Guild Wars 2

I think ANet may be having an issue with what could be called a false positive.

So, look at it this way.

Jenny works 45 hours a week at a fast food restaurant. Now, you could conclude that because of this she must love her job.

Now, this may be true, but it could also be due to some other factor such as bills she must pay.

The Guild Wars 2 “Living Story” Could be much like this. ANet may be seeing an increase in players due to the “Living Story” but does that actually equate to satisfied players? To assume that because they’re playing a lot, they must be happy, does not factor in all the variables.

The question that I ask myself is, what happens if ANet is interpreting these results as positive, and using that as evidence to continue in that direction, yet player satisfaction may be more mixed.

The reason I bring this up, is because I personally feel the longer the LS progresses, the less I become satisfied with the game. I am already finding myself struggling to log in, and it was only due to a four day vacation that allows me to break the cycle of logging in daily.

I’m now quite nonchalant about what is coming next, what the achievements are, what weapons/Armour I can make, or what the story is. The only real reason I continue to log in is due to the friends I have made in game. This to is unfortunately not going so well as many of them are spending more and more time offline.

So, I wonder if ANet has a system beyond these forums for gauging player satisfaction? I personally think it is time for them to put out a yearly survey that really drills down to how players are feeling.

It would be a shame if they continued on this path, thinking all the logged in players are a great sign, only to find that that next update, or bug, or overpriced gem item, or change, tips the player base over the edge and it starts to erode.

You assume they actually follow a logical pattern. Considering some updates where they ignored glaring issues that people have brought up for past year… I don’t think they actually put any thought into this at all.

Jenny needs money to survive, this is not optional
Players dont need to play, it’s optional
False analogy.

Raziel.4216:

Jenny needs money to survive, this is not optional
Players dont need to play, it’s optional
False analogy.

I was wondering when the “optional” argument was going to come up. Here is the thing, we must assume that players want to play the game, just like we must assume that Jenny doesn’t want to be homekitten

th are optional, just one has bigger consequences.

That being said….I’m not sure what that has to do with my point. My point isn’t whether the game is or isn’t optional. The Jenny analogy was to point out that if all the variables aren’t taken into consideration, one can easily draw a false conclusion.

Just wait, within the next 3 months – give or take – the playerbase will begin dropping…

GL ArenaNet, getting them back.

I truly hope that they don’t make GW2 flop with this “Living World” story.

Excuse my cynicism. But the LS is proving to be a larger and larger disappointment, only providing grind to a game where we were promised no grind.

Raziel.4216:

Jenny needs money to survive, this is not optional
Players dont need to play, it’s optional
False analogy.

Players are conditioned into enjoying rewards. (A good explanation of what I mean)
ArenaNet added rewards to achievement points.
Living Story retains players not by story or content, but by all the many new achievement points (it is the easiest way to get more AP).

How dare they trick players into playing their game a lot! The idea that players are staying for the rewards, which they have been conditioned into enjoying, makes it mind-bogglingly sinister.

-facepalm-

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Just wait, within the next 3 months – give or take – the playerbase will begin dropping…

I think they majorly underestimate just how many people ingame are only hanging around for mad king and winter’s day.

Those two have a chance of reigniting the playerbase, but what Anet chooses to do in november and january will be the deciding factor for a lot of players.

(if there are skypirates in the mad king event, I will be crying myself to sleep at night and winter’s day be kittened.)

It’s unlikely that ANet are looking solely at concurrency as their only metric of success/failure of new content. If concurrency figures for a release give a “false positive” with respect to how popular the new content is, then those numbers will drop shortly after it’s released.

Personally, I feel that the living world releases are enjoyable, but they are really missing the story. Earlier chapters had a decent amount, but the later releases are feeling like very little effort has been made at telling the story.

I’m trying not to be too critical here, after all most mmos tell stories in large chunks through raid/content patches or expansions. ANet are trying to deliver a story through fortnightly episodic updates, which is a lot harder. I just want them to get a lot better at doing it.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Raziel.4216:

Jenny needs money to survive, this is not optional
Players dont need to play, it’s optional
False analogy.

Players are conditioned into enjoying rewards. (A good explanation of what I mean)
ArenaNet added rewards to achievement points.
Living Story retains players not by story or content, but by all the many new achievement points (it is the easiest way to get more AP).

If you don’t enjoy the content given, what’s the point of getting more AP rewards? “I must have the most stuff in this game I hate.” Really?

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Just wait, within the next 3 months – give or take – the playerbase will begin dropping…

GL ArenaNet, getting them back.

I truly hope that they don’t make GW2 flop with this “Living World” story.

Excuse my cynicism. But the LS is proving to be a larger and larger disappointment, only providing grind to a game where we were promised no grind.

But then again that have been said more or less after every single Living Story chapter since they started with the living story, and still the concurrency numbers seem to increase rather than decrease.

DusK.3849:

What you’re posting makes zero sense, Crazylegs. A player chooses to log in of his own accord. Nobody’s holding guns to players’ heads and forcing them to log in.

If a player clicks that log in button, it’s because, for whatever reason, he wants to play the game.

Yes, of course, but wanting to play, and enjoying the game are not the same thing. You’re proving my point here. You’re assuming that there are no other reasons that players would be logging in, other than because they enjoy playing.

I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that many players have logged into the game not because it is fun, but because of other pressures. I myself have logged in many times and grinded out some achievement because I felt a need to complete the meta achievements.

Simply put, just because a player logs in, doesn’t automatically mean they enjoy what they’re doing.

DusK.3849:

You’re attempting to discredit statistical information with extremely faulty analogies and personal experience. That kind of argument has a name.

No, I’m attempting to make sure that statistics are not misinterpreted by using possible faulty logic.

“Players are actively choosing to smash 100 piñatas, therefore they must enjoy these events.”

“Players are fighting Tequatl multiple times, they must enjoy the new mechanics.”

“Players are farming resources for legendaries, they must think this is a fun way to aquire new gear.”

DusK.3849:

People at large simply don’t play games if they don’t actually want to play them.

People will do a lot of things beyond reason, especially the more financially and emotionally invested they are. Simply assuming people will stop when it stops being enjoyable is a very narrow way of looking at things.

I never once said that people can’t enjoy the game. Many do.

What I do know is that despite what you, or ANet wants to believe, player concurrency does not necessarily equal satisfied players.

Your straw man argument doesn’t really help here. Let me try putting this to you another way.

Can you think of any time since you’ve started playing this game that you logged in, and completed content you didn’t really enjoy, but did so simply because you felt a desire to complete it? If so, you’ve proven my point.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

Yes, of course, but wanting to play, and enjoying the game are not the same thing. You’re proving my point here. You’re assuming that there are no other reasons that players would be logging in, other than because they enjoy playing.

I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that many players have logged into the game not because it is fun, but because of other pressures. I myself have logged in many times and grinded out some achievement because I felt a need to complete the meta achievements.

Simply put, just because a player logs in, doesn’t automatically mean they enjoy what they’re doing.

In so many words, you just explained how you fired up the game because you wanted to play the game.

It doesn’t matter what the motivations are, be they achievements, a sense of personal accomplishment, a willingness to explore the game world, socialize with people in Lion’s Arch, or whatever else; when you clicked “log in”, it’s because you wanted to do something in the game. You got some degree of satisfaction for the game that you felt merits the time spent.

Something in the game was actually satisfying enough to make you log in and play the game for a while. ANet’s mission: Accomplished.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

No, I’m attempting to make sure that statistics are not misinterpreted by using possible faulty logic.

“Players are actively choosing to smash 100 piñatas, therefore they must enjoy these events.”

“Players are fighting Tequatl multiple times, they must enjoy the new mechanics.”

“Players are farming resources for legendaries, they must think this is a fun way to aquire new gear.”

People will do a lot of things beyond reason, especially the more financially and emotionally invested they are. Simply assuming people will stop when it stops being enjoyable is a very narrow way of looking at things.

Players wouldn’t be doing any of those things if they didn’t want to. If they really found zero satisfaction with doing those activities, as you’re trying to let on, they simply wouldn’t do them.

Being “financially invested” has nothing to do with it. People stop playing games when they get bored of them. If they’re still playing, then there’s still something in the game that they find worthwhile. The game fullfills some sort of desire that is relevant to the player’s interests and is a worthwhile tradeoff for that player’s time. Again, in your case:

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

I felt a need to complete the meta achievements.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

I never once said that people can’t enjoy the game. Many do.

What I do know is that despite what you, or ANet wants to believe, player concurrency does not necessarily equal satisfied players.

All do, to some degree. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t log in. Players, at zero satisfaction with any given game, will stop playing it.

The fact that more players, not fewer, are seen logging into the game every day says that more and more players are motivated, once again, for whatever reason to play the game. There’s really no other way you could possibly read that data unless you slap on a tinfoil hat.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

Your straw man argument doesn’t really help here. Let me try putting this to you another way.

Can you think of any time since you’ve started playing this game that you logged in, and completed content you didn’t really enjoy, but did so simply because you felt a desire to complete it?

No.

DusK,

I’m sorry, but I’m not sure you’re fully understanding the position you’re taking here. You said,

“Something in the game was actually satisfying enough to make you log in and play the game for a while. ANet’s mission: Accomplished.”

You couldn’t be more wrong. This is exactly, to the tee, the faulty logic I am talking about. You’re concluding that someone performing an action means they actually enjoy that action.

Here is an example for you.

I play a lot of Crab Toss.

In fact, I play so much that I almost have all the AP’s complete. By your logic, I am a satisfied customer, and anyone looking at my log in stats could conclude I love me a game of Crab Toss. Right?

Wrong! I detest that game. I walk away from that game feeling cranky and frustrated almost every time. I get so bloody bored that the only way I can even get through the games is to put on a movie, or listen to music. So…why do I play so much then?

Because, despite my dislike for it, I want AP, XP, and achievement completion.

Does this make sense?

In beta I rember a little survey would pop up in game asking you to rate whatever it was a 1-5 and leave comments and check if you enjoyed it. They should implement this again for living world content.

DusK.3849:

What you’re posting makes zero sense, Crazylegs. A player chooses to log in of his own accord. Nobody’s holding guns to players’ heads and forcing them to log in.

If a player clicks that log in button, it’s because, for whatever reason, he wants to play the game.

You’re attempting to discredit statistical information with extremely faulty analogies and personal experience. That kind of argument has a name.

People at large simply don’t play games if they don’t actually want to play them.

You buddy sure love to toss around words like statistical information and evidence. Care to give a proof… because until then what you say is exactly what you are so adamantly trying to discredit personal opinion/exprience.

Please do kindly see the irony here.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Just wait, within the next 3 months – give or take – the playerbase will begin dropping…

GL ArenaNet, getting them back.

I truly hope that they don’t make GW2 flop with this “Living World” story.

Excuse my cynicism. But the LS is proving to be a larger and larger disappointment, only providing grind to a game where we were promised no grind.

Raziel.4216:

Jenny needs money to survive, this is not optional
Players dont need to play, it’s optional
False analogy.

Players are conditioned into enjoying rewards. (A good explanation of what I mean)
ArenaNet added rewards to achievement points.
Living Story retains players not by story or content, but by all the many new achievement points (it is the easiest way to get more AP).

The next three months hold the most popular festivals in Guild Wars history. They could have released nothing all year and players would return for Halloween and Wintersday. Let’s not forget that Wintersday also coincides with holidays.

I agree that lately GW2 feels more like quantity rather than quality and the design philosphy has shifted to rewards driving content rather than a satisfying experience driving content. ArenaNet wants players logging in every day so instead of creating content that makes players want to log in every day because the experience is fun, they create content that makes players log in every day because they need to do their dailies. The Living Story content is full of limited time achievements and temporary content because it forces you to do it when it’s available or miss out forever. It’s so heavily rooted into their design structure now I don’t think ArenaNet or GW2 will ever recover unless they can change direction with an expansion.

The question they ask is no longer “Is it fun?” but rather “Is it keeping players logged in daily?”. The mistake would be to think that those are both the same thing.

I think I understand what the OP is talking about.

For example Anet looks at their crafting numbers and says ‘Wow look at all the people that are crafting. Our crafting system must be great!’ without taking into considersation those that just crafted an alt to 80 because it was fast not because it was fun. Or those that only crafted to get an ascended weapon. Not because they enjoyed crafting but because it was the only way to get the weapon of choice.

Another exapmle that I think fits is the indescriminate slayer acheivement. If Anet looks at this and sees that X percentage of players have completed it and assumes that people enjoy killing those little buggers and then makes content for it (ambient killer daily) with out asking was it fun for them or did they do it just to put themselves over the top for the next AP chest?

Metrics are great, but they only tell you what people are doing not why they are doing it.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Just wait, within the next 3 months – give or take – the playerbase will begin dropping…

GL ArenaNet, getting them back.

I truly hope that they don’t make GW2 flop with this “Living World” story.

Excuse my cynicism. But the LS is proving to be a larger and larger disappointment, only providing grind to a game where we were promised no grind.

Raziel.4216:

Jenny needs money to survive, this is not optional
Players dont need to play, it’s optional
False analogy.

Players are conditioned into enjoying rewards. (A good explanation of what I mean)
ArenaNet added rewards to achievement points.
Living Story retains players not by story or content, but by all the many new achievement points (it is the easiest way to get more AP).

Oh man. 5 years ago, I never thought I would one day see a Konig post like this.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

DusK,

I’m sorry, but I’m not sure you’re fully understanding the position you’re taking here. You said,

“Something in the game was actually satisfying enough to make you log in and play the game for a while. ANet’s mission: Accomplished.”

You couldn’t be more wrong. This is exactly, to the tee, the faulty logic I am talking about. You’re concluding that someone performing an action means they actually enjoy that action.

Here is an example for you.

I play a lot of Crab Toss.

In fact, I play so much that I almost have all the AP’s complete. By your logic, I am a satisfied customer, and anyone looking at my log in stats could conclude I love me a game of Crab Toss. Right?

Wrong! I detest that game. I walk away from that game feeling cranky and frustrated almost every time. I get so bloody bored that the only way I can even get through the games is to put on a movie, or listen to music. So…why do I play so much then?

Because, despite my dislike for it, I want AP, XP, and achievement completion.

Does this make sense?

You dislike Crab Toss, but you enjoy AP system.
This prove DusK was right.

I dislike SAB and Gauntlet: I hate jump system in this game in first case, and my main is an ele and gauntlet was pretty hard in the second one.

Result: My living story are almost empty for both category.

I belive they must annunce an expansion very soon, anyway.
I’ve realize when someone hit 8000 AP , player lose interest in the game ‘cause he/she has seen almost all main feature that doesn’t implement grinding.

Living story are a nice add, but living story system will collapse if they doesn’t add major content soon.

nihavel.6592:

You dislike Crab Toss, but you enjoy AP system.
This prove DusK was right.

What made you conclude that I liked the AP system? Can you provide an example of where I said this?

Lucky.9421:

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Just wait, within the next 3 months – give or take – the playerbase will begin dropping…

GL ArenaNet, getting them back.

I truly hope that they don’t make GW2 flop with this “Living World” story.

Excuse my cynicism. But the LS is proving to be a larger and larger disappointment, only providing grind to a game where we were promised no grind.

Raziel.4216:

Jenny needs money to survive, this is not optional
Players dont need to play, it’s optional
False analogy.

Players are conditioned into enjoying rewards. (A good explanation of what I mean)
ArenaNet added rewards to achievement points.
Living Story retains players not by story or content, but by all the many new achievement points (it is the easiest way to get more AP).

Oh man. 5 years ago, I never thought I would one day see a Konig post like this.

^
The outline of his posts have taken a different turn, I agree. Seems he’s riding the wave until it ends though.

His comments, opinions are generally well thought out and he does his research before posting, so I consider him a credited poster.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

What made you conclude that I liked the AP system? Can you provide an example of where I said this?

Here!

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

I play a lot of Crab Toss.

In fact, I play so much that I almost have all the AP’s complete. By your logic, I am a satisfied customer, and anyone looking at my log in stats could conclude I love me a game of Crab Toss. Right?

Wrong! I detest that game. I walk away from that game feeling cranky and frustrated almost every time. I get so bloody bored that the only way I can even get through the games is to put on a movie, or listen to music. So…why do I play so much then?

Because, despite my dislike for it, I want AP, XP, and achievement completion.

Does this make sense, or is the concept lost on you?

if you don’t enjoy AP system and since you hate some feature (like crab toss) but you are playing them as well a question rise in my mind:

See. Now we are getting down to it. You came to the conclusion that because I’m doing something, I must therefore enjoy it.

The fact is that I don’t really like the AP system. It outs too much focus on rewards then it does fun. The reason I “want” to get AP is because that is currently how the game is designed.

I “want” gold/gear/laurels and so in order to do that, I must play the game as ANet has designed it. For example, I don’t like doing dailies because I find them to be a waste of time, yet I want laurels.

So, ANet sees me log in, complete dailies and decides I must enjoy it.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

That being said….I’m not sure what that has to do with my point. My point isn’t whether the game is or isn’t optional. The Jenny analogy was to point out that if all the variables aren’t taken into consideration, one can easily draw a false conclusion.

The “optional” variable is just as important.

Pennry.9215:

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Raziel.4216:

Jenny needs money to survive, this is not optional
Players dont need to play, it’s optional
False analogy.

Players are conditioned into enjoying rewards. (A good explanation of what I mean)
ArenaNet added rewards to achievement points.
Living Story retains players not by story or content, but by all the many new achievement points (it is the easiest way to get more AP).

If you don’t enjoy the content given, what’s the point of getting more AP rewards? “I must have the most stuff in this game I hate.” Really?

That’s what the skinner box was designed for, except that the analogy worked for the P2P MMOs (you paid for each month, so you had to make the best of it) and not the B2P MMOs, because the reinforcement will be there without a monthly fee.
One could argue “but the 25 AP from the LS wont be there!” sure, you can get that in 1 TA run, I doubt Anet looks at the first day of release to get reliable data.

What data are you using to reach this conclusion “LS is proving to be a larger and larger disappointment” ? The only one with access to real, non-anecdotal (worthless) evidence is Anet, and they decided to increase the # of LS per month, so I doubt it’s dissapointing.

Raziel.4216:

What data are you using to reach this conclusion “LS is proving to be a larger and larger disappointment” ? The only one with access to real, non-anecdotal (worthless) evidence is Anet, and they decided to increase the # of LS per month, so I doubt it’s dissapointing.

They have data that shows how long, and how often I’ve done some task, but they don’t have my personal thoughts on them. If they choose to come to a conclusion (that I like the content) without considering any other variables, and then create even more content based on that conclusion, there will be a tipping point.

I think many players (based on these forums, in-game dead zones, map chat, etc) are growing increasingly impatient with the “Living Story.” Many, myself included are struggling with our feelings on this one.

I feel torn because ANet will release new content that I don’t really enjoy, but I will do it anyway, for various reasons. I feel guilty because ANet sees me running along, mashing the “1” key and assumes I want more of that. The next update comes along, and it gets a little worse.

Now, what has happened is that I struggle to even log in. When I do, I blast through the content as fast as I can, so I don’t have to feel pressure to log in for the next two weeks. I read the update notes, wait for the patch, rinse and repeat.

It’s a circular feedback loop that will never be broken until ANet steps up and starts actually connecting player satisfaction with their time in game. If they don’t, a point will come where players will simply not come back.

Since you log in for a day to beat the content and then never log again for 2 weeks you’re probably not among the data that they look for.

Based on lively zones, praise topics, map chat, guild chat, etc. I could reach the opposite conclusion. Anecdote vs Anecdote = worthless.

I really doubt Anet, the company that made an extremely succesful CORPG known for it’s content updates would increase the ammount of LS per month without being certain that a large chunk of the comunity wants it, large gunk =/= everyone.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

See. Now we are getting down to it. You came to the conclusion that because I’m doing something, I must therefore enjoy it.

The fact is that I don’t really like the AP system. It outs too much focus on rewards then it does fun. The reason I “want” to get AP is because that is currently how the game is designed.

I “want” gold/gear/laurels and so in order to do that, I must play the game as ANet has designed it. For example, I don’t like doing dailies because I find them to be a waste of time, yet I want laurels.

So, ANet sees me log in, complete dailies and decides I must enjoy it.

The problem with this, is that ingame rewards only have any significance in-game. There is no conceivable reason for you to want in game rewards unless you have an underlying desire to play the game. If you don’t want to play the game, then in-game rewards are worthless, therefore you will not grind to get them.

You do not enjoy crab toss. You do not enjoy living story. Ok, cool. There are parts of GW2 content you don’t enjoy. But you do them a lot. Why? Because your underlying desire to play the game, wherever it is founded, is overriding the dislike you have of those particular aspects that give you your rewards.

Many players simply do not play content they don’t like. You, apparently, are unable to stop yourself from doing so. The fact that you are still playing every day to do things which you don’t find fun is… up to you, I guess.

Anet will, no doubt, draw their own conclusions.

nihavel.6592:

if you don’t enjoy AP system and since you hate some feature (like crab toss) but you are playing them as well a question rise in my mind:

I was a “completionist” (I’m still w/in the top 1k NA players for APs — 11588, though I’ve fallen almost 100 places in the ranking in the past week) — there’s something psychologically effective about offering limited time rewards. But I lead to me being very kitten ed off at anet, because I’d play content I wasn’t enjoying for extrinsic (rather than intrinsic) rewards.

I considered quitting (and took most of a week off … first time in a while), but finally decided that I can enjoy the game if I make my goal having fun while getting the fewest number of APs possible.

So I won’t touch the new TA dungeon path (though it sounds like it’s at least somewhat interesting) until the meta is done, because avoiding LS achievements is the only way I can see of protesting the AP grind that is LS. (Well, that and quitting, but there are still some parts of the game that I find fun.)

But I’m still unhappy that GuildWars 2 has chosen to add so many grinds — the fact that it’s psychologically effective doesn’t make it a good way to design your games.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

I think ANet may be having an issue with what could be called a false positive.

So, look at it this way.

Jenny works 45 hours a week at a fast food restaurant. Now, you could conclude that because of this she must love her job.

Now, this may be true, but it could also be due to some other factor such as bills she must pay.

Or;
- she like the people she works with
- flexible work schedules
- benefits
- reward program
- customers
- managements

I agree, there are many factors.

The Guild Wars 2 “Living Story” Could be much like this. ANet may be seeing an increase in players due to the “Living Story” but does that actually equate to satisfied players? To assume that because they’re playing a lot, they must be happy, does not factor in all the variables.

Well, if players plays for the same hours as Jenny, 45 hrs week, it would be hard to conclude that players hate, or unsatisfied with, GW2.

The question that I ask myself is, what happens if ANet is interpreting these results as positive, and using that as evidence to continue in that direction, yet player satisfaction may be more mixed.

I highly doubt that this is the only factor used. Just like Jenny, she may hate the job, but she likes the flexible hour, the benefits, and the people she work with.

I’m now quite nonchalant about what is coming next, what the achievements are, what weapons/Armour I can make, or what the story is. The only real reason I continue to log in is due to the friends I have made in game. This to is unfortunately not going so well as many of them are spending more and more time offline.

Just like Jenny, you log in due to your friends, thus she might choose to go to work due to her co-workers. She might not care about benefits and reward program at all, just like you not caring about weapons and armors.

So, I wonder if ANet has a system beyond these forums for gauging player satisfaction? I personally think it is time for them to put out a yearly survey that really drills down to how players are feeling.

I remember reading that they might have said (but don’t quote me on this) that they are looking at how many achievement points players earned per hour spent. Someone can be logged in for hours, but if they have not gained any achievement points, they are not doing anything at all. If you are logging in to do the Daily, you are gaining achievement points, thus you are doing something.

If you spent 45hr/week and earned 1,000 achievement points, then that is a very good indication that you love, and are satisfied with, GW2.

It would be a shame if they continued on this path, thinking all the logged in players are a great sign, only to find that that next update, or bug, or overpriced gem item, or change, tips the player base over the edge and it starts to erode.

So, in conclusion, obviously you are mistaken.

Olvendred.3027:

Many players simply do not play content they don’t like. You, apparently, are unable to stop yourself from doing so. The fact that you are still playing every day to do things which you don’t find fun is… up to you, I guess.

Anet will, no doubt, draw their own conclusions.

I think of this as being like gambling. People who are compulsive about it (it uses similar psychological mechanisms) aren’t really enjoying it. But at some point, lack of enjoyment isn’t really relevant.

I think the AP grind is designed to function like that. You start out getting something you want … then you realize you could get a little more if you do this little thing right now (but not if you wait) … and that little bit of grinding grows to take up more and more time.

I quit when content was really not fun (so I didn’t have every AP, and wasn’t at the top of the AP grind leader boards) … but it’s easy to get sucked in.

GuildWars 1 was advertised in part by developers claiming that they were against the concept of grinds as a way to encourage player participation. GuildWars 2 is not, AFAICT, guided by that philosophy, which makes me sad. (And I may yet decide that I’m done with it when having playing/having fun for the fewest possible number of APs stops being an interesting goal.)

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

Raziel.4216:

What data are you using to reach this conclusion “LS is proving to be a larger and larger disappointment” ? The only one with access to real, non-anecdotal (worthless) evidence is Anet, and they decided to increase the # of LS per month, so I doubt it’s dissapointing.

They have data that shows how long, and how often I’ve done some task, but they don’t have my personal thoughts on them. If they choose to come to a conclusion (that I like the content) without considering any other variables, and then create even more content based on that conclusion, there will be a tipping point.

Well, when you do a content, it’s not just about the content. If the content encourage team work and you like teaming-up with your friends, then the content had fulfilled its purpose. Even if you are disappointed about the actual content, you cannot say that you are disappointed teaming-up with your friends.

And if ever that tipping point happen, just like you did before, just move on to the next game.

I think many players (based on these forums, in-game dead zones, map chat, etc) are growing increasingly impatient with the “Living Story.” Many, myself included are struggling with our feelings on this one.

One thing for sure. Even though GW2 is way bigger than GW1, it’s still not as big as a traditional MMO where there are tons of things to do. But even with traditional MMO, there are still dead zones and players growing impatient.

I feel torn because ANet will release new content that I don’t really enjoy, but I will do it anyway, for various reasons. I feel guilty because ANet sees me running along, mashing the “1” key and assumes I want more of that. The next update comes along, and it gets a little worse.

Now, what has happened is that I struggle to even log in. When I do, I blast through the content as fast as I can, so I don’t have to feel pressure to log in for the next two weeks. I read the update notes, wait for the patch, rinse and repeat.

It’s a circular feedback loop that will never be broken until ANet steps up and starts actually connecting player satisfaction with their time in game. If they don’t, a point will come where players will simply not come back.

I agree, it’s hard being in the minority. If all the minority who are dissatisfied leave the game and never return, GW2 will have 100% satisfied players.

Interesting, there sure is alot of sand being thrown around here.

I myself will always try something a few times on principle. Same thing goes for food or drinks. However, trying it out doesnt mean that its Pristine Fun Factor 10.

Statistically, if we all give a gold and there 1 million people and only 3 winners, statistically, that means there is only 3 winners. Stop trying to argue numbers when numbers dont mean anything. Sadly, with the temporary content, you truly cant judge the true numbers, as everyone races to be 1 of the 3 winners.

This temporary content will always spike at the beginning and the end of the temporary contents shelf life. Why is this? You have people that feel a sense of urgency to complete it, and then there are those that wait until the last minute, hoping less people are doing it for better framerates.

The Living Story is great conceptially, but in practice, feels more like the developers are practicing programming. The original concept of the world changing over time and your character will help influence it buy reacting or ignoring would have been great, but probably wouldn’t have worked out.

My one wish for guild wars 2 is to evolve our personal story or beyond our personal story into an episode to episode type living story, rather then this rubberbanding dribble that makes no sense whatsoever. And each living story brings change to Tyria.

Yes, some of my favorite moments in mmo history had to do with long term temporary content, the best stories came when I was having fun in my community. But it seems there has been a disconnect in this thought by many factors, such as, “personal greed”, "personal content, personal guilds (wheres our guild versus guild?).

The problem is, respectfully, we all want our own personal agendas to be tackled now, right now, that we miss the bigger picture as to what the living story intent was initially, "to bridge the gap between solitaryand reel us back into community.

The investors don’t care if you’re happy, they only care about the number of people playing.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

See. Now we are getting down to it. You came to the conclusion that because I’m doing something, I must therefore enjoy it.

The fact is that I don’t really like the AP system. It outs too much focus on rewards then it does fun. The reason I “want” to get AP is because that is currently how the game is designed.

I “want” gold/gear/laurels and so in order to do that, I must play the game as ANet has designed it. For example, I don’t like doing dailies because I find them to be a waste of time, yet I want laurels.

So, ANet sees me log in, complete dailies and decides I must enjoy it.

If you want daily laurel you must do only 5 tasks. It take 20/30 min or less.
AP chest isn’t rewarding in long term.
My bank is plenty of canisters, orbs and other things and my wallet have 4500+ badge.

So you can avoid today daily AP “get 2 wvw level rank” (like i will do) if you’re playing only for laurel and you hate AP system.

linuxotaku.4731:

GuildWars 1 was advertised in part by developers claiming that they were against the concept of grinds as a way to encourage player participation.

3 words:

Friend of luxon

Anyway i love your new philosophy “i want do this so i’m not interest in other objective.”

nihavel.6592:

3 words:

Friend of luxon

Anyway i love your new philosophy “i want do this so i’m not interest in other objective.”

Ahahaha! Classic reply +1.

I remember those awful Amber runs for the Kurzicks. >.<’

linuxotaku.4731:

GuildWars 1 was advertised in part by developers claiming that they were against the concept of grinds as a way to encourage player participation. GuildWars 2 is not, AFAICT, guided by that philosophy, which makes me sad. (And I may yet decide that I’m done with it when having playing/having fun for the fewest possible number of APs stops being an interesting goal.)

Please point out what mandatory grind stops you from playing something in GW2 besides fractals.

Guild Wars 1 had plenty of OPTIONAL grinds, just like GW2. You dont NEED ascended (unless you want to do elite content), you dont NEED legendaries, you dont NEED 12398192389 AP, you dont NEED that tittle.
You can complete all the content in the game besides fractals in rares, you dont even need exotics.

nihavel.6592:

linuxotaku.4731:

GuildWars 1 was advertised in part by developers claiming that they were against the concept of grinds as a way to encourage player participation.

3 words:

Friend of luxon

Anyway i love your new philosophy “i want do this so i’m not interest in other objective.”

Actually … given how they changed the luxon/kurzick tracks, I don’t think that’s much of a counter argument. At one point, the way to do the kurzick track was farming quests — I saw the farm (I learned to do it out of curiosity) — incredibly boring and slow as molasses in terms of progression. That was changed so that you’d get faction credit for vanquishing … add in zaishen quests & double faction weekends, and I found the result somewhat fun for a while. (Though I stopped somewhere after r10 — it was still a grind to hit r12.)

In any case — you pointed out a single, which they made less grindy — which hardly seems a strong counter-argument. The Zaishen Quests are perhaps a better counter-example, but I liked that you could stack them do do them when you want … if the AP system were like that, I’d like it more.

GW1 was advertised as not requiring a grind for BiS stats — but included farming/grinding for pretty skins. This seems OK to me; and other than precursors, I don’t mind legendaries in GW2. (Even if the only legendary thing about them is the grind.)

In GW2, there are stat differences for “BiS” gear (5% for weapons, >35% for trinkets — and a little more if you include fine infusions). You can do most content without, but eventually you’ll have to deal with all the people who have BiS gear QQ’ing about how the content has become too easy … followed by updates like the one to Teq. (For the record: the fight is fun in PVT gear, but waiting in Sparkfly fen > 1h for each try … kitten that.)

But really — what bothers me isn’t so much that you can find a grind in the game, but rather that the grinds are so in-your-face, with constant reminders of how you could get more APs, stats, and items through boring, repetitive content.

I have come to hate the AP system, and I am unhappy that anet added something which clearly encourages grinding. There are things I like about the game, or I wouldn’t play it — but this isn’t one of them.

Raziel.4216:

linuxotaku.4731:

GuildWars 1 was advertised in part by developers claiming that they were against the concept of grinds as a way to encourage player participation. GuildWars 2 is not, AFAICT, guided by that philosophy, which makes me sad. (And I may yet decide that I’m done with it when having playing/having fun for the fewest possible number of APs stops being an interesting goal.)

Please point out what mandatory grind stops you from playing something in GW2 besides fractals.

Guild Wars 1 had plenty of OPTIONAL grinds, just like GW2. You dont NEED ascended (unless you want to do elite content), you dont NEED legendaries, you dont NEED 12398192389 AP, you dont NEED that tittle.
You can complete all the content in the game besides fractals in rares, you dont even need exotics.

You aren’t responding to my actual argument — I’m sure it’s satisfying to argue against that straw man, though.

I do not like content which encourages grinds, regardless of whether or not they’re necessary — for anything other than purely aesthetic goals. You can call that exception inconsistent if you like, but this keeps the playing field level. (And in this case, I also think you’re wrong if you think the difference in ascended stats is insignificant.)

GW1 was advertised as not encouraging grinds, and there were fun ways to do almost all of the content. GW2 has far too many grinds which are clearly designed to get people to do content which isn’t very interesting in order to get moar loot or more AP or temporary-LS-items (wings, anyone?).

I think that’s crappy design, and unethical to boot.

linuxotaku.4731:

I do not like content which encourages grinds, regardless of whether or not they’re necessary — for anything other than purely aesthetic goals. You can call that exception inconsistent if you like, but this keeps the playing field level. (And in this case, I also think you’re wrong if you think the difference in ascended stats is insignificant.)

What advantage ? Dealing more damage in a pure PVE world? or dealing an extra 300 dmg in the middle of a huge zerg in WvW ?
I’m confused.

linuxotaku.4731:

GW1 was advertised as not encouraging grinds, and there were fun ways to do almost all of the content. GW2 has far too many grinds which are clearly designed to get people to do content which isn’t very interesting in order to get moar loot or more AP or temporary-LS-items (wings, anyone?).

.[/quote]
You could say some of those tittles did encourage grinding, but like in GW2 they were optional
Still waiting for you to point out the required grind that limits the game for you, so far you limit yourself to calling this a straw-man (nice try).
If the grind is somehow affecting your gameplay you should be able to point it out (I cant do X without spending hours and hours grinding for it). If you simply cant help not having the newest carrot all the time there’s no point in arguing, completionists or game addicts are a minority and Anet doesnt target’em.

BTW you may want to re-read a bit of a previous reply from this thread

You’re attempting to discredit statistical information with extremely faulty analogies and personal experience. That kind of argument has a name.

Raziel.4216:

I really doubt Anet, the company that made an extremely succesful CORPG known for it’s content updates would increase the ammount of LS per month without being certain that a large chunk of the comunity wants it, large gunk =/= everyone.

So…everything ANet does is what they are certain a large chunk of the community wants?

Seriously, everything?

Are you suggesting that they are incapable of making a mistake?

Raziel.4216:

What advantage ? Dealing more damage in a pure PVE world? or dealing an extra 300 dmg in the middle of a huge zerg in WvW ?
I’m confused.

Dungeons are the part I find interesting; having done both with an without ascended gear, I’m willing to assert that it makes a difference. Also — as others have pointed out — give higher stats, and players will ask for harder content to keep things interesting. E.g. the recent changes to Teq. I have nearly full ascended gear — but I don’t want it to be the case that new people are at a disadvantage; I dislike how that affects PUG dynamics. (There’s enough disadvantage through not knowing the mechanics.)

Raziel.4216:

You could say some of those tittles did encourage grinding, but like in GW2 they were optional
Still waiting for you to point out the required grind that limits the game for you, so far you limit yourself to calling this a straw-man (nice try).

The straw man argument is that it’s only a grind if you can’t play content without doing it. The meaning I intend is that it’s a grind if you’re doing something you don’t enjoy for extrinsic rewards. You couldn’t use the definition you’re using if you mean to include grinding for aesthetic rewards.

Raziel.4216:

If the grind is somehow affecting your gameplay you should be able to point it out (I cant do X without spending hours and hours grinding for it). If you simply cant help not having the newest carrot all the time there’s no point in arguing, completionists or game addicts are a minority and Anet doesnt target’em.

Actually, Anet does now target them. That’s sort of my point when I call this kind of game design unethical.

Raziel.4216:

BTW you may want to re-read a bit of a previous reply from this thread

You’re attempting to discredit statistical information with extremely faulty analogies and personal experience. That kind of argument has a name.

I read Dusk’s comments, and am familiar with yourlogicalfallacyis.com; this isn’t actually the anecdote fallacy because here the OP isn’t asserting that it is generally so, only that the personal anecdote does not fit the naive model. At least in this thread, the OP didn’t say people aren’t playing (making a claim about statistics from anecdote), but rather than playing more != enjoying the game more.

Dusk’s fallacy is in assuming the naive model: that players are rational actors. Like it or not, neither you nor I are perfectly rational.

I can understand that the game designers created “Achievement Points” to solve a problem: experienced people won’t be in newbie zones (or re-doing old content) that long, and new players will otherwise be playing in a wasteland. Also, they wouldn’t be able to attract the hordes to their bi-weekly updates (living story fluff) without APs.

The part that bothers me is the use of time-limited offers for this. There’s plenty of literature in psychology research about this, and I’m sure the use of this is not an accident.

That (use of psychological pressure to encourage certain decisions) is why Dusk’s argument:

DusK.3849:

If a player clicks that log in button, it’s because, for whatever reason, he wants to play the game.

— misses the OP’s point: players may think they want to log in and play the game — but afterwards realize that they did so due to psychological tactics rather than because it was actually fun (or because they actually wanted to rewards in question). Any players which experience this will go through a period of higher play followed but unhappiness with the game. Said differently: naively using engagement metrics will probably produce biased data when you’re also using psychological tactics to encourage engagement.

The question of whether or not such players constitute a large enough group to matter is a different question, and I don’t think the OP asserted that it is a large number. OTOH, if you only looked at concurrency, you would misunderstand the behavior of this set of players, however large or small it is.

Linuxotaku, I seriously doubt every player, or anywhere close to a majority of players, or even anywhere over 1% of the players, are so masochistic as to log in to a game that they really just don’t want to play. Maybe you guys are like that, but you guys are so small of a minority in that regard compared to the player base at large that it really makes this whole thread kind of a moot point.

Really, 1% (once again, being generous) is a statistical irrelevance and wouldn’t offset, in any way, the increase in player concurrence that results from people actually firing up the game because they enjoy it.

These same anti-statistics arguments I’m seeing you guys post are used in many other conspiracy theories as well. There are very good reasons why they’re not taken seriously by any rational person.

The bottom line is, you may be dissatisfied, but in no way is the player base at large dissatisfied. That’s what the numbers show. The only way the general hypothesis of the OP could be true in the least is if there are more “glutton for punishment” players such as yourself than there are players who log on because they actually enjoy the game. And that just doesn’t happen, no matter what game it is.

DusK.3849:

The bottom line is, you may be dissatisfied, but in no way is the player base at large dissatisfied. That’s what the numbers show. The only way the general hypothesis of the OP could be true in the least is if there are more “glutton for punishment” players such as yourself than there are players who log on because they actually enjoy the game. And that just doesn’t happen, no matter what game it is.

You ask about masochism after the LS chapter which had such titles as glutton for punishment? :-p

I am dissatisfied with the structure of LS content; as an anecdote, some of those I see in my world in map chat (and guilds) are also disinterested/turned off by it. I agree that this is not a concrete measurement, but neither is your wild assertion of 1%. I would expect that the vast majority of players like the LS content or are indifferent to it.

In the long term, I agree that statistics of logins will indicate how significant this topic is; and I imagine that ANet will attempt to correct course if things aren’t going well. As I said, using concurrency naively when you’re also encouraging participation will produce skewed results; but you can take such enticements into account.

ANet’s devs have acknowledged that they’ve gotten negative feedback about too much temporary content in the past (albeit not for the reasons in this thread): https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/archive/jubilee/So-EVERYTHING-in-this-patch-is-temporary/first#post2561414

I think the OP is right that concurrency alone isn’t enough to do short-term course corrections. In the long term, I’ll grant that you’re right that it will approximate player satisfaction … but I would assert that you throwing around any specific numbers like 1% is pulling numbers out of your kitten .

minbariguy.7504:

Raziel.4216:

I really doubt Anet, the company that made an extremely succesful CORPG known for it’s content updates would increase the ammount of LS per month without being certain that a large chunk of the comunity wants it, large gunk =/= everyone.

So…everything ANet does is what they are certain a large chunk of the community wants?

Seriously, everything?

Are you suggesting that they are incapable of making a mistake?

Of course not, I’m suggesting that before committing a bunch of resources to LS they will look at their own data, like every company in the world would maybe?

linuxotaku.4731:

Dungeons are the part I find interesting; having done both with an without ascended gear, I’m willing to assert that it makes a difference. Also — as others have pointed out — give higher stats, and players will ask for harder content to keep things interesting. E.g. the recent changes to Teq. I have nearly full ascended gear — but I don’t want it to be the case that new people are at a disadvantage; I dislike how that affects PUG dynamics. (There’s enough disadvantage through not knowing the mechanics.)

You can do dungeons in masterwork gear, is that it ?
You’re predicting what players will do, your argument relies on pure speculation, elitists will always be there, avoiding them is not hard.
Next

linuxotaku.4731:

The straw man argument is that it’s only a grind if you can’t play content without doing it. The meaning I intend is that it’s a grind if you’re doing something you don’t enjoy for extrinsic rewards. You couldn’t use the definition you’re using if you mean to include grinding for aesthetic rewards.

You’re complaining about a grind, therefore grind must somehow affect your ability to play, it’s quite basic.
Calling it straw-man many times wont cut it dude, try again.

linuxotaku.4731:

Actually, Anet does now target them. That’s sort of my point when I call this kind of game design unethical.

Companies cant keep up with addicts or completionists, they complete content way too fast and producing it takes longer.
Next

linuxotaku.4731:

I read Dusk’s comments, and am familiar with yourlogicalfallacyis.com; this isn’t actually the anecdote fallacy because here the OP isn’t asserting that it is generally so, only that the personal anecdote does not fit the naive model. At least in this thread, the OP didn’t say people aren’t playing (making a claim about statistics from anecdote), but rather than playing more != enjoying the game more.

Really ?

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that many players have logged into the game not because it is fun, but because of other pressures.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

People will do a lot of things beyond reason, especially the more financially and emotionally invested they are. Simply assuming people will stop when it stops being enjoyable is a very narrow way of looking at things.

That’s just the first 2, there’s plenty.
Next

linuxotaku.4731:

Dusk’s fallacy is in assuming the naive model: that players are rational actors. Like it or not, neither you nor I are perfectly rational.

And you assume that we play a game that we dont want to play, epic.

linuxotaku.4731:

The part that bothers me is the use of time-limited offers for this. There’s plenty of literature in psychology research about this, and I’m sure the use of this is not an accident.

Already pointed out why the skinner box is not as effective in B2P as in P2P MMOs.

DusK.3849:

If a player clicks that log in button, it’s because, for whatever reason, he wants to play the game.

linuxotaku.4731:

— misses the OP’s point: players may think they want to log in and play the game — but afterwards realize that they did so due to psychological tactics rather than because it was actually fun (or because they actually wanted to rewards in question).

Read previous posts.

linuxotaku.4731:

Any players which experience this will go through a period of higher play followed but unhappiness with the game. Said differently: naively using engagement metrics will probably produce biased data when you’re also using psychological tactics to encourage engagement.

If you’re done with the game content you move on.

I’m sure you can do better

DusK.3849:

snip

Anti statistics are a far better philosophy than making them up as you go.

“%1” pfft. There are now dozens of threads like this one in the last month alone.

Of course, Anet themselves make the claim that the forums are such a small percentage that any opinions expressed are irrelevant.

I log in because I want to have fun. Sure.
But then I run into the daily limits on anything I want to do and am enticed to walk in a circle farming champs as the only legitimate method of ever achieving any of the worthwhile rewards. Since doing the content that is fun is losing out on any real progress and reward.

I log in on LS release days, hoping the content is worthwhile.
Doesn’t mean it is.

This thread is a sad scope of education.
Extrinsic vs intrinsic rewards are a basic premise of psychology. No matter how hard you claim that people only do things for intrinsic rewards the stark reality of life in general is the opposite. But by all means continue arguing that as it seems to be something you enjoy doing, otherwise you wouldn’t be doing it, right?

Statistical fallacies (real numbers portrayed incorrectly) are a basic premise of mathematics and debate. Individual anecdotal evidence is flawed and subject to bias, but there is a point where the anecdotal evidence of many people reaches statistical viability.

And any corporation’s primary goal should always be customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction can only be gained via anecdotal evidence from the customers.

Anecdotal evidence suggested that people loved the “idea” of monthly release, but were very disappointed with catastrophe that was the Lost Shores release. Regardless of what came with it, the release upset nearly every who was there, and everyone who missed the one time only event at 12 noon PST.

Knowing that this was the case Anet admited to redesigning the core foundation of LS and working towards a better solution with Flame and Frost. The end result of which, and the opening of Secret of Southson was well received. Again by the collection of anecdotal evidence. Those happened to be two weeks apart.

Someone, somewhere, decided that since people liked the never before heard of monthly content (anecdotal), and people logged in and spent the most money during the first 1-2 weeks of each release (statistical), that doubling the release schedule would result in a more fluid income rate.

(And stick it to those monthly sub games, as Anet would roll in dough TWICE a month.)

Anet has hinted (no actual evidence of any kind, just anecdotal marketing hype from a market driven company) that concurrency is still very high. One half of their magical formula has been working for now.

They still need the collection of anecdotal evidence of customer satisfaction.

Because year one is gone, the “Loyalty” building phase is gone. What they choose to do now and into the beginning of 2014 WILL determine the longevity of this game. As a ‘niche’ market overshadowed by the new wave of MMOs? Or as the stark reminder of how easily the current BiS can kill itself with gimmicky mechanics built around maintaning concurrency vs satisfaction.

Unless everyone has forgotten the early reviews of Guild Wars 2, that it would either be the new best in class, or just the first-and-worst in a new class of mmo. The former could still happen, but only with some core changes to this LS formulae. The idea is still good. The execution, lets just say if it was a tv show based on a good movie, it would have been canceled by now.
(It’s more like it opened with LOTR, and now we have the Power Ranger edition.)

The latter is looking more and more likely with each new LS release, and each new developer pod cast about the other upcoming games.

Raziel.4216:

If you’re done with the game content you move on.

I’m sure you can do better

OK, but that is not the point. Yes, if you get bored, you should move on. That is something I personally recommend to burned out guildies. But that does not mean you have to like watching a franchise fail.

There is no expansion in the works. No sequel is being worked on either.

Right now, the living story is all the Guild Wars franchise has, creatively. It is all Anet has, financially. If the LS does not succeed, then both the IP and the company are in trouble.

Fans of the series want to see Guild Wars succeed and continue to grow. If the living story is not up to par, then that will not happen because, once again, there is nothing else on the horizon from this company.

I’m of the opinion they should involve the player base in how the living story goes;
similar to the election. I feel like something we did as a whole should have affected this Scarlet situation.

Personally, I think they need to get off this tangent, and get back to the main story.
What is the pact doing? Zhaitan is dead yet Orr is business as usual.
Are the other dragons on a picnic?
What are the Destiny’s Edge people up to?

I would like to get back on track with the actual STORY and not this sidebar “crazed Sylvari” story.

Lucky.9421:

OK, but that is not the point. Yes, if you get bored, you should move on. That is something I personally recommend to burned out guildies. But that does not mean you have to like watching a franchise fail.

There is no expansion in the works. No sequel is being worked on either.

Right now, the living story is all the Guild Wars franchise has, creatively. It is all Anet has, financially. If the LS does not succeed, then both the IP and the company are in trouble.

Fans of the series want to see Guild Wars succeed and continue to grow. If the living story is not up to par, then that will not happen because, once again, there is nothing else on the horizon from this company.

This is what scares me more than anything. I’m completely emotionally invested in this game and so are my guildies, but what have I been seeing lately? My guildies looking at other games that are coming out in the next few months. It makes me mad that after 8 years we are going to be forced to a different game, because it basically isn’t the same company as it was before. Then you have the people on here telling us all to leave the game if we don’t like it anymore, and for them it is probably that easy because they aren’t emotionally involved in the Guild Wars franchise. I can only hope that they figure this out before it is too late for me to bring my guildies back to this game.

Raziel.4216:

Of course not, I’m suggesting that before committing a bunch of resources to LS they will look at their own data, like every company in the world would maybe?

Right. They will look at their own data and, just like every company in the world who is not infallible, may possibly misinterpret the data, make erroneous assumptions, or make mistakes with the execution of their plan.

Hence this thread. And many others like it. I am glad, however, that you acknowledge the possibility that ANet could be making the wrong call in regards to Living Story.