Showing Posts For Diabolus.2705:
Oh! and one on how big the legendary population is, and a breakdown of which are most/least popular legendaries….. Even though we know the answer to that one :P
Hey Anet!
I think it would be really cool if you guys can toss together some fun stats about GW2, like % breakdown of which professions are played most/ least, what races people roll most/ least, what are the most/least common crafts, etc. I think stats like these would be really well received and will continue to give your community a sense of trust/transparency with you guys. Keep up the awesome job!
-Cheers
/agreed – Please help with this Anet!!!!
I use GW2LFG.com, it’d just be nice to have it in game.
I don’t know why people keep saying it’s against lore to have mounts. There’s dialogue between two human NPCs in Quuensdale, I believe, that say something along the lines of, “remember when we used to ride Moas across the fields?”.
I read a while ago somewhere that Anet didn’t make a LFG tool because they didn’t want LA to appear deserted. It would keep the city alive and help groups form quickly. Win/Win
Like Anet give a F#ck about us guys in getting Legendary….And i do agree that getting Legendary is a pain.unless ur a non lifer and the whole time u spend on the game.But not everyone is like that.Some ppl have a Job,Family,Morgage,college, hobbies,etc.
That’s the thing, they actually DO “give a F###” about us as a playerbase. A game that is created to cater to everyone does so not by creating 1-piece of content that everyone enjoys, but by creating multiple layers of content. In Guild Wars 2, the breakdown in relationship to gear seems to generally be like this:
Casual-beginner Players: Stats easily obtained @ lvl 80 then get Dungeon set looks.
Casual-advanced Players: Tier 3 cultural/ rare crafts(ie volcanus/ foefire’s essence)/ ascended gear
Hardcore Players: Legendary weapons
Again, this is because they are doing what they are saying and appealing to everyone with the game as a WHOLE, not with any 1 piece of content. I don’t understand why people get so upset about it. It’s one tiny piece of content (a simple skin mind you) that doesn’t exclude anyone from anything story related, or otherwise relevant content, that doesn’t make anybody more powerful than anyone else, and that Anet created for their small Hardcore fan base. I’m grateful they took the time to do something like that. It really shows how they really are catering to every single type of player they can. I feel like people forget that.
Actually, they said somewhere that they want to appeal to both casual (by making it easy to get stats IMO) and the hardcore (by making legendaries hard to achieve IMO). It’s a small aspect of the game. If it’s too hard, there are a ton of other great looking skins that aren’t as difficult to get. It’s only one skin per weapon type that you personally won’t obtain for a very long time for whatever reason, because you don’t have the free time in your life, or otherwise. In a game that is not like WoW, in the sense that you can accomplish your legendary by yourself without the need of a group, how else would they have implemented something for the hardcore? I think they did a great job, 3-12 month grind is a great time sink to build a legendary and I think Anet agrees.
A genuine, curious question. What, within the bounds of GW2, would be challenging and a lot of effort, and not require much time? Such that a very small percentage of players would end up with legendaries? Because legendaries really shouldn’t be common, they need to be special. Something that sets one apart from the masses. Otherwise it really wouldn’t be legendary.
No game developer in the world designs content or goals specifically for “the hardcore”. The very idea that you are entitled to something more than another person in a game based purely on the fact that you have a lot more free time and are willing to grind repetitive content is really quite sad. You’re not entitled; you’ll just get it quicker. That’s fine. The problem is the RNG and the heavy ties to the ballooning economy.
Legendary is a word, nothing more. It’s there to distinguish tiers of stuff, not imply entitlement. You aren’t entitled to a legendary because you bill yourself as “hardcore”… I find this attitude really rather disturbing; you are not more important than other people as a result of your personal situation, and it’s in Anet’s interest to make the goals of their game open and achievable by all while staying true to their manifesto.
Software is malleable; whether you have a legendary or not, or believe you’re entitled to one or not based on how you categorise yourself is irrelevant; the current implementation is impenetrable to new players, players with less time, and people who are feeling the pain of RNG.
The ironic sense of entitlement works both ways my friend.
I feel like Legendaries were made specifically for the hardcore. In which case, I’m happy where they’re at currently. I don’t feel like they were made to be accessible to everyone. If they were easier to craft, a lot more hardcore players would not have much other content to do. I don’t have my legendary yet, but I’m personally happy with how expensive and time consuming it all is. Hopefully it goes higher, and an RNG factor just makes me look @ players with legendaries and say, " holy crap, not only did you collect all the mats, but you’re also super lucky". Just adds more OMG factor whenever I see someone with one. And the fact that prices for all them go up as the amount of players increase just keeps the legendaries at that ultra- rare level. I don’t want to see 100 new twilights if there are 1000 new players. Price increase keeps it super elusive.
Those are valid points and an ignorant assumption, at best, in your conclusion. From your “going back to tetris” argument, one could say go play GW1, it’s time for GW2 to evolve. But that’s not the point. The point is we now have a valid argument for why we shouldn’t have mounts, and THAT is the reason behind starting a topic, getting both ends of the spectrum. Now from a lore standpoint, there are ways around adding mount like features without adding actual mounts. For example, charr can sprint faster, Asura can maybe get a new technology that transforms them into a fast ball of energy, norn could maybe transform into a leopard, Etc. I know lore may be a big deal to you, but calling people ignorant because they believe that mounts can easily tie into lore somehow is well, just ignorant.
Waypoints are cool and all except the cost really adds up. I’m just saying mounts would be a cool option in having to pay ONLY ONCE ( as opposed to countless times using waypoints). This is my personal #1 reason for mounts. Mounts are casual friendly as well IMHO. Like 10-15g for the skill, seperate little utility button and it summons mount/ speed buff, depending on race. 30% increase or something like that.
Just did a re-evaluation of my skills, was 100 miles over due according to the sticker, thanks for the reminder. OT: Down to the bare-bones of it, a mount is a perma-speed buff at a hefty cost. Why can’t I ask for that? And you still haven’t given me a straight-forward answer… Why don’t YOU want mounts? You just gave me ways to get around not having them and how other people farm Orr, which is great and all, if I didn’t utilize all that already. Creating an alt simply for a speed buffed farmer just doesn’t fit into my schedule, as I’m sure for many other casual players going for their legendary. Give me something solid here. Change my mind.
Token as in typical feature in some games like WoW or Tera. It’s not required or needed, if you want your vanity pet because frankly that is all it would be, that’s what mini’s are for. That is how it has always been implemented in Guild Wars.
I’m not sure we’re seeing eye-to-eye here. Vanity would be a side-effect, main purpose is a permanent speed boost.
:sigh: Enough with the mount threads, it takes like 5 seconds to walk to where you need to go, stop trying to add token features from other games into this one.
More like an additional gold sink than token feature. Not sure exactly what you mean by this.
No. Mounts do not belong in GW.
@Starlightpaw The only penalty for dying in WvW is the time it takes you to get back to the battle. If that was not there battles would be much longer and possibly deadlocked.
Tell me why you don’t think they belong in GW2?
Hey there fellow gamers!
Long time forum creep, first time poster.
Let me start by saying that I’m a long time MMO player, not ancient, but I’ve been playing them since around the time WoW was in patch 1.3.
For me, mounts/ increased speed have been a very important feature in any MMO for reasons ranging from decreased farm time to looking like B’dass incarnate. I feel like Guild Wars 2 should also have mounts, but the implementation has to be very specific. For one reason or another, the following points outline exactly how I feel mounts should be implemented into GW2:
•Racial specific mounts- Keep it as realistic as possible. Maybe Charr shouldn’t have mounts and instead get a mount buff.
•No mounting in towns- Several reasons for this. Also, keeps towns less cluttered-looking.
•Auto-dismount in certain areas/ events- Some quests/ events just don’t have room for mounts.
•Easy dismount by enemy- Simply to keep players from stampeding through a horde of Risen or something. Stay tactical, avoid baddies.
•Not super fast- Keep them at like a 30% speed increase. Mounted=/=Sonic Speed.
These are just some of the suggestions I had that I can remember right now. What are some of yours?
(edited by Diabolus.2705)