Guild Wars 2

Raziel.4216:

I doubt they’d commit to 2 living story updates per month if they noticed people log in to do achievements only.
We can only speculate, the only one with real # is Anet, no company would make this kind of decision out of the blue.

You’re assuming Anet behaves rationally, logically, and in their own best interests.

Instead, Anet has shown that they don’t listen to their customers and are very stubborn about admitting and fixing mistakes. They seem very shortsighted, often doing things that perhaps give them good metrics now, but probably will negatively affect the longevity of the game.

I would not be surprised at all if a large percentage of people are logging in only for the achievements.

Back to the thread: I feel the Living Story is a great idea in theory, but a total failure in implementation. There is practically no “Living” in the Living Story (Scarlet’s invasions have zero effect on the world) and the “Story” is amateurish at best.

I think Anet should have been more bold and had the Living Story affect zones permanently (something like the evolution of Southsun from a desolate island to a growing world of colonists). The world would feel more alive.

Plus, when players that missed the storyline return to the game, they at least get a “new” zone to explore.

Lord Kuru.3685:

Raziel.4216:

I doubt they’d commit to 2 living story updates per month if they noticed people log in to do achievements only.
We can only speculate, the only one with real # is Anet, no company would make this kind of decision out of the blue.

You’re assuming Anet behaves rationally, logically, and in their own best interests.

Instead, Anet has shown that they don’t listen to their customers and are very stubborn about admitting and fixing mistakes. They seem very shortsighted, often doing things that perhaps give them good metrics now, but probably will negatively affect the longevity of the game.

I would not be surprised at all if a large percentage of people are logging in only for the achievements.

Back to the thread: I feel the Living Story is a great idea in theory, but a total failure in implementation. There is practically no “Living” in the Living Story (Scarlet’s invasions have zero effect on the world) and the “Story” is amateurish at best.

I think Anet should have been more bold and had the Living Story affect zones permanently (something like the evolution of Southsun from a desolate island to a growing world of colonists). The world would feel more alive.

Plus, when players that missed the storyline return to the game, they at least get a “new” zone to explore.

You’re assuming Anet doesnt behave rationally (proof?) and doesnt follow the same steps that any company would before commiting to something.
No company will throw resources at something before checking the data, such as how many people log on before and after LS, how much time they spend online, what % of that time is doing LS-related stuff, etc.

Anet has many flaws, as expected, but they certainly listen to customers (shown in GW1 many times) and made this decision based on real data, like any company does they are not new to this.

We can continue speculating and talking about the friend of my friend that doesnt log on anymore because of LS! but that’s anecdotal (worthless) evidence.

Raziel.4216:

Lord Kuru.3685:

Raziel.4216:

I doubt they’d commit to 2 living story updates per month if they noticed people log in to do achievements only.
We can only speculate, the only one with real # is Anet, no company would make this kind of decision out of the blue.

You’re assuming Anet behaves rationally, logically, and in their own best interests.

Instead, Anet has shown that they don’t listen to their customers and are very stubborn about admitting and fixing mistakes. They seem very shortsighted, often doing things that perhaps give them good metrics now, but probably will negatively affect the longevity of the game.

I would not be surprised at all if a large percentage of people are logging in only for the achievements.

Back to the thread: I feel the Living Story is a great idea in theory, but a total failure in implementation. There is practically no “Living” in the Living Story (Scarlet’s invasions have zero effect on the world) and the “Story” is amateurish at best.

I think Anet should have been more bold and had the Living Story affect zones permanently (something like the evolution of Southsun from a desolate island to a growing world of colonists). The world would feel more alive.

Plus, when players that missed the storyline return to the game, they at least get a “new” zone to explore.

You’re assuming Anet doesnt behave rationally (proof?) and doesnt follow the same steps that any company would before commiting to something.
No company will throw resources at something before checking the data, such as how many people log on before and after LS, how much time they spend online, what % of that time is doing LS-related stuff, etc.

Anet has many flaws, as expected, but they certainly listen to customers (shown in GW1 many times) and made this decision based on real data, like any company does they are not new to this.

We can continue speculating and talking about the friend of my friend that doesnt log on anymore because of LS! but that’s anecdotal (worthless) evidence.

They may look at data but interpret it incorrectly. For example, they may see data of tons of people doing LS and think it’s because people enjoy LS when in reality it could be that people only care about the rewards/Achievements.

As for listening to customers in GW1. That was a very different Anet to the Anet we have now.

Anyway, your post seemed to indicate that Anet has data and therefore are taking the right actions. All I’m saying is that having data doesn’t mean you’re using it in the right way. And from their recent behavior, I personally believe (IMO!) that they are not.

I don’t understand this “ANet has data and metrics, therefore they are infallable!” argument. They already said that they heard us loud and clear that we didn’t appreciate the enormous amount of temporary content Living World was giving us, so in response they announced that going forward they would be focusing more on permanent content.

Why didn’t their all-knowing data stop them from launching Living Story with such a high focus on temporary content? I mean hey, if they were releasing all that temporary stuff, they surely must have had data that suggested that it was the right thing to do, right?

Except it wasn’t. And ANet finally admitted it after the overwhelmingly negative response. Now many of us are just waiting for ANet to admit that the pace and quality of the Living Story is also not what a significant number of players want, and again adjust accordingly.

Numbers, metrics, and data are not super powers wielded by advanced and infallible beings. Anyone can make mistakes. Yes, even ANet.

I do not like it. I’d prefer permanent content. The opening of Southsun was the only thing that they’ve released that was actually fun. Teq has been a distant second.

Fernling.1729:

I would rather see all the resources put into permanent content.

AGREED 100%

Lord Kuru.3685:

Raziel.4216:

Lord Kuru.3685:

Raziel.4216:

I doubt they’d commit to 2 living story updates per month if they noticed people log in to do achievements only.
We can only speculate, the only one with real # is Anet, no company would make this kind of decision out of the blue.

You’re assuming Anet behaves rationally, logically, and in their own best interests.

Instead, Anet has shown that they don’t listen to their customers and are very stubborn about admitting and fixing mistakes. They seem very shortsighted, often doing things that perhaps give them good metrics now, but probably will negatively affect the longevity of the game.

I would not be surprised at all if a large percentage of people are logging in only for the achievements.

Back to the thread: I feel the Living Story is a great idea in theory, but a total failure in implementation. There is practically no “Living” in the Living Story (Scarlet’s invasions have zero effect on the world) and the “Story” is amateurish at best.

I think Anet should have been more bold and had the Living Story affect zones permanently (something like the evolution of Southsun from a desolate island to a growing world of colonists). The world would feel more alive.

Plus, when players that missed the storyline return to the game, they at least get a “new” zone to explore.

You’re assuming Anet doesnt behave rationally (proof?) and doesnt follow the same steps that any company would before commiting to something.
No company will throw resources at something before checking the data, such as how many people log on before and after LS, how much time they spend online, what % of that time is doing LS-related stuff, etc.

Anet has many flaws, as expected, but they certainly listen to customers (shown in GW1 many times) and made this decision based on real data, like any company does they are not new to this.

We can continue speculating and talking about the friend of my friend that doesnt log on anymore because of LS! but that’s anecdotal (worthless) evidence.

They may look at data but interpret it incorrectly. For example, they may see data of tons of people doing LS and think it’s because people enjoy LS when in reality it could be that people only care about the rewards/Achievements.

As for listening to customers in GW1. That was a very different Anet to the Anet we have now.

Anyway, your post seemed to indicate that Anet has data and therefore are taking the right actions. All I’m saying is that having data doesn’t mean you’re using it in the right way. And from their recent behavior, I personally believe (IMO!) that they are not.

We agree to disagree then, I personally believe that they’re going in the right direction.

I’d love’em if they let everyone look at their data, it would calm (or justify) the complaints.

minbariguy.7504:

I don’t understand this “ANet has data and metrics, therefore they are infallable!” argument. They already said that they heard us loud and clear that we didn’t appreciate the enormous amount of temporary content Living World was giving us, so in response they announced that going forward they would be focusing more on permanent content.

Why didn’t their all-knowing data stop them from launching Living Story with such a high focus on temporary content? I mean hey, if they were releasing all that temporary stuff, they surely must have had data that suggested that it was the right thing to do, right?

Except it wasn’t. And ANet finally admitted it after the overwhelmingly negative response. Now many of us are just waiting for ANet to admit that the pace and quality of the Living Story is also not what a significant number of players want, and again adjust accordingly.

Numbers, metrics, and data are not super powers wielded by advanced and infallible beings. Anyone can make mistakes. Yes, even ANet.

Doesnt mean they’re infallable, it means their decision is based on real evidence, we on the other hand have tons and tons of anecdotal evidence (worthless).

They “heard” forum complaints, but they can also look at how much time people spend logged on since LS, what % of that time is doing LS content, etc. and THAT would speak much louder than some players talking about how the friend of the friend of the other friend didnt like it and left. That would justify the updates every 2 weeks, NO company will commit resources without checking their own data first.

BTW your last paragraph is fallacious, you cant ask “why did the data obtained LATER stop that from happening BEFORE”, come on, you can do better.

They can make mistakes, OF COURSE! they are humans, but I’ll trust their decision (wich, once again, is based on hard data) instead of a bunch of anecdotal crap.

Raziel.4216:

BTW your last paragraph is fallacious, you cant ask “why did the data obtained LATER stop that from happening BEFORE”, come on, you can do better.

They can make mistakes, OF COURSE! they are humans, but I’ll trust their decision (wich, once again, is based on hard data) instead of a bunch of anecdotal crap.

Well of course you are correct. If the data is obtained later, it could not have been used to support a course of action.

Which is why I am suggesting that while decisions based on the “hard data” they had at the time might have suggested this course of action was solid, the current data they are presently collecting may prove otherwise.

But of course, I don’t know that. And neither do you. Only time will tell.

By the way, while I agree that posts claiming to speak for “all their friends who quit the game” are unreliable, any forum post complaining about that poster’s personal dissatisfaction with Living Story is not “anecdotal”, since it is based on the poster’s own personal experience. And the fact that a person logged on to a forum to tell a business “Hey, I do not like this” is “hard data”.

minbariguy.7504:

Raziel.4216:

BTW your last paragraph is fallacious, you cant ask “why did the data obtained LATER stop that from happening BEFORE”, come on, you can do better.

They can make mistakes, OF COURSE! they are humans, but I’ll trust their decision (wich, once again, is based on hard data) instead of a bunch of anecdotal crap.

Well of course you are correct. If the data is obtained later, it could not have been used to support a course of action.

Which is why I am suggesting that while decisions based on the “hard data” they had at the time might have suggested this course of action was solid, the current data they are presently collecting may prove otherwise.

But of course, I don’t know that. And neither do you. Only time will tell.

By the way, while I agree that posts claiming to speak for “all their friends who quit the game” are unreliable, any forum post complaining about that poster’s personal dissatisfaction with Living Story is not “anecdotal”, since it is based on the poster’s own personal experience. And the fact that a person logged on to a forum to tell a business “Hey, I do not like this” is “hard data”.

I doubt the current data proves otherwise, a company wouldnt shoot itself on the foot by commiting resources to a failed project.
Like you said, only time will tell.

Maybe in 2 months they’ll suspend LS, or maybe they’ll make it 3 per month, we’ll see.

Raziel.4216:

Lord Kuru.3685:

Raziel.4216:

Lord Kuru.3685:

Raziel.4216:

I doubt they’d commit to 2 living story updates per month if they noticed people log in to do achievements only.
We can only speculate, the only one with real # is Anet, no company would make this kind of decision out of the blue.

You’re assuming Anet behaves rationally, logically, and in their own best interests.

Instead, Anet has shown that they don’t listen to their customers and are very stubborn about admitting and fixing mistakes. They seem very shortsighted, often doing things that perhaps give them good metrics now, but probably will negatively affect the longevity of the game.

I would not be surprised at all if a large percentage of people are logging in only for the achievements.

Back to the thread: I feel the Living Story is a great idea in theory, but a total failure in implementation. There is practically no “Living” in the Living Story (Scarlet’s invasions have zero effect on the world) and the “Story” is amateurish at best.

I think Anet should have been more bold and had the Living Story affect zones permanently (something like the evolution of Southsun from a desolate island to a growing world of colonists). The world would feel more alive.

Plus, when players that missed the storyline return to the game, they at least get a “new” zone to explore.

You’re assuming Anet doesnt behave rationally (proof?) and doesnt follow the same steps that any company would before commiting to something.
No company will throw resources at something before checking the data, such as how many people log on before and after LS, how much time they spend online, what % of that time is doing LS-related stuff, etc.

Anet has many flaws, as expected, but they certainly listen to customers (shown in GW1 many times) and made this decision based on real data, like any company does they are not new to this.

We can continue speculating and talking about the friend of my friend that doesnt log on anymore because of LS! but that’s anecdotal (worthless) evidence.

They may look at data but interpret it incorrectly. For example, they may see data of tons of people doing LS and think it’s because people enjoy LS when in reality it could be that people only care about the rewards/Achievements.

As for listening to customers in GW1. That was a very different Anet to the Anet we have now.

Anyway, your post seemed to indicate that Anet has data and therefore are taking the right actions. All I’m saying is that having data doesn’t mean you’re using it in the right way. And from their recent behavior, I personally believe (IMO!) that they are not.

We agree to disagree then, I personally believe that they’re going in the right direction.

I’d love’em if they let everyone look at their data, it would calm (or justify) the complaints.

What data?

A quick example of a made up scenario:

In May this year the following dungeons were run a certain number of times each day:

CoF path 1: 3000
CoF path 2: 200
CoF path 3: 5

Arah Path1: 15

AC Path 1: 200
AC Path 2: 10
AC Path 3: 150

TA F/U: 0

According to this data CoF P1 is the best dungeon path in the game. Should every dungeon path in the game be made the same as CoF P1 as a result? Should TA F/U be removed (the answer was yes apparently)?

At some point data has to have context – and at some point even popular content can be bad content.

Queen’s Gauntlet:
Subject 7: killed 4000 times
Deadeye Dunwell: killed 20,000 times
All other bosses combined: killed 1000 times

Does that mean that Deadeye Dunwell was the best designed content? What is the goal with content? To have players repeat it as much as possible? To have players tell their friends “hey this is cool, come play this game to try it out” (original SAB)? To give players an engaging story for a few hours every two weeks with satisfactory rewards? To keep players logging in as much as possible as consistently as possible?

You know what’s nearly impossible to define with data? Is it fun? Players will do something that they don’t enjoy because it’s profitable, or because it’s a daily, or because it’s gone forever in two weeks.

If ArenaNet is focusing on data to decide how to design content, they have truly lost site of the question “Is it fun?”.

We can speculate all we want about what Anet considers data, it could be how many times players do something or the ammount of time spent in a piece of LS content, we dont know.

That doesnt change the fact that it’s standard for companies to research before committing resources to anything, if they’re increasing the ammount of LS per month then whatever data they use must support that decision.

Raziel.4216:

They wouldnt release a new update every 2 weeks if people didnt like it.

They don’t care if people like it, they only care if it keeps players logging in and – by extension – spending money in the cash shop.

You do know they’ve had dungeons in most of the LS right?

Mad king’s realm, Tixx’s airship, SAB, molten facility, aetherblade retreat, and scarlet’s playhouse. (and SAB again if you want to count it twice.)

So you went a month without a new dungeon at the most; the horror.

PvP constantly gets balance updates (read nerfs if you play PvE), it has got new maps every once in awhile, and all the minigames in the events, save for 1, have been PvP.

WvW, i’ve said before, what do you really do to it? Changes are nice and everything, but what could you really add to WvW that would add anything new to the experience. WvW needs to be entirely reworked IMO, but that takes time and one simple update won’t do it.

I like the Living Story overall, I don’t like particular details.

Considering A.net is improving fast on the quality and quantity of the Living Story, I can only see the future brightly. They’re clearly moving towards more permanence. To me, the Living Story is good.

Lord Kuru.3685:

Raziel.4216:

I doubt they’d commit to 2 living story updates per month if they noticed people log in to do achievements only.
We can only speculate, the only one with real # is Anet, no company would make this kind of decision out of the blue.

You’re assuming Anet behaves rationally, logically, and in their own best interests.

I think that’s the safe assumption to make. To think otherwise is tinfoil hat territory.

Instead, Anet has shown that they don’t listen to their customers and are very stubborn about admitting and fixing mistakes. They seem very shortsighted, often doing things that perhaps give them good metrics now, but probably will negatively affect the longevity of the game.

Quite the contrary. Arena.net has always shown a long term vision and a willingness to listen to their playerbase. That goes for both GW1 and GW2. To claim otherwise is cherry picking. The amount of developer feedback you get in this game is unseen in other companies. Frankly, I believe they listen too much to the playerbase.

I would not be surprised at all if a large percentage of people are logging in only for the achievements.

If people didn’t like doing what it takes to get those, they won’t log in at all. If people do the achievements, the game is enjoyable. That goes without saying. If you’re doing stuff you don’t like for some online number, you’re doing something wrong. You only got one life, spend it wisely.

I like the LS but I dislike the fact they end the stories in dungeons which I disapprove as being a meaningful content.

Skan.5301:

Dulfy the content, finish it in 2 hours, get your rewards, call it a day.

That’s fun, right? Every two weeks you get some new reward that you can show off with the rest of the GW2 players who have the same exact thing.

No. I’d rather some things that are there to stay and require using brainpower instead of reading some prewritten guide.

Then don’t use the guide and play as intended. Quite simple really.

A minority of the majority that don’t respond on the forums I say. The Living Story started out weak but really picked up my interest once Molten Facility started and from thus far. Whether people believe it or not, things change in the game and the pieces are moving. So, define this “change” because I thought we actually voted on change during the election, that actully CHANGES to what the game population votes for.

I think changes in the game due to Living Story arcs are greatly exaggerated. If you view the base game Guild Wars 2 as a group photo, all the living story does is adding a different funny hat to one guy in the background every two weeks.

Sadly, I look at living story as they are practicing game design and story telling. Instead of each living story being like a new chapter or a sequel or prequel, it feels more like 4 completely different stories they are trying to bounce between. But in a persistant world that rarily shuts down, it has to act more like a staircase. Otherwise, it feels like watchingva movie that keeps jumping around and evetually gets to its point, thats to say half the theater didnt already walk out after the 1st 15 minutes.

Lets see, we went from southsun helping out Black Lion Co’s enemy, the Consortium which to this day hang out in Lions Arch fractal building and serve no purpose whatsoever to helping out against the flame and frost which we still have no idea who created that madness then to Southsun again to help turn it into a no purpose resort, then this band of pirates came from the sky that we curbstomped and then we helped out a sky merchant from who knows where exactly just so we could vote for somebody, so that we could stop the Queens Assassination from this person named Scarlet who control the Aetherblades, Steam creatures from the future and Clockworks who fled somewhere, then Tequatl rose up living fishheads in its wake, and now we stumble upon Scarlets new home in Twilight Arbor.

Come on, non of this makes any sense. Actually, its a great idea I just had, for a grand end of this livimg story and the new one (The search for more Dragons). The tie in Living Story could be called “Sorting out the Madness” where everything comes together, because we learn Scarlet is in fact!!!! ____

Folly : We went to Southsun Cove with the Lion Guard to solve a problem (Karka invading Lions Arch) that the Consortium had started when Canach discovered it and riled up the Karka. The Consortium and Black Lion aren’t enemies, they are competing corporations. The Consortium do use some dodgy practices to acheive their own goals though.

During Flame and Frost they assisted the refugees by giving them a temporary camp after their homes were burnt down, but then took it too far, by signing them up to contracts that turned refugee’s into forced labour. It’s not a no purpose resort, they are trying to make money from this project they have started and don’t care what it takes to get it done. The Southsun stuff was a bit of a stand alone story, apart from progressing Ellens career, which is completely fine.

The Molten alliance was set up by a smooth talker from the city, we later find that the Alliance are actually working with Scarlet during the invasions, so while it hasn’t been said definitively, we can assume that was Scarlet (or maybe Mai).

The Aetherblades, Mai’s clockwork crew I believe was created because of the Molten Alliance. This is just my currently unproven theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL8wY-pBLajFYeyeyA3axtowONmbkNMRrx&feature=player_detailpage&v=0Sw2lgBUgBc#t=585 but yeah we don’t have an explanation yet on where the Aetherblades cames from.

The Zephyrites do have a connection to the dragons, they are the protectors of Glints legacy and live in the sky to protect it.

The election took place because Mai organised the assassination of Theo Ashford and even before that, the guy who would have been his replacement was killed during the Molten Alliance, which seems was also a Scarlet initiative. The council seat was probably opened up with the goal of destabilising Lions Arch, we have probably stopped that plan for now and I’m sure we’ll be seeing Ellen and Evon again soon.

Jennah was trying to bolster her peoples resolve and show they could overcome anything, that they had been tested and survived. Scarlet took that as a personal challenge and gave her something new to overcome, then started attacking randomly around Tyria likely sowing fear and doubt among the locals.

Scarlet is looking to overturn the existing order, in her words "I reject the notion that that I must choose the Dream or be lost to Nightmare. The forces that push us this way or that can be redirected. They can be set against one another to the detriment of both, and now I know how.”

So yes she is going to push and prod in lots of different places, it’s going to look random until you see the whole picture. Just because we don’t have all the information yet we can’t say whether the story works overall.

Skan.5301:

Dulfy the content, finish it in 2 hours, get your rewards, call it a day.

That’s fun, right? Every two weeks you get some new reward that you can show off with the rest of the GW2 players who have the same exact thing.

No. I’d rather some things that are there to stay and require using brainpower instead of reading some prewritten guide.

I hate to say it, but this is a very valid point. While I like the concept of Living Story, it’s a little shortsighted. For example, Kiel was elected and then . . . well, nothing so far as far as that story. Well, unless you count hunting down a bunch of mobs without trial because . . . well, because.

Story usually means: plot.

And, so far, that’s sorely lacking in “Living Story.”