Guild Wars 2

Basically, this mode would put a player in their own totally separate instance from other players. It would be just like GW1 where it’s totally instanced around one player. They would still be able to chat to anyone they want to, but they wouldn’t actually see anyone.

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too and easier on the servers since the load would be just on the client now. This would also allow one to actually play the game without being connected to the internet. Accounts would sync as soon as the player goes online so any achievements and items are not lost. If the offline files used to store offline progress are lost, the system will simply revert you back to the state you were last in when you logged out. Also, this would of course, prevent people zerging all the mobs and having to wait for them to respawn back. (Although in fairness, GW2 handes this sort of thing pretty well.) And finally, it’s just kind of nice to explore the world by yourself without distractions from others in a kind of solitary adventurous sort of way a la Elder Scrolls or Myst.

The auction house and gem store though would not be available at all, and obviously, PvP matches of any kind with other players are also right out. Bosses which require more than one person to defeat will have to be scaled back or stripped out altogether. Or they could leave them in just as they are and bring in mercs to play with.

Now, there are two potential problems with this. 1. This MAY allow an exploit but I really don’t see how, the exploit being that if one could reverse engineer the code enough, they could go offline, alter the game file to give themselves whatever they want and then just log back in to sync. But the thing is, if they can already reverse engineer the code, there’s nothing stopping them from doing it online too so it’s kind of a moot point.

2. This will probably lead to lesser amounts of online players in the PvE world. But my thinking here is this. Does it really matter that much? It seems like most people don’t ever interact in PvE anyway. It’s been my experience that in any given area, about 90% of them don’t want to talk and interact and/or simply aren’t paying attention. So we’re probably not gonna see that much of a difference. Or it actually may ENCOURAGE more interaction now as, if the players are given a choice to be offline and undisturbed, the players that you do see online obviously will want to interact.

Ultimately, I think the pros far outweigh the cons. What do you guys think?

Massive MULTIPLAYER Online Role Playing Game

Triggerbrand.8072:

Massive MULTIPLAYER Online Role Playing Game

And so is the first GW, but 95% of the PvE is instanced. And in any case, this doesn’t tell me why it would be a bad idea.

I think Guild Wars was a CORPG, rather than an MMORPG.

I also think it might require more resources than one might suspect.

Good luck.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I also think it might require more resources than one might suspect.

Hm. How so? The entire GW2 world and system file is already downloaded on everyone’s computer, taking up a nice 30 GBs.

Ahah… wait serious? And how dungeon,raid,fractals,bank,market,guild,world boss event,maps,pvp,wvw,gem store,craft,store,reward,exp from enemies,enemies,animals,npc,events work? Or you really think all of this is compressed in yours 30GB gw2 download??

It is nowhere near as simple as you believe it to be. Just because you download files on your computer does not mean that you have ALL the files related to GW2. The whole game is designed from the ground up to be online only, meaning that it would be essentially an impossible task to restructure the whole thing to allow for an offline mode. This argument would have made much more sense for the original Guild Wars but again, it was designed from the ground up as an always online game. There are too many reasons why this won’t work, the balance in engaging enemies, dungeons, raids, dynamic events, the structure of the entire system, how enemy AI is server side not client side, how GW2 creates maps for players to play on server side etc.etc.etc.

If they were to redesign GW2 to allow for an offline experience, they may as well have put all that effort into creating an entire expansion based off of the programming alone. It would be much easier to create a Guild Wars single player offline RPG than it would be to create an offline mode for GW2.

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too and easier on the servers since the load would be just on the client now. This would also allow one to actually play the game without being connected to the internet.

You have a powerful imagination. In order to play the game, you’d have to have a copy of the server data on your computer, keeping track of all the moving artwork, all the NPCs, all the collision data, and then some.

Even if none of that were true, the game was designed as an MMO, not a single-player game. It would take huge amounts of time to restructure the software to make this possible.

And that’s before dealing with potential abuses — what’s to stop someone from manipulating data while in offline mode, before reconnecting.

And finally, it’s not clear to me how this would be good for the game. It’s meant to be massively multi-player, not occasionally.

What would ANet’s motivation be for expending the resources to make this happen? Remember they wanted to move away from the Co-Op RPG nature of GW and make a true MMO.

Acnologia.6934:

Ahah… wait serious? And how dungeon,raid,fractals,bank,market,guild,world boss event,maps,pvp,wvw,gem store,craft,store,reward,exp from enemies,enemies,animals,npc,events work? Or you really think all of this is compressed in yours 30GB gw2 download??

most of that stuff happen automatically on timers so as long as the game runs on a timer stuff like that would be possible to happen but then again a great deal of the game is ment to be played with others around but he might mean just the exploration aspect which isnt so hard to prob make into a offline experience

They would still be able to chat to anyone they want to

wait… what? there is nothing anywhere that lets you chat with people like that without using some kind of connection somewhere.

no, too much possibility for hacking

Arnox.5128:

They would still be able to chat to anyone they want to
[…]
This would also allow one to actually play the game without being connected to the internet.

Wat ?!
:D

Now, there are two potential problems with this. 1. This MAY allow an exploit but I really don’t see how, the exploit being that if one could reverse engineer the code enough, they could go offline, alter the game file to give themselves whatever they want and then just log back in to sync. But the thing is, if they can already reverse engineer the code, there’s nothing stopping them from doing it online too so it’s kind of a moot point.

No
people wouldn’t be able to do that online because for example the Character Data isnt stored on their computer so they cannot alter it since it isnt available to them

(Look at Diablo 2 for example – single player & open battlenet is full of hacked characters but closed battlenet doesnt have that stuff
… as you see just because you have the knowledge to do it offline doesnt help you at all with hacking anything of the server stored online data)

Oh yeah it would be totally simple. No problem at all moving all that authorization stuff client side, won’t be any problems with duping or exploits. Let’s just make this game totally single player, why even bother with chat at all? Clearly the OP is among a growing majority of players who don’t want contact with others, even in a game that was billed as an MMO which they knowingly signed up to. Afterall, it’s easier to force one’s ideas unto others to make oneself comfortable than to change themselves.

nosleepdemon.1368:

Oh yeah it would be totally simple. No problem at all moving all that authorization stuff client side, won’t be any problems with duping or exploits. Let’s just make this game totally single player, why even bother with chat at all? Clearly the OP is among a growing majority of players who don’t want contact with others, even in a game that was billed as an MMO which they knowingly signed up to. Afterall, it’s easier to force one’s ideas unto others to make oneself comfortable than to change themselves.

To be fair, if there are enough people who want to play this as a single player game and already do so, then changing the game to fit that large population isn’t really unreasonable. Not that what the OP is asking for is ever going to happen, but you can’t really fault players for coming here to play how they want…especially because before this game launched, in the FAQ, they even had a question addressing people who wanted to solo. They did say you can reach max level without having to group.

Of course they also said we believe that in an MMO there needs to be challenges where the community needs to come together.

But saying someone shouldn’t play an MMO as a solo game when so many obviously do, isn’t really going to get much traction. It’s just too prevalent for anyone to change that.

It does, in a way. Log on, and open your contact list in-game, then click the online status dropdown box next to your name and set yourself to Invisible.

Then go play the game as you normally would. Players will not be able to whisper or chat with you and you won’t see guild messages appear in guild chat. Don’t party up with anyone and ignore any other players you may encounter. There you go; single player GW2.

Seriously though, why redesign the game from the ground up when you can already play the vast majority of the game alone? If it’s strictly due to a lack of a solid internet connection in your area, then I apologize—I know that struggle all too well, as I’m sure many of us do. If so, then you have my sympathies, friend.

You know, I was gonna answer everyone’s concerns and points but there’s so much salt, sarcasm, and “LOL OP is dum” responses in here that I lost all ability to care. Nevermind.

drunkenpilot.9837:

It does, in a way. Log on, and open your contact list in-game, then click the online status dropdown box next to your name and set yourself to Invisible.

Then go play the game as you normally would. Players will not be able to whisper or chat with you and you won’t see guild messages appear in guild chat. Don’t party up with anyone and ignore any other players you may encounter. There you go; single player GW2.

Seriously though, why redesign the game from the ground up when you can already play the vast majority of the game alone? If it’s strictly due to a lack of a solid internet connection in your area, then I apologize—I know that struggle all too well, as I’m sure many of us do. If so, then you have my sympathies, friend.

This is indeed one way of doing things but it unfortunately still doesn’t answer some problems that a full offline mode would. While I do have a decent enough internet connection to play online, other people do not as you have mentioned, so that is also a problem.

-

I apologize to everyone who replied like an actual adult.

Uh … maybe go take a look at http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1024442/-Guild-Wars-Microservices-and first

Vayne.8563:

nosleepdemon.1368:

Oh yeah it would be totally simple. No problem at all moving all that authorization stuff client side, won’t be any problems with duping or exploits. Let’s just make this game totally single player, why even bother with chat at all? Clearly the OP is among a growing majority of players who don’t want contact with others, even in a game that was billed as an MMO which they knowingly signed up to. Afterall, it’s easier to force one’s ideas unto others to make oneself comfortable than to change themselves.

To be fair, if there are enough people who want to play this as a single player game and already do so, then changing the game to fit that large population isn’t really unreasonable. Not that what the OP is asking for is ever going to happen, but you can’t really fault players for coming here to play how they want…especially because before this game launched, in the FAQ, they even had a question addressing people who wanted to solo. They did say you can reach max level without having to group.

Of course they also said we believe that in an MMO there needs to be challenges where the community needs to come together.

But saying someone shouldn’t play an MMO as a solo game when so many obviously do, isn’t really going to get much traction. It’s just too prevalent for anyone to change that.

ok let me tell you what revelation online has done. The have that option where the game takes away all the players they are no more visible to use not their skill effect no nothing. But they can still walk around and kill stuff and youncant see them (only mob bats going down in the case of them killing a mob). Idk isnt that a good alternative? Its also a system that deals with lag.

Arnox.5128:

You know, I was gonna answer everyone’s concerns and points but there’s so much salt, sarcasm, and “LOL OP is dum” responses in here that I lost all ability to care. Nevermind.

drunkenpilot.9837:

It does, in a way. Log on, and open your contact list in-game, then click the online status dropdown box next to your name and set yourself to Invisible.

Then go play the game as you normally would. Players will not be able to whisper or chat with you and you won’t see guild messages appear in guild chat. Don’t party up with anyone and ignore any other players you may encounter. There you go; single player GW2.

Seriously though, why redesign the game from the ground up when you can already play the vast majority of the game alone? If it’s strictly due to a lack of a solid internet connection in your area, then I apologize—I know that struggle all too well, as I’m sure many of us do. If so, then you have my sympathies, friend.

This is indeed one way of doing things but it unfortunately still doesn’t answer some problems that a full offline mode would. While I do have a decent enough internet connection to play online, other people do not as you have mentioned, so that is also a problem.

-

I apologize to everyone who replied like an actual adult.

No you wouldn’t have. The main reason people reacted the way they did is most were probably amazed at the idea (and lack of understanding what this actually incorporates on your side).

The game is designed from the ground up as a MMO game which essentially means most of the AI is server side, many of the more important mechanics are handled server side as well (say gliding for exmaple until they made it client side with server side checks).

Having an essentially private server setup for people would vastly increase the ability of people to hack and reverse engineer the game, not to mention they would effectively be degrading their own MMO world and reducing server population even further giving sway to even more “is this game dying” arguments.

Simple adult answer to your question: No GW2 should not have an offline mode because the effort to implent is to high, the design of most of the game is for a MMO, the drawbacks far outweigh the benefits.

zealex.9410:

Acnologia.6934:

Ahah… wait serious? And how dungeon,raid,fractals,bank,market,guild,world boss event,maps,pvp,wvw,gem store,craft,store,reward,exp from enemies,enemies,animals,npc,events work? Or you really think all of this is compressed in yours 30GB gw2 download??

most of that stuff happen automatically on timers so as long as the game runs on a timer stuff like that would be possible to happen but then again a great deal of the game is ment to be played with others around but he might mean just the exploration aspect which isnt so hard to prob make into a offline experience

Yeah but how do you think the timer is administrated? You really think all the items and exp you get from killing npcs is databased in your downloaded client? WELL then let me datamine the code so next time i kill a rabbit it drop me 4 dusk and 3 the hunter! And OP sorry if i my previous post was full of sarcasm but….. I couldn’t say “wow what a dumbfest post is this” :P

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Sigh… As a game programmer, this sort of comments make me feel like this

They can’t even develop real content on timely manner, let alone develop an offline mode.

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Okay other programmers: CHUG!!!!!

Arnox.5128:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I also think it might require more resources than one might suspect.

Hm. How so? The entire GW2 world and system file is already downloaded on everyone’s computer, taking up a nice 30 GBs.

You are downloading assets, not what those assets do. What they do is a function of what other people (both NPCs and players) do.

You could create (non-trivially) an instance that looks like some zone, yes. Said instance would be VERY boring though as there would be no mobs, bosses, dynamic events, or even most hearts. Unless your idea of fun is running around gathering POIs I am not sure what the point is of static instances.

nottsgman.8206:

They would still be able to chat to anyone they want to

wait… what? there is nothing anywhere that lets you chat with people like that without using some kind of connection somewhere.

I was wondering about that as well. It pretty much defeats the whole point of not being connected to the internet if you need to connect to the internet.

I think this thread could use some input from a game developer because it seems to be lacking some knowledge in how this stuff works specifically. First of all, online is the only way to prevent cheating. The more aspects of the game that are client-side, the more power cheaters have. That’s why you can hack stuff into say GTA V online, but in League of Legends the best advantage you can have is scripting; as those games have a very different amount of data that’s handled client and server side. There is literally no way to have a true offline mode that prevents cheating. Fundamentally impossible.

That’s why a lot of games that can be played solo have always-online DRM.

On the other hand, all the assets and full game engine of GW2 is hosted client side; so there would likely be very little if any actual more data players would have to download. It may very well be more resource intensive, requiring the players computer to do the processing that’s done server side as well, but, on the other hand, it’s only handling a single player. So it also may not impact performance much at all.

But it’s true, the implementation of this feature could be an extraordinary amount of work depending on how the game is designed. Also, it could significantly increase server load, once again depending on how the game is designed.

In summary, the best you can hope for is a solo option, where you could experience content in your own personal instance, but would still require an internet connection. Something like how modern MMO-ARPGS handle the game, akin to Path of Exile and Diablo 3’s requirement for constant server connection.

Feanor.2358:

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Sigh… As a game programmer, this sort of comments make me feel like this

You get that with all kinds of programming. Every time a user wants some change and says ‘this should be simple, just…’ I just assume their estimated time for writing/testing the feature is off by at least a magnitude and will probably have unanticipated results.

Your assertion that this would be easy is wrong. Even if by some miracle the netcode was for some reason written in a way that it could be switched to 100% client side (which in itself is extremely unlikely and would require it’s own huge effort to get in that state) the game would need to be completely redesigned as well. The gameplay is balanced for persistant multiplayer, not on demnd single player, so encounters, spawn rates, prices, timers, EVERYTHING would need to be reworked.

Also your few potential drawbacks you indicate, those are the main obvious ones that maintain security. Yes it is possible to reverse engineer and cheat, people attempt this all the time, and a monitored online presence can maintain security better than a static code base.

So no, the pros do not outweigh the cons by a long shot. GW2 was so thoroughly designed as a multiplayer game that there are no easy (or good) ways to single-playerify it .

Menadena.7482:

Feanor.2358:

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Sigh… As a game programmer, this sort of comments make me feel like this

You get that with all kinds of programming. Every time a user wants some change and says ‘this should be simple, just…’ I just assume their estimated time for writing/testing the feature is off by at least a magnitude and will probably have unanticipated results.

Yeah. A lot of the time though, you can at least see why something would logically seem easy to a layperson though. In this case unless you are completely baffled by the general capabilities of computers this one should seem obviously hard.

There’s a good reason as to why customers should never set the engineering scope.

Moonyeti.3296:

Menadena.7482:

Feanor.2358:

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Sigh… As a game programmer, this sort of comments make me feel like this

You get that with all kinds of programming. Every time a user wants some change and says ‘this should be simple, just…’ I just assume their estimated time for writing/testing the feature is off by at least a magnitude and will probably have unanticipated results.

Yeah. A lot of the time though, you can at least see why something would logically seem easy to a layperson though. In this case unless you are completely baffled by the general capabilities of computers this one should seem obviously hard.

There’s a good reason as to why customers should never set the engineering scope.

True of all fields. The phrase ‘this should be easy’ should be banned if you do not have experience in the field. Often VERY specialized experience as, oh, the preferred text editors for web programmers may not be the same as the preferred text editors for game programmers.

We are looking at why this could not be done, maybe how to do it if the company said it was their #1 2017 priority? My guess would need almost a complete rewrite of the engine, hopefully utilizing existing graphics/sound resources.

Menadena.7482:

Moonyeti.3296:

Menadena.7482:

Feanor.2358:

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Sigh… As a game programmer, this sort of comments make me feel like this

You get that with all kinds of programming. Every time a user wants some change and says ‘this should be simple, just…’ I just assume their estimated time for writing/testing the feature is off by at least a magnitude and will probably have unanticipated results.

Yeah. A lot of the time though, you can at least see why something would logically seem easy to a layperson though. In this case unless you are completely baffled by the general capabilities of computers this one should seem obviously hard.

There’s a good reason as to why customers should never set the engineering scope.

True of all fields. The phrase ‘this should be easy’ should be banned if you do not have experience in the field. Often VERY specialized experience as, oh, the preferred text editors for web programmers may not be the same as the preferred text editors for game programmers.

We are looking at why this could not be done, maybe how to do it if the company said it was their #1 2017 priority? My guess would need almost a complete rewrite of the engine, hopefully utilizing existing graphics/sound resources.

I would be skeptical that they could pull it off by the end of 2017, it would be a multi year effort most likely. Any one of the many things that would need to be added would take a ton of time. As an example of one, the OP mentioned bringing back the heroes / henchmen idea as an easy way to make up for not having other players. They were in GW1, GW2 game engine is based of GW1 engine, should be easy! Only in GW2 we have full 3d movement, unlike GW1. The maps were designed to be navigated by a party of players, not NPCs. The AI and map work to get henchmen to be able to accompany you in a competent way would be huge. I am picturing taking a henchman party through a jumping puzzle with combat for example.

Moonyeti.3296:

Menadena.7482:

Moonyeti.3296:

Menadena.7482:

Feanor.2358:

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Sigh… As a game programmer, this sort of comments make me feel like this

You get that with all kinds of programming. Every time a user wants some change and says ‘this should be simple, just…’ I just assume their estimated time for writing/testing the feature is off by at least a magnitude and will probably have unanticipated results.

Yeah. A lot of the time though, you can at least see why something would logically seem easy to a layperson though. In this case unless you are completely baffled by the general capabilities of computers this one should seem obviously hard.

There’s a good reason as to why customers should never set the engineering scope.

True of all fields. The phrase ‘this should be easy’ should be banned if you do not have experience in the field. Often VERY specialized experience as, oh, the preferred text editors for web programmers may not be the same as the preferred text editors for game programmers.

We are looking at why this could not be done, maybe how to do it if the company said it was their #1 2017 priority? My guess would need almost a complete rewrite of the engine, hopefully utilizing existing graphics/sound resources.

I would be skeptical that they could pull it off by the end of 2017, it would be a multi year effort most likely. Any one of the many things that would need to be added would take a ton of time. As an example of one, the OP mentioned bringing back the heroes / henchmen idea as an easy way to make up for not having other players. They were in GW1, GW2 game engine is based of GW1 engine, should be easy! Only in GW2 we have full 3d movement, unlike GW1. The maps were designed to be navigated by a party of players, not NPCs. The AI and map work to get henchmen to be able to accompany you in a competent way would be huge. I am picturing taking a henchman party through a jumping puzzle with combat for example.

True, when I said a 2017 priority I meant either a ‘do as much as we can this year’ or ‘start in 2017’ or ‘you now have infinite resources …. go’. I probably should have clarified that it was a hypothetical exercise to think about the opposite way of looking at it.

Using the AI would be work even if that were the only thing. I have lost count of how many times my ranger pets have started attacking fires in Doric.

Moonyeti.3296:

Menadena.7482:

Feanor.2358:

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Sigh… As a game programmer, this sort of comments make me feel like this

You get that with all kinds of programming. Every time a user wants some change and says ‘this should be simple, just…’ I just assume their estimated time for writing/testing the feature is off by at least a magnitude and will probably have unanticipated results.

Yeah. A lot of the time though, you can at least see why something would logically seem easy to a layperson though. In this case unless you are completely baffled by the general capabilities of computers this one should seem obviously hard.

There’s a good reason as to why customers should never set the engineering scope.

I’ve read your explanations, and they don’t tell me much about what is actually involved in allowing a “offline” mode.

If I was a client, and I asked you for a proposal. I would deem your explanation insufficient, and you would lose out on the contract. From what you have said, you have no idea how the communication infrastructure works, what processes are being used, and what is the philosophy behind their architecture.

“There’s a good reason as to why customers should never set the engineering scope.”

This statement is false, the client is a important part of setting the “engineering scope”. Many conferences are held and documents are exchanged, in the process of creating and defining the product. What is being delivered to the client, is stated out exactly.

Chun.5827:

Moonyeti.3296:

Menadena.7482:

Feanor.2358:

Arnox.5128:

I imagine this would be really easy to implement too

Sigh… As a game programmer, this sort of comments make me feel like this

You get that with all kinds of programming. Every time a user wants some change and says ‘this should be simple, just…’ I just assume their estimated time for writing/testing the feature is off by at least a magnitude and will probably have unanticipated results.

Yeah. A lot of the time though, you can at least see why something would logically seem easy to a layperson though. In this case unless you are completely baffled by the general capabilities of computers this one should seem obviously hard.

There’s a good reason as to why customers should never set the engineering scope.

I’ve read your explanations, and they don’t tell me much about what is actually involved in allowing a “offline” mode.

If I was a client, and I asked you for a proposal. I would deem your explanation insufficient, and you would lose out on the contract. From what you have said, you have no idea how the communication infrastructure works, what processes are being used, and what is the philosophy behind their architecture.

“There’s a good reason as to why customers should never set the engineering scope.”

This statement is false, the client is a important part of setting the “engineering scope”. Many conferences are held and documents are exchanged, in the process of creating and defining the product. What is being delivered to the client, is stated out exactly.

Of course the client is important in deciding engineering scope. They are the usually the origin of whatever is being requested, and they are the ones you want to be satisfied with the end result. This is why I said they should not set the scope. They know what they want but not how long it will take to make it.

It shouldn’t.

Pretty much all content in the game is to make sure maps are populated. This includes even cities being social areas. Allowing offline content would simply be counterproductive to this cause, especially given this is an aging game. Yes, a lot of people don’t really communicate, but if they’re not there, then it removes even the possibility. Even basic social interactions like saying “ty” after you get res’d is a way of breaking the ice. I mean, sure most of the people on the street don’t talk to me either, but I think it’s a bit safer if the street has many people than opposed to a deserted street in the middle of the night.

Also, not every map is that densely populated anyways, plus given the tendency to LFG the more popular maps, there are plenty of quiet maps.

Now, I will concede that modern gaming requiring “always on” even for single player is more annoying than anything else— my internet connection is poor, but unfortunately that’s just something we have to accept.

Ultimately, the grand majority of deign mechanics was put to encourage group play. Thus, you really can’t expect them to do the opposite.

If you were a client…? Well, you know what they say about clients :P

Not every idea comes from the client, especially when innovating otherwise GW2 would simply be a re-skinned GW1 aka this thread. Sometimes vision and courage of your convictions is involved – anyone still use a blueberry?

“Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma – which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of other’s opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.”

vesica tempestas.1563:

Not every idea comes from the client, especially when innovating otherwise GW2 would simply be a re-skinned GW1 aka this thread. Sometimes vision and courage of your convictions is involved – anyone still use a blueberry?

“Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma – which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of other’s opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.”

Sounds great … assuming you actually understand at least some of the things that needs to be done.

It’s like someone setting out to build a better suspension bridge without understanding any of the engineering princples just because they think they have a great idea.

Definitely a big no.
Or do you really want this game dead?

Khisanth.2948:

vesica tempestas.1563:

Not every idea comes from the client, especially when innovating otherwise GW2 would simply be a re-skinned GW1 aka this thread. Sometimes vision and courage of your convictions is involved – anyone still use a blueberry?

“Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma – which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of other’s opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.”

Sounds great … assuming you actually understand at least some of the things that needs to be done.

It’s like someone setting out to build a better suspension bridge without understanding any of the engineering princples just because they think they have a great idea.

well i think Steve jobs knows a thing or 2 as does Anet in their own field.

If its more of a typical feature development (that doesn’t apply here) then project start up sessions are all about creating a shared understanding and it is the responsibility of the engineer to bring to life the costs involved so the product owner and full team can make an informed decision.

Khisanth.2948:

vesica tempestas.1563:

Not every idea comes from the client, especially when innovating otherwise GW2 would simply be a re-skinned GW1 aka this thread. Sometimes vision and courage of your convictions is involved – anyone still use a blueberry?

“Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma – which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of other’s opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.”

Sounds great … assuming you actually understand at least some of the things that needs to be done.

It’s like someone setting out to build a better suspension bridge without understanding any of the engineering princples just because they think they have a great idea.

vesica tempestas.1563:

well i think Steve jobs knows a thing or 2 as does Anet in their own field.

If its more of a typical feature development (that doesn’t apply here) then project start up sessions are all about creating a shared understanding and it is the responsibility of the engineer to bring to life the costs involved so the product owner and full team can make an informed decision.

I don’t get the reason for this post. If you acknowledge that creating an offline mode isn’t typical feature development, then why go on about the responsibility of an engineer when the Khisanth was clearly talking specifically about creating an offline mode?

Your first post quoted here talks about vision and courage. I (and apparently Khisanth as well) assumed that the post is specifically talking about the vision and courage to createan offline mode. If that IS the case, I don’t see what this second post is talking about, since you mention the difference between this and typical feature development. If that post has no relation to the creation of an offline mode, then why place it in the thread?

This post and it’s relation to the previous two definitely leave my head scratching.

(quotes separated because I dont know if the forums will display three quotes simultaneously)

And offline mode for an MMO……

Is there an appropriate meme for this?
I don’t even.

Can’t say I’m interested in an offline mode myself, and while henchmen could be nice for dungeons and other instanced areas, I see no point for them in open world. Anyways…

If what you wanted was to make a own map instance for yourself, they already have the technology for that with Mega Server, so theoretically they could do something crazy like setting map limit to 1 per map. Every player would play solo in every map.

Obviously this is never going to happen.

I don’t know anything about the server structure and loads etc, but I do seem to remember them saying that “number of maps” was one of the sources of straining the server. So might be a wash for server resources, or it might completely freak out in one extreme direction, I don’t know.

But theoretically they could likely add a way to make players opt for a “individual map copy” with map limit 1. I have no idea how much work that would be, just that MegaServer could do it.

But I don’t see why ANet should or would do it. They’ve made it clear from the start that they want lots of people in the maps, they want that helping each others etc. Most of the design decision for the game was focused around “You want to see other players”.

And you can already play the game mostly solo 90% of the time anyways. So I really don’t see much gain.