you paid for.

i would agree with you if this were a subscription based game, which it is not. an expansion like any other good you find in a store needs to be as described. you wouldn’t buy a bike with only half the gears and one wheel.

this is the first time posting on this topic. while i bought the expansion half for the precursor collections alone, they know our discontent and complaining about it further wont change anything. hopefully they’ll get back to them in a few months when the living story 3 ends.

Either you are hoping for a very short Living World Season 3, or the time that will pass before work on Legendaries starts again, would be about 14 – 16 months from now.

why would anyone buy the next expansion pack when anet blatantly lied about the first expansion’s content ?

“if you give us 60 bucks you’ll get a full set of new legendaries”

we give them 60 bucks

“actually we’ll only give you 4 new legendaries, mostly ones you’d never use”

… well then, give us some of our money back

“no. We’ve got your money, and we’re going to keep it. P.s. pls buy the next expansion pack.”

no.

interloper.6892:

why would anyone buy the next expansion pack when anet blatantly lied about the first expansion’s content ?

“if you give us 60 bucks you’ll get a full set of new legendaries”

---

we give them 60 bucks

“actually we’ll only give you 4 new legendaries, mostly ones you’d never use”

… well then, give us some of our money back

“no. We’ve got your money, and we’re going to keep it. P.s. pls buy the next expansion pack.”

---

no.

I won’t say I’m not going to buy the next xpak but I sure as hell won’t pre-order it… Anet has lost my trust… I’ll be watching MANY reviews on it to make sure it isn’t as wide as ocean and as deep as puddle like HoT…

MO can get as offended as he likes when people call HoT half baked, it doesn’t change the fact that HoT was half baked…

Khailyn.6248:

i would agree with you if this were a subscription based game, which it is not.

This is not a point of argument … it’s simply true. Read the EULA. You pay for access. You don’t actually own your account or anything on it.

dw looks like legendary mace is on its way

JustTrogdor.7892:

I’d be willing to bet many of them never crafted a legendary and have no plans to do so in the future.

(that’s why they were cancelled)

Healix.5819:

JustTrogdor.7892:

I’d be willing to bet many of them never crafted a legendary and have no plans to do so in the future.

(that’s why they were cancelled)

Nice cherry picking from my post.

Kamikazi.5380:

dw looks like legendary mace is on its way

Where did you find this?

Curunen.8729:

Kamikazi.5380:

dw looks like legendary mace is on its way

Where did you find this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/539buk/upcomming_stuff/

Healix.5819:

Curunen.8729:

Kamikazi.5380:

dw looks like legendary mace is on its way

Where did you find this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/539buk/upcomming_stuff/

Hmm, I’m open to this.

A shame it is the mace though – I won’t be able to use it as a mesmer.

Actually I forgot. My Augury of Death is bolt skinned with Augury of Death.

Kamikazi.5380:

dw looks like legendary mace is on its way

Wasn’t there a new weapon set coming with the new map? If there is that might be one of them.

Obtena.7952:

Khailyn.6248:

i would agree with you if this were a subscription based game, which it is not.

This is not a point of argument … it’s simply true. Read the EULA. You pay for access. You don’t actually own your account or anything on it.

EULA is not the law. In fact, it has been proved many times already that a lot of points that businesses like to use in EULA (especially the one you bring up) do not actually relieve developers from their responsibilities to their customers nor can they vaive (or step around) any customer rights.

It doesn’t stop those points from being used in EULAs, of course, because a lot of people actually believe they do matter.

That’s nice … the fact remains that you pay for access. You don’t own your account. So when people complain they didn’t get content they paid for, they don’t understand what they are actually talking about. No matter … I’m sure customers are so aggrieved by this, they will pursue it choosing any one of the lineup of lawyers willing to take this on … :/

Obtena.7952:

That’s nice … the fact remains that you pay for access. You don’t own your account. So when people complain they didn’t get content they paid for, they don’t understand what they are actually talking about.

Nope. At least in EU, paying for access and “we keep a right to delete your account for no reason whatsoever” parts of EULA still won’t protect you under consumer rights from not delivering on sale promise. Because EULA cannot vaive consumer rights guaranteed by law (and those points are trying to do exactly that).

It doesn’t mean, of course, that customers are going to take that to the court. Obviously, in most cases, they won’t. It doesn’t make your argument any more true, however.

But, it makes no difference. EU players won’t get Legendaries any more quickly than NA players; at best they might get a refund and lose access.

That discussion has already been dismissed and buried. Anet could easily argue they DID deliver on their ‘sales promise’ because what they ‘promised’ didn’t specify how many Legendaries they would create. No one can sensibly argue against that.

There really isn’t any wrong with the argument I’m making … EVERY time I see someone QQ about not getting content they were ‘promised’ that they paid for, it’s cringe-worthy because no matter how you want to twist it, they don’t pay for content, they pay for access to it. I don’t own a share in the amusement park every time I pay to go there … I pay for access to the rides. Same thing. The EULA just defines the rules of use for Anet’s property, for the benefit of the player and them. Anyways, people can’t actually say they didn’t get what they paid for in the first place, even if they DID pay for specific content. See first paragraph.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

But, it makes no difference. EU players won’t get Legendaries any more quickly than NA players; at best they might get a refund and lose access.

That’s true. By now, i guess any chance of Anet doing legendaries any time soon is basically void. And them trying to sell legendaries as a part of new expac would also be really stupid – not only noone would believe them, but they’d end up with bad press instead of desired pre-expac hype.

I’m still going to keep calling them out on undelivered promises. Even if i know there’s no chance of them fulfilling them. New players have a right to know that things like that may happen again.

Obtena.7952:

I don’t own a share in the amusement park every time I pay to go there … I pay for access to the rides. Same thing.

If you happen to pay for a ride, and then amusement park staff tell you that sorry, that ride got cancelled, they’d better return you the money for the ticket. Same thing.

Obtena.7952:

Anet could easily argue they DID deliver on their ‘sales promise’ because what they ‘promised’ didn’t specify how many Legendaries they would create. No one can sensibly argue against that.

Going to leave this here for all interpretation.

“It takes a lot of work to craft these legendary journeys for release, so rather than take the time to develop the full set before releasing any of them, we will be releasing new legendary weapons in small groups at regular intervals until the full set of sixteen has been added to the game. "

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/hot-new-legendary-weapons/

Obtena.7952:

Anet could easily argue they DID deliver on their ‘sales promise’ because what they ‘promised’ didn’t specify how many Legendaries they would create. No one can sensibly argue against that.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Obtena.7952:

Anet could easily argue they DID deliver on their ‘sales promise’ because what they ‘promised’ didn’t specify how many Legendaries they would create. No one can sensibly argue against that.

Always good to see the update in print.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

Always good to see the update in print.

Yeah the update they made 5 months after HoT went live. That certainly was a nice update for people that already bought HoT 5 months prior and even longer for those that pre-purchased.

Astralporing.1957:

Obtena.7952:

I don’t own a share in the amusement park every time I pay to go there … I pay for access to the rides. Same thing.

If you happen to pay for a ride, and then amusement park staff tell you that sorry, that ride got cancelled, they’d better return you the money for the ticket. Same thing.

That comparison is not relevant in this situation … you do NOT pay for access every time you log in to the game like you do the park.

Obtena.7952:

Astralporing.1957:

Obtena.7952:

I don’t own a share in the amusement park every time I pay to go there … I pay for access to the rides. Same thing.

If you happen to pay for a ride, and then amusement park staff tell you that sorry, that ride got cancelled, they’d better return you the money for the ticket. Same thing.

That comparison is not relevant in this situation … you do NOT pay for access every time you log in to the game like you do the park.

One need not necessarily pay for access every time they go to a given amusement park.

Even so, how often one pays for access to something advertised as included in the price of admission is irrelevant. Advertising, “pay $X and receive access to Y,” and then, after collecting the money, stating, “we have chosen to not provide access to Y,” is questionable at best.

I am very curious, if your broadband provider told you, after you had paid for a given month, perhaps even signed a two year contract, that they have chosen to not provide access to the internet, as advertised as part of the package you chose, would you defend their decision?

I don’t know how the legalities of contracts work in other countries, but in the United States, TOS contracts cannot negate customer rights. (and must provide exactly what they say or be subject to reasonable compensation.)

Obtena.7952:

Astralporing.1957:

Obtena.7952:

I don’t own a share in the amusement park every time I pay to go there … I pay for access to the rides. Same thing.

If you happen to pay for a ride, and then amusement park staff tell you that sorry, that ride got cancelled, they’d better return you the money for the ticket. Same thing.

That comparison is not relevant in this situation … you do NOT pay for access every time you log in to the game like you do the park.

your right… instead you bought a lifetime pass and then were told the rides you bought the pass to ride for, are no longer being used… totally not relevant….

JaddynnStarr.5201:

your right… instead you bought a lifetime pass and then were told the rides you bought the pass to ride for, are no longer being used… totally not relevant….

Well, to be fair, it wouldn’t be relevant, because the lifetime pass just gets you in to the park (so lets you log in to the game) with no guarantees that every ride will always be available. Over time, some rides will be replaced/removed (content subject to change) but you still have your lifetime access to the park.

Making legendaries may be the only reason some people bought HoT (I don’t doubt it). But, if you buy lifetime access to a theme park, and they close your favorite restaurant or ride at the park months later, they aren’t likely to say “here’s your money back” and then compensate you further for the change.

Going strictly by the letter of that notice, it would not count as false advertising. “Regular intervals” could mean, for all we know, once every year.

Sarrs.4831:

Going strictly by the letter of that notice, it would not count as false advertising. “Regular intervals” could mean, for all we know, once every year.

Very much so. I’m quite neutral about the whole ‘indefinite suspension’ of Legendary development, but rightly so in black and white, there was the promise of a set of 16 new weapons.

I can absolutely imagine the outrage if the next expansion came before the rest of the set, because it was advertised as ‘this is what you will get when purchasing Heart of Thorns’ not ‘This is what you will get, spread out in X paid expansions.’

Sarrs.4831:

Going strictly by the letter of that notice, it would not count as false advertising. “Regular intervals” could mean, for all we know, once every year.

I knew there was someone around here that saw this clever usage.

Yes, there is no timeline associated with the ‘sales promise’ or whatever our clever dissenters want to call it. In addition to the clever language Anet choose to describe the postponement, I would say anyone trying to challenge this legally would have quite the fight on their hands. I mean, you would think Anet consults their own lawyers or something … amazing.

Ubi.4136:

JaddynnStarr.5201:

your right… instead you bought a lifetime pass and then were told the rides you bought the pass to ride for, are no longer being used… totally not relevant….

Well, to be fair, it wouldn’t be relevant, because the lifetime pass just gets you in to the park (so lets you log in to the game) with no guarantees that every ride will always be available. Over time, some rides will be replaced/removed (content subject to change) but you still have your lifetime access to the park.

Making legendaries may be the only reason some people bought HoT (I don’t doubt it). But, if you buy lifetime access to a theme park, and they close your favorite restaurant or ride at the park months later, they aren’t likely to say “here’s your money back” and then compensate you further for the change.

This pretty much nails it. While people argue academics if EULA is relevant or not or where, THIS analogy is exactly how your GW2 payment works.

Obtena.7952:

Sarrs.4831:

Well, to be fair, it wouldn’t be relevant, because the lifetime pass just gets you in to the park (so lets you log in to the game) with no guarantees that every ride will always be available. Over time, some rides will be replaced/removed (content subject to change) but you still have your lifetime access to the park.

Making legendaries may be the only reason some people bought HoT (I don’t doubt it). But, if you buy lifetime access to a theme park, and they close your favorite restaurant or ride at the park months later, they aren’t likely to say “here’s your money back” and then compensate you further for the change.

This pretty much nails it. While people argue academics if EULA is relevant or not or where, THIS analogy is exactly how your GW2 payment works.

What do you mean? When I bought GW1 I paid for the ability to only be able to refund my skill points with refund points and I was outraged when they changed it to only be done for free in outposts. Just like how I was outraged when respec costs were removed in GW2 and made to be free everywhere. I paid for the ability to only respec with the trainers! How dare they remove that beloved feature!

Now back on topic: I’ve always found this cancellation discussion hilarious because it is all about the fat cats wanting to be able to show off how fat their wallets are. Lets face it, there is no skill in getting any legendary in this game (even the armor is dicey since you can buy raid kills but at least there is 150 insights required to make it really expensive that way). Now if legendaries actually required being decent at this game (yes just decent, not even good), I could get behind the whining going on in this thread. But since the TP barons can just buy everything in this game I could care less when something that sets them apart gets cancelled.