Guild Wars 2

Obtena.7952:

True, not all dungeons are as bad as Lupi, etc.

Ye, open world is even worse. Imagine that.

Then you must be rolling at the thought that we can solo world bosses like grenth, melandru, lyssa and statue of dwayna (pre megaserver change).

rotten.9753:

Obtena.7952:

True, not all dungeons are as bad as Lupi, etc.

Ye, open world is even worse. Imagine that.

I can … but I this thread isn’t a discussion about open world content so … /moreshrug

spoj.9672:

Then you must be rolling at the thought that we can solo world bosses like grenth, melandru, lyssa and statue of dwayna (pre megaserver change).

Not sure how that’s relevant to the thread. How I feel about dungeon content is not the same as how I feel about OW content.

Obtena.7952:

spoj.9672:

Then you must be rolling at the thought that we can solo world bosses like grenth, melandru, lyssa and statue of dwayna (pre megaserver change).

Not sure how that’s relevant to the thread. How I feel about dungeon content is not the same as how I feel about OW content.

If this is how you feel about 5 man content being solo’d then you must be pretty livid about massive group content being solo’d.

Obtena.7952:

I don’t consider content that is intended for a 5 man team that can be soloed by well-programmed individuals to be designed properly or engaging

I dont really see how content that is possible to solo makes it bad design.

spoj.9672:

I dont really see how content that is possible to solo makes it bad design.

Call me crazy but … if it’s in a 5 man dungeon, it’s not intended to be soloed. Of course nothing stops people doing it so that’s probably not unreasonable. If it’s not intended to be designed to solo, yet people can, I wouldn’t call that good design.

Obtena.7952:

Call me crazy but … if it’s in a 5 man dungeon, it’s not intended to be soloed. Of course nothing stops people doing it so that’s probably not unreasonable. It does say alot about people who complains about challenge. If it’s not intended to be designed to solo, yet people can, I wouldn’t call that good design.

So what about 100+ people events that were being solo-ed before megaservers? Bad design as well? So maybe it’s time for anet to abandon all pve and just focus on pvp.

rotten.9753:

Obtena.7952:

Call me crazy but … if it’s in a 5 man dungeon, it’s not intended to be soloed. Of course nothing stops people doing it so that’s probably not unreasonable. It does say alot about people who complains about challenge. If it’s not intended to be designed to solo, yet people can, I wouldn’t call that good design.

So what about 100+ people events that were being solo-ed before megaservers? Bad design as well? So maybe it’s time for anet to abandon all pve and just focus on pvp.

So what about it? I think it was bad design .. Anet fixed that with Megaservers. It’s ancient history. It’s not dungeon content. I don’t see the relevance in a thread about dungeon content in the game.

If you think GW2 should be a PVP only game based on the fact that someone is able to solo something in PVE, then make a thread about it. I don’t see why you’re trying so hard to start an argument here and derail the thread with sensationalism.

Quotes from a little known film called “30 Days of Dungeons”…

Players: Please, dungeons!

Devs: Dungeons? [They look down at the ground then back at players. They shake their heads.] No dungeons.

spoj.9672:

Then you must be rolling at the thought that we can solo world bosses like grenth, melandru, lyssa and statue of dwayna (pre megaserver change).

In general, Obtena does have a point there at the end of the last page, why are people so combative about this?

Especially given that there’s no policy result from this. Anet’s decision is made, we’re not going to change anything, and we’re (mostly) talking about what we think will happen, not what we think should happen.

Actually we can change something. If we prove there is enough interest in new dungeons….

You arent doing anyone any favours by saying things are absolute and argueing against new stuff. Anything is better than nothing. Which is why i never understand why people say no to any form of addition to the game. If its not something that interests you thats fine. But theres no need to speak out against it. You dont see me saying stop wasting resources on new pvp, wvw and open world stuff.

I don’t think player’s interest is enough to change this. That’s as simple as I can put it. I will go way back to one of my initial posts … if Anet doesn’t like what they see as a result of player’s attitudes based on this type of content, I can see why we won’t be getting anymore dungeons until either 1) players attitudes change or 2) Anet rethinks how dungeons work. I doubt #1, I don’t see the business case for #2.

Obtena.7952:

So what about it? I think it was bad design .. Anet fixed that with Megaservers. It’s ancient history. It’s not dungeon content. I don’t see the relevance in a thread about dungeon content in the game.

They didn’t fixed nothing, just made harder to find those events alone. Triple wurm is probably harder now with megaservers, right?

If you think GW2 should be a PVP only game based on the fact that someone is able to solo something in PVE, then make a thread about it. I don’t see why you’re trying so hard to start an argument here and derail the thread with sensationalism.

Eh, you can’t even understand a simple analogy. For you, an instanced content that’s soloable is badly designed and shouldn’t be developed any further but soloable open world content designed for 100+ people should be. This discussion is virtually pointless.

How can you even discuss something you don’t do? It’s staggering.

Obtena.7952:

I don’t think player’s interest is enough to change this. That’s as simple as I can put it. I will go way back to one of my initial posts … if Anet doesn’t like what they see as a result of player’s attitudes based on this type of content, I can see why we won’t be getting anymore dungeons until either 1) players attitudes change or 2) Anet rethinks how dungeons work. I doubt #1, I don’t see the business case for #2.

Players’ attitude is now behind your arguments? Open world players are toxic as well, just go to copper boss and start using aoe. Just because you cannot be kicked doesn’t mean it’s less toxic.

rotten.9753:

They didn’t fixed nothing, just made harder to find those events alone. Triple wurm is probably harder now with megaservers, right?

That’s a fix, even if you don’t want to acknowledge it. You can’t solo it if you’re not the only one at the event.

rotten.9753:

For you, an instanced content that’s soloable is badly designed and shouldn’t be developed any further but soloable open world content designed for 100+ people should be. This discussion is virtually pointless.

It’s pointless because you want to talk about openworld PVE in a dungeon content thread , tell me things I’ve never said …

rotten.9753:

How can you even discuss something you don’t do? It’s staggering.

… and telling me things you think I’ve never done. I get you’re angry about this, but making up stuff just makes you appear silly.

rotten.9753:

Players’ attitude is now behind your arguments? Open world players are toxic as well, just go to copper boss and start using aoe. Just because you cannot be kicked doesn’t mean it’s less toxic.

This isn’t new … player’s attitude was always part of my argument, you’re just a little behind the discussion because you can’t seem to stay focused on the topic and you want to make irrelevant comparisons to OW PVE.

Yes, OW players are toxic too, but the impact on the affected player is much less significant than in dungeons. In fact there is LITTLE you can do other than flame someone in OW PVE in GW2 if you want to harrass them. What can be done to a player in dungeons is much worse.

Obtena.7952:

That’s a fix, even if you don’t want to acknowledge it. You can’t solo it if you’re not the only one at the event.

It’s a bandaid fix at best. You are still able to do it just like certain guilds are able to complete triple trouble without any random strangers.

It’s pointless because you want to talk about openworld PVE in a dungeon content thread , tell me things I’ve never said …

The concept of an analogy shouldn’t be hard to understand.

… and telling me things you think I’ve never done.

Present simple implies you don’t do it usually, not that you have never done it.

rotten.9753:

The concept of an analogy shouldn’t be hard to understand.

I get the concept of analogies and I get why your comparisons to OW PVE are fail. I also know when people put words into my mouth and lie about what I have done ingame to try to discredit me like you are. Just because you’re angry doesn’t mean I’m not qualified to talk about the topic.

Obtena.7952:

This isn’t new … player’s attitude was always part of my argument, you’re just a little behind the discussion because you can’t seem to stay focused on the topic and you want to make irrelevant comparisons to OW PVE.

Maybe it’s irrelevant for you but comparison between open world and dungeons are relevant for me because they both are used to farm gold, just that one requires a bit more brain cells than the other.

Yes, OW players are toxic too, but the impact on the affected player is much less significant than in dungeons.

Verbal abuse affects them as much. I wouldn’t want to play with toxic players even in open world.

Obtena.7952:

I get the concept of analogies. I also know when people put words into my mouth and lie about what I have done ingame.

I never said you had never done instanced content.

Anyway, I just waste my time here. Shame anet still haven’t implemented block feature.

rotten.9753:

Maybe it’s irrelevant for you but comparison between open world and dungeons are relevant for me because they both are used to farm gold, just that one requires a bit more brain cells than the other.

You seem to have a problem with making correlations. Just because both give gold doesn’t mean that there is a relationship between these two game elements in the way you want to compare them. Also, what you feel personally is not really a valid argument for how things should or shouldn’t work in the game.

rotten.9753:

Verbal abuse affects them as much. I wouldn’t want to play with toxic players even in open world.

That’s nonsensical … a player verbally abused has tools to deal with the abuse, a player kicked from dungeons has no recourse. A player kicked loses their opportunity to get the end boss loot. A player in OW PVE suffers no loss of time or rewards.

rotten.9753:

I never said you had never done instanced content.

No? Do you mind telling me what you meant when you asked me how I could discuss something I don’t even do then?

spoj.9672:

Actually we can change something. If we prove there is enough interest in new dungeons….

You arent doing anyone any favours by saying things are absolute and argueing against new stuff. Anything is better than nothing. Which is why i never understand why people say no to any form of addition to the game. If its not something that interests you thats fine. But theres no need to speak out against it. You dont see me saying stop wasting resources on new pvp, wvw and open world stuff.

Not for HOT we can’t :p

Also, we can’t fool Anet. They know just about how much forum chatter is worth as compared to player activity and strategic goals.

I’m not saying anything is absolute beyond not wanting to shoot myself in the foot by constantly repeating qualifiers. I’ve been pretty clear on that point several times (and clear on the fact that yeah I don’t have arenanet internals, can only speculate based on observation).

And, I think it was a page or two back: IT IS SOMETHING THAT INTERESTS ME, I JUST DON’T THINK IT WILL HAPPEN. Even with my occasional kittening about the ‘crowd’ new dungeons are something I could enjoy immensely, either with my running buddies or just in pugs.

The difference is, I’m not going to tell myself a fairy story about why something that isn’t likely to happen actually is. That’s a bad scene for any number of reasons.

rotten.9753:

Morfedel.4165:

Generally? Based on which games? Look at GW1; with each expansion, how many dungeons did it have? Heck, how many dungeons did GW1 have at all?

The only expansion that gw1 had added 18 dungeons.

I’m sorry, what gw1 expansion had ANY dungeons? 18?! please.

This isn’t WoW. They have said from the beginning that things would be very different. That being the case, things like Vinewrath and some other things added during living story seem to indicate that they have been testing new ideas to engage players.

> vinewrath
> engaging content
Pick one.

It was an example, not an all inclusive list. Many people DO find the content engaging. Just because YOU don’t doesnt mean your experience matches that of others.

Morfedel.4165:

I’m sorry, what gw1 expansion had ANY dungeons? 18?! please.

The only expansion gw1 had had 18 dungeons.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Dungeons

It was an example, not an all inclusive list. Many people DO find the content engaging. Just because YOU don’t doesnt mean your experience matches that of others.

Depends how you define engaging content. For people that want instanced content, vinewrath (and probably every other open world boss) doesn’t cut it.

rotten.9753:

Morfedel.4165:

I’m sorry, what gw1 expansion had ANY dungeons? 18?! please.

The only expansion gw1 had had 18 dungeons.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Dungeons

It was an example, not an all inclusive list. Many people DO find the content engaging. Just because YOU don’t doesnt mean your experience matches that of others.

Depends how you define engaging content. For people that want instanced content, vinewrath (and probably every other open world boss) doesn’t cut it.

But that’s sort of the discussion. What percentage of people want instanced content? What percentage of people just solo and never want to group? What percentage of people don’t care one way or another (such as me).

It’s an interesting question.

Over all I prefer open world content to instanced content, but I don’t particularly mind instanced content and wouldn’t be against it being added.

The only real question here is how many people feel that instanced content is the whole game (there are definitely some) and how many people think that the game requires instant content to be successful.

I still think we’ll see more forward momentum on fractals than any new dungeon.

I remember the days when Robert Hrouda was making earnest efforts at revamping dungeons, and then he was gone from the company and any dungeon business died with his departure.

I don’t hold much up for HoT, since they even said they’re leaving old world dungeons as is ( a mess).

P.S. I hate open world content. I bet you would too if you were forced to play a mesmer and play the tagging game and the open world bosses who 1-shot your main source of damage via aoe spam.

I get the impression a lot of people who like open world content are greatsword/staff camping people whose 11111111 spam actually happens to be good for that content.

Everything about open world is “Do you have a big zerg? If not, get a big zerg and brute force it.” There’s not a single open world encounter where zerging is not an effective strategy.

Zenith, let me ask you seriously, knowing it’s a little trite.

Given that you hate open world content and have contempt for people who do open world content and want dungeons, given their ongoing direction, what are you expecting from this discussion? From what you’re saying yourself, it doesn’t seem like they’re moving towards dungeons (fractals being different) in any way, and you’re not presenting anything that says they will be, where’s this going for you?

There’s still pvp. :>

I agree with Obtena. Group content that can be soloed (or with significantly less people than suggested) is designed badly.

So every encounter in the game except for Triple Trouble and Tequatl is badly designed? And thats only because they start off scaled to about 40+ people.

This is a game that has an active combat element. There is active defence. Its common for games with this kind of combat to be doable by less than intended numbers of players if they have above average skill and reflexes. If anything thats good design. Artificially limiting players has never been considered good design. Why is this game any different?

spoj.9672:

So every encounter in the game except for Triple Trouble and Tequatl is badly designed? And thats only because they start off scaled to about 40+ people.

This is a game that has an active combat element. There is active defence. Its common for games with this kind of combat to be doable by less than intended numbers of players if they have above average skill and reflexes. If anything thats good design. Artificially limiting players has never been considered good design. Why is this game any different?

From a POV of difficulty balance? Arguably.

Certainly that implies it’s much much easier than was intended.

rotten.9753:

Windsagio.1340:

I have some buddies I do fractals with; occasionally the concept comes up of whether we should do some dungeon speedruns to make some $$$. It’s never about anything else though.

Because people play silverwastes for fun.

Actually, I do. While I sorta kinda want the Preserved Queen Bee (Ok, I really want it, I just know it’ll never drop) and that gives me a slight extra boost to hopping to SW for a round, mostly I just enjoy doing a full round from prep to Breach to Vinewrath to Labyrinth. Not multiple times in short order, but every day or so I like to spend time on that.

In dungeons I have some I love — CM, for instance, I adore going in there — and some I loathe — CoF, SE, Arah — and it’s all due to the aesthetics. I’ll go where my guild group feels like going, but I get worn out much faster if everything is lava or rotten gunk.

I’d do TA Aether plenty if it wasn’t long enough to make my guildies prefer to avoid it.

I don’t really make money on dungeons, not like people seem to think can be done. I salvage most everything and keep the mats for personal use or for helping out friends in need of mats. I just run them for fun.

And if they gave us new dungeons that felt like real areas — mmm CM furnishings and estate layout — I’d be thrilled to run them. I’m not even a major dungeon runner! I just like it as part of the buffet of experiences GW2 offers.

Malediktus.3740:

I agree with Obtena. Group content that can be soloed (or with significantly less people than suggested) is designed badly.

Completely disagree. Group content that CAN’T be done with less than the maximum amount is designed badly IMO.

I think the ONLY part of the instanced game which REQUIRES 5 players is the electric room in TA aetherpath.

This part of the game is also a complete nightmare for pugs and is probably part of the many reasons why aetherpath is rarely pugged.

No pve content is challenging, if it’s open world zerg it down if instanced find easiest way get used to it. Two ways of challenging pve ,pvp like encounters not class like mobs but mobs that can create randomness and are always unpredictable , or open world bosses with PK, neither will happen so you just make it challenging for a while instanced or 5 man dungeon that’s why theme park mmos need expansions.

It seems good design means different things to some.

Windsagio.1340:

From a POV of difficulty balance? Arguably.

Certainly that implies it’s much much easier than was intended.

When one guy solo’d lupi for the first time few months after the launch, anet designer was impressed of his skill, never said anything about the difficulty or lack of it.

All this talk about engaging. Curious, what does that term mean to people?

To me it simply means that it requires me to actually pay attention. Challenge is what makes me want to play to the best of my ability, but engaging, simply means I won’t tab out to something else while doing it.

In this regard GW2’s combat system alone does a great job of encouraging engaging play. It’s simply some bosses that allow us to ignore it. These aren’t the majority of dungeon bosses, these aren’t your Lupis for sure. Vinewrath does come to mind though as a possible example. While the bosses are pretty well designed we as players have done what we do best and found the path of least resistance.

The content that isn’t engaging in this game is the content we can range and afk, or that we simply have to get a tag in then stop paying attention and come back to collect rewards, to a lesser extent i’d also say bosses taht you can do blindfolded (AC dungeon comes to mind).

Vinewrath we’ve developed safe spot strats and many people just get their tag then stop caring… this is content that isn’t engaging to me. AC you can burn the bosses down by simply running your rotation without really paying attention to what they are doing, this isn’t engaging to me.

Lupi… even in a good group you need to be wary of the kick, you really should avoid grubs, making sure to deal with frenzied blast is absolutely key. Even a wallsploit Lupi (which I hate btw) is still engaging as you still need to pay attention to what’s happening or it won’t work (or at least not all the way).

Now challenge is a different subject, in fact I’d say it’s a subjective subject based both on player ability and their experience with said content, but I’ll leave that for another post.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Malediktus.3740:

I agree with Obtena. Group content that can be soloed (or with significantly less people than suggested) is designed badly.

Completely disagree. Group content that CAN’T be done with less than the maximum amount is designed badly IMO.

I think the ONLY part of the instanced game which REQUIRES 5 players is the electric room in TA aetherpath.

This part of the game is also a complete nightmare for pugs and is probably part of the many reasons why aetherpath is rarely pugged.

Cof p1 with the braziers aswell before last boss need 5 people

Both of them only require 4. For CoF p1 you can use a ranger pet to kill the control. For the other you can just make the guy on the door platform kill the aetherblade (pull it over with scorpion wire or something or stealth the other people). You dont need the extra 5th man to do it.

Windsagio.1340:

spoj.9672:

So every encounter in the game except for Triple Trouble and Tequatl is badly designed? And thats only because they start off scaled to about 40+ people.

This is a game that has an active combat element. There is active defence. Its common for games with this kind of combat to be doable by less than intended numbers of players if they have above average skill and reflexes. If anything thats good design. Artificially limiting players has never been considered good design. Why is this game any different?

From a POV of difficulty balance? Arguably.

Certainly that implies it’s much much easier than was intended.

I really can’t see how hardcoding a fight to require X bodies is considered good design.

Good design has always been about promoting a certain skill level, something that takes some time to master, and keeping it engaging such that even after mastering it you’re not farming it while you tab out to do other things.

Good design as far as I’ve always seen it praised has also promoted the ability to hinder yourself in the goal of increasing the challenge after mastery. Fact is no encounter in any game that I’ve ever seen has pushed players to the brink of what is possible, they scale it back, they try to have it open to more than just the top .01% of players. In this, that top .01% of players are able to far exceed the requirements of said raid. This is why for example in past games we brought healers who focused on donig damage between heals, they had downtime, and tanks that did the same, they didn’t have to max out their defense. There has always been a bit of leeway that only those who exceed the level for which the content is tuned to use.

Over time of course that .01% grows to .02% and then .03, and onward as people increase their competency with the content. For example my reaction times haven’t decreased when fighting lupi, but I just know the timing and with such I’m able to solo him now without too much trouble.

That’s not bad design at all. That’s simply old content that has been played to the point of complete mastery as far as the RNG will allow (dodging into a stray unmarked frenzied blast still happens >.<)

Now there is room for good content that simply demands more players through standard means. I still want more players for lupi unless I want the challenge, but there could be content that is challenging enough such that no one really wants to solo it. But when artificial means are put in to require it… it’s nothing more than a gimmick. That’s not good design, it’s a shortcut, a bandaid meant to simulate content that requires such things.

Teq/TT’s only challenge and quality lie in it’s “herding cats” requirement. Can you organize an entire map to work together. There’s certainly a desire for that and it’s an element that’s cool about the game, but it’s hardly reasonable to call it good design when discussing bosses on a scale as it requires the use of gimmicks to get the job done.

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

spoj.9672:

Both of them only require 4. For CoF p1 you can use a ranger pet to kill the control. For the other you can just make the guy on the door platform kill the aetherblade (pull it over with scorpion wire or something or stealth the other people). You dont need the extra 5th man to do it.

I stand corrected!

That said, I think my original point is still valid. When you are dependent on the rest of your team, it’s really easy for one newbie to screw everything up.

Still talking about instances, ofc.

HawkMeister.4758:

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

Yeah. Unless the fractals mastery system is any good, I won’t be buying it.

Maybe a year or two down the line when they have a 75% off sale or something.

rotten.9753:

Windsagio.1340:

From a POV of difficulty balance? Arguably.

Certainly that implies it’s much much easier than was intended.

When one guy solo’d lupi for the first time few months after the launch, anet designer was impressed of his skill, never said anything about the difficulty or lack of it.

“arguably” :p

An argument can be made that it’s easier than intended if it’s soloable. Also an encounter that is poorly tuned ~= an encounter that’s BROKEN and is worthless.

Still, a discussion can certainly be had on the issue.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

HawkMeister.4758:

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

Yeah. Unless the fractals mastery system is any good, I won’t be buying it.

Maybe a year or two down the line when they have a 75% off sale or something.

Which is fine, if a product isn’t for you you shouldn’t buy it.

Gamers say this all the frickin’ time though, we’ll see what happens

Windsagio.1340:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

HawkMeister.4758:

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

Yeah. Unless the fractals mastery system is any good, I won’t be buying it.

Maybe a year or two down the line when they have a 75% off sale or something.

Which is fine, if a product isn’t for you you shouldn’t buy it.

Gamers say this all the frickin’ time though, we’ll see what happens

Do you think the mastery system will be available to the beta testers? If so, I’ll let you know my decision then.

spoj.9672:

This is a game that has an active combat element. There is active defence. Its common for games with this kind of combat to be doable by less than intended numbers of players if they have above average skill and reflexes. If anything thats good design. Artificially limiting players has never been considered good design. Why is this game any different?

I think it’s good design to not artificially set number of player limits either but I think what we have in GW2 goes way to far. Team content is about relying on teammate to finish content. If content designed for multiple players can be soloed, I think it’s too easy. I would also say it’s poorly designed too; if you don’t need team support to do teamed content, then it’s not a team, it’s just 5 guys trading agg and soloing. We can’t even reliably hold aggro, so it’s not even THAT complex of a team interaction.

I find it ironic that the better you are as a player, the less of a ‘teamplayer’ you need to be; I guess that’s a consequence of the lacking trinity and every man is an island philosophy. It’s just unfortunate that the dungeon design doesn’t change with it. WE end up with 5 guys soloing in the same instance. That’s where dungeons in GW2 fail to me … if you’re good enough, you can’t just ignore the fact you’re playing with 4 other people. The dungeon design in this game is so 1-dimensional. It’s actually pretty lame dungeon design if it’s meant to cater to the idea of co-operation and support from teaming. It’s just not hard enough and it’s simple.

Obtena.7952:

spoj.9672:

This is a game that has an active combat element. There is active defence. Its common for games with this kind of combat to be doable by less than intended numbers of players if they have above average skill and reflexes. If anything thats good design. Artificially limiting players has never been considered good design. Why is this game any different?

I think it’s good design to not artificially set number of player limits either but I think what we have in GW2 goes way to far. Team content is about relying on teammate to finish content. If content designed for multiple players can be soloed, I think it’s too easy. I would also say it’s poorly designed too; if you don’t need team support to do teamed content, then it’s not a team, it’s just 5 guys trading agg and soloing. We can’t even reliably hold aggro, so it’s not even THAT complex of a team interaction.

I find it ironic that the better you are as a player, the less of a ‘teamplayer’ you need to be; I guess that’s a consequence of the lacking trinity and every man is an island philosophy. It’s just unfortunate that the dungeon design doesn’t change with it. WE end up with 5 guys soloing in the same instance. That’s where dungeons in GW2 fail to me … if you’re good enough, you can’t just ignore the fact you’re playing with 4 other people. The dungeon design in this game is so 1-dimensional. It’s actually pretty lame dungeon design if it’s meant to cater to the idea of co-operation and support from teaming. It’s just not hard enough and it’s simple.

This is the problem I have had with GW2 since the beginning. There is pretty much no situation where I want other players around. In every dungeon and open world encounter I would be significantly better off if I was alone. The other people are there, but i’m not really playing with them, they are just there so things die faster.

If there was an option to duplicate my character 5x and have 5 of me stacked together I would take it every time. Other players offer nothing of value to me except that they might be dead weight that I have to carry.

Every dungeon, world boss, and encounter in the game can be solved by having more dps. I was hoping the devs would introduce some challenging instanced content in the format of dungeons so that this would finally change. It is a necessary evil of the super casual open world, but it doesn’t need to be like that in instanced content.

Well, if that’s the case, I question why you even play MMO’s in the first place.

I don’t actually see how the devs are going to introduce challenging instanced content as long as they don’t make that content require even the highest skilled players in a team to NEED each other to be there. The only way I can imagine they could accomplish challenging, teamed content that does this is to make this teamed instanced content a competitive thing … like two teams in the same instance, seeing which team can get through the content the fastest to win and get the better reward than the loser team … something like that.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Windsagio.1340:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

HawkMeister.4758:

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

Yeah. Unless the fractals mastery system is any good, I won’t be buying it.

Maybe a year or two down the line when they have a 75% off sale or something.

Which is fine, if a product isn’t for you you shouldn’t buy it.

Gamers say this all the frickin’ time though, we’ll see what happens

Do you think the mastery system will be available to the beta testers? If so, I’ll let you know my decision then.

I’d bet money it is (although subject to a huge amount of tuning, beta and all), I hope you like it, more people is good

Windsagio.1340:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Windsagio.1340:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

HawkMeister.4758:

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

Yeah. Unless the fractals mastery system is any good, I won’t be buying it.

Maybe a year or two down the line when they have a 75% off sale or something.

Which is fine, if a product isn’t for you you shouldn’t buy it.

Gamers say this all the frickin’ time though, we’ll see what happens

Do you think the mastery system will be available to the beta testers? If so, I’ll let you know my decision then.

I’d bet money it is (although subject to a huge amount of tuning, beta and all), I hope you like it, more people is good

The fractal mastery system even? I mean they released information about many of the other masteries but for whatever reason have kept the fractal mastery “obscured by the Mists.”

1 Mastery Point: Follows Advice – Details are obscured by the Mists
2 Mastery Points: Agony Channeler – Details are obscured by the Mists
3 Mastery Points: Mistlock Singularities – Details are obscured by the Mists
5 Mastery Points: Recursive Resourcing – Details are obscured by the Mists
8 Mastery Points: Essential Singularities – Details are obscured by the Mists
10 Mastery Points: Hyperactive Singularities – Details are obscured by the Mists