Guild Wars 2

Personally, I find it easier to make a well rounded female character than male.

Rosamonde Venus.2948:

Psientist.6437:

Accurately representing the thought experiment would require a gas chamber for a cat. Are you really going to compare a gas chamber for a cat to a cat hunting and killing a bird?

Another way to represent Schroedinger’s cat:

A cat in a lab coat who is smart enough to run away from the person carrying a box.

I never asked for an accurate representation of the experiment, so a box named Schröedinger’s box, containing only the cat (without the flask of gaz and the hammer) would be perfect for me., and like this there is no gaz chamber representation.

I even proposed to theorically replace the gaz by a soporific if a dead cat is controversial.

And even if you want an accurate representation, wich is not my suggestion, it’s also possible to use the Einstein’s version of this experiment, replacing the hammer and the flask of gaz by a keg of unstable gunpowder.

Any representation of this cat without the Schröedinger’s box or outside of the box would be disappointing for me.

Edit : changed my mind : a box named Schröedinger’s experiment with a cat in lab coat next to it, maybe randomly dead or alive, would be ok for me

I am glad I live in a world where team dead cat and team no dead cat can compromise with a cat wearing a lab coat. Goes to show that we should never underestimate the power of cute cats in clothes.

Rosamonde Venus.2948:

If a dead cat could be controversial (PEGI12 related?), why not namimg the two states “asleep” and “awake”. We just need to replace the hydrocyanic acid by an extremely fast soporific XD

I really don’t agree with an undead cat, imho, it does simply not correspond to the experiment : in the experiment, both states exist simultaneously and independantly untill you observe. Then the two (or more) states collapse in one one of them, randomly.

Btw, we already have a daily dead bird in our home instance, so why not a dead Schröedinger’s cat?

Accurately representing the thought experiment would require a gas chamber for a cat. Are you really going to compare a gas chamber for a cat to a cat hunting and killing a bird?

Another way to represent Schroedinger’s cat:

A cat in a lab coat who is smart enough to run away from the person carrying a box.

Going to go out on a limb and predict ‘dead cat’ and ‘device to kill cat’ are the first two items on the list of things to never put in home instance.

An undead cat could be used as a work around since it has properties of both a living and dead cat.

A cat made from a box could reference the thought experiment without including a dead cat.

I guess it comes down to how important it is to help people feel smart, you know that 1 in 5.

I have left groups when someone pulls out Twilight, it figuratively looks like a censored kitten. I get it OP, but exhibitionism sells and not everyone can maintain a sophisticated and cultured aesthetic. Having good taste can be lonely. Thankfully, there is tasteful gear that I can use to make my character look like a vampire ninja maid.

I will interrogate some NPCs, see if I can get them to crack under pressure.

I liked the HoT story as well, especially how the PC protagonist was presented. We consistently displayed the personality traits necessary of someone leading a military assault. Eir’s death scene was compelling, she showed her son how to die with honor. The zone and event storytelling was well crafted and combined with the main story arc made for a cohesive experience the studio should be proud of.

LW3 though….

The PC protagonist becomes a foil for the other characters, presenting personality traits and responding according to what the plot or the characterization of other characters requires rather than as a consistent person. The PC protagonist became the straight person for comedy routines which , imo, erodes sincerity. We switch from correctly telling Braham that the team must work for the greater good rather than pursue his understandable desire to rescue his mother, to pandering to Taimi’s desire to keep important research to herself because she doesn’t want to share credit. We go from being a competent leader of armies to being preoccupied with guild drama. We threaten Rytlock when he doesn’t give us information but pet Kasmeer’s hand even though she took off when we needed her. And for some reason we get squeamish when Taimi describes the biology of some foes.

I think the term ‘angling’ better describes what we are asking for than the term ‘fishing’. If the pro-angling coalition adopts the term ‘angling’ it would eliminate some of the “but there is fishing, we can kill fish” responses. Not all of them, but the remaining are easily countered by pointing to the term ‘angling’.

Some of my ideas on how angling could be designed.

Premise: The flesh of fish species is delicate and heros are freeken brutes. Attacking and killing a fish doesn’t leave any usable flesh.

A mastery system that unlocks a fishing pole as a two handed weapon for all professions (with or without profession specific skills) and utility skills such as “Use Net”, “Use Gaff”, and “Jig”.

Fish have a HP bar and a break bar. The goal is to deplete the break bar before the HP bar is depleted. Hooking a fish could start HP degen and skills could effect one or both bars.

The extra break bar could be given to existing fish and angling would be another way to fight a mob. If existing fish were used then I don’t think it would be too weird to have fishing poles work underwater as well. The problem with using existing fish is the whole ‘everyone can target a mob’ thing, so we will have to get rid of kill credit sharing. Just kidding. I think fisherpeople, I mean anglers, would be willing to look for instances of fish without a crowd of people. If using existing fish risks too much trolling (ha get it? trolling!) then existing fish could be supplemented with fish created by the act of angling.

I would put all of the fishing gear (fishing poles, lures) into one new crafting discipline that is big enough to contribute to overall economic activity and demand for gold . Gate fish with gear levels the same way current mobs are gated with gear levels. Throw in some angler outfits in the gem shop.

IndigoSundown.5419:

MMO’s are all about wasting time. I can think of no greater waste of time in an MMO than virtual fishing. Sounds like a perfect fit for ANet devs to waste time implementing.

How many levels of time wasting is that? I need to see this as a formula. Is it TW x TW x TW, TW/TW/TW? Looks like there could even be a square root of TW in there!

“What goes well with Aurene?”

Friendship!
Adventure!
Hugs!
Mentoring!

We will get fishing when the studio figures out how to make fishing a jumping puzzle.

Raptors handle well, but ‘posting’ animation looks silly. Zone looks great as usual but the area we saw lacked the ‘NPC personality/culture’ of HoT zones.

For the love of Tyria, just accept that the studio changed their minds and stop perpetuating the falsehood that the original quote describes ‘a la carte’ pricing. You can not describe ‘a la carte’ pricing without describing the definitive feature of ‘a la carte’ pricing, that items can be purchased individually. Consumers do not need to be told that the price of item A can be added to the price of item B. That is especially true if we understand the context of the quote; players were asking whether the studio would be using an ‘a la carte’ or a ‘meal’ pricing model. The quote describes ‘meal’ pricing.

In the context of game expansions, there are two ways to rationalize how the ‘meal’ price is calculated. Either past expansions aren’t included in the the price (they are free) or they are included (players who purchased the older expansion are charged again).

Hello On a boat!

Something like what you describe could appear when we fight/sing a lullaby to Bubbles, the underwater dragon. Perhaps submarines instead of boats?

Egrimm Van Horstmann.7921:

There does need to be more info in the game, not just a reliance on Wiki. For instance getting your first Ascended weapon should give you access to a tooltip or even a page that gives you info on changing stats and whatnot for weapons, armor, rings, amulets, and accessories. They could make each one a separate page or note that is either mailed or picked up with the item. You could even do an ingame manual that gives players access to this. Or even an NPC in the city that explains these that sends you a letter to visit them. Would make the world a little less confusing.

Or make stat changing a crafting recipe.

OP, your examples sound less like examples of a game lacking structure and more like examples of a lack of curiosity. You get laurels and never check what they can be redeemed for and want to raid but don’t explore how to obtain BiS gear. I agree that GW2 depends on wiki and outside sources, but so has nearly every game I have played and optimizing your work and time always requires research. The only way to optimize without doing research is for the game to oversimplify until the optimized path is the only path or be a prescient genius.

They look like an omage to Steven Universe and/or FF.

Back in the day crossing checking maps was the only way to find the last things needed for 100% map completion. The content guide makes cross checking maps obsolete.

For map completion, choose the option to ‘Disable Events and Personal Story.’ With that selected, the min-map will only point you towards undiscovered map items such as hearts, PoIs and vistas.

You aren’t wealthy until dwarves plot to sneak into your cave and take your treasure.

Danikat, accurate description of some of the differences between the Tyrian economy and the real world economy. However, those differences do not make the Tyrian economy less of a genuine economy, just different.

Shaogin.2679:

I used to see this response alot when requests came up for things like raids, tanks, healers, mounts etc. All of those things are in the game now despite the strong protest of these apparent WoW haters.

So I guess we can go back to asking for anything now, and just ignore the naysayers. What’s next? Capes? Built in open world voice channels?

Edit: Before you start your rant, allow me to clarify that I in no way think any of these changes make GW2 a WoW clone. I was simply stating that it was the response I always saw from people that were against these changes. I was simply interested in what other changes, that were previously deemed impossible/unlikely, people would like to see put in the game now.

I’m personally rooting for in-game voice coms.

Your original post was clear enough, though your title comes across as click bait.

Imo, “This isn’t WoW!” is more of a slogan for identity politics. “Who are we? We aren’t them!” It is easier to use generalized slogans than make nuanced arguments.

In-game voice chat channels would be great and are supported by the studio’s design pillars. Giving players access to a common chat system would make it easier for players to cooperate. I think player housing is possible as well. Home instances give the studio an innovative way to include player housing that also contributes to world building and story telling.

If the studio’s design pillars are legs supporting a table, I don’t see how dueling can be supported on that table top.

Some great and funny ideas here! The litter carried by skritt and sloth are amazing. If the studio abandoned wall crawling spider mounts because some designers were squeemish……..

The llama, doesn’t have any special movement abilities but can discuss economics.
Two coconut halves, special attack transforms target’s first attack into a flesh wound.
The Catacatapult, a catapult on a cat……it does….I don’t know…I guess it would be up to the cat.

Everyone claiming that mounts break immersion should google ‘what is game immersion?’ and read some articles and/or play LotRO. Immersion is about coherence and authenticity and mounts can increase the authenticity of a game world. If immersion is your biggest concern, then I have no idea why you are playing GW2.

It is clear to me that the declaration that ‘mounts break immersion’ is more of a slogan used to identify one’s aesthetic and group and not a reasoned argument. Imo, it is an aesthetic dominated by entitled contrarianism. You are entitled to believe that our PCs should be able to overcome any obstacle the world presents by pulling some magical ability from our kitten. You are entitled to insist that GW2 has to be contrary to every other mmo. The studio has definitely cultivated that mythos. However, you are not entitled to declare that failing to live up to your aesthetic breaks immersion. Have the dignity to declare you preference without claiming there is an existential risk in the studio’s failing to cater to your preference.

That being said, I hope mounts are restricted from certain areas like towns and open world crafting hubs. I can’t stand visual clutter and having mounts in those areas come closest to breaking immersion. It turns everything into the real world equivalent of a drive thru window (edit) and transform world elements that are important because they are areas the player shares with NPCs into areas that are just playgrounds for heroes.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Rezzet.3614:

it feels pretty lame having home instances and nothing to do with them except for once a day gatherables

It feels pretty great to me that an MMO doesn’t have player housing, that few people see. I’d rather see more changes to guild halls than anything more than cats & nodes in personal instances.

In my opinion, an mmo like Guild Wars is also a world simulator. While home instances and player housing don’t add much to the mmo experience they do add to the world simulation experience.

Personally, I wouldn’t put much effort into the same type of player housing that is found in most mmos.
I would put a lot of effort into a more innovative approach where we are the benefactors/ angel investor/ mayors of our home instances. The LW could introduce us to a cast of NPCs such as orphans, doctors, scientists, wounded soldiers, refugee families, skilled craftsman, artists, etc. who we would invite into our home instances. We would use crafting recipes, collections or scavenger hunts to produce items they would then use within the home instance, or more realistically, provide them with materials that they would use to build improvements. Carpenters could be tasked with building a stage for artists, new beds for the hospital, toys for orphanage. Essentially an interdependent ecosystem.

This would offer so much space for story telling and I think there are ways to connect the activity within the home instance to the outside world as well.

Is there a saint of lost causes or indefensible positions that you are trying to please?

1. I will buy PoF because of Mike O’brien and the assumption that he is responsible for the lack of overconfident hype and promises.

2. Disappointed that PoF won’t include player housing or content for home instances. I do not have a reward track to pursue that interests me and miss the not having a Skinner box.

3. Why is the emblem for Path of Flame a tornado?

This is an understandably sore subject for the studio, but I think the studio, especially with Mike O’Brien at the helm, is mature enough to allow the discussion to happen.

I have a bachelors in English lit, got a near perfect score on verbal SATs, tutored college students in reading comprehension….cat me if that quote describes a la carte pricing for expansions. If you are planning to offer a la carte pricing, you describe a la carte pricing. You don’t talk about the importance of keeping players on the same page, only mention a ‘single price’ or stress how innovative you are since a la carte pricing is the industry standard. The quote describes expansions only being available as a bundle and the only way that is a square deal for existing players is if the prior expansions are considered free.

This business some of you are describing where the studio remains true to the quote because $20 + $30 = $50 only makes sense if there is a rule that expansions cost $50. As well, the argument falls apart when the studio releases future expansions and it looks like Anet is set up to deliver expansions regularly.

To be clear, I applaud the studio’s decision to use a la carte pricing for expansions. A la carte pricing for expansions is the industry standard because it is the intuitive form for expansion pricing. A la carte pricing is free of gimmicks, gives the consumer a defined product that they can judge the value of, results in a product line that is easy to navigate and is resistant to a studio’s efforts to pad the price.

I would not describe the change as Anet lying to us. Instead, I would describe it as the studio maturing past the stage where they promise more than they can deliver because they are overconfident in their abilities. I also suspect the studio had less control over the pricing of HoT than PoF and the quote is their effort to rationalize and internalize.

The 2 ticket price does not affect players who already have tickets more than players who purchase tickets after the release of the Abaddon set. Every ticket takes a certain amount of player work to create and doubling the number of tickets needed doubles the amount of work required. When a player did the work is irrelevant.

Imo, arguing whether doubling the price qualifies as a ‘cash grab’ is just petty semantics being applied to a broad term. I think that may be this forums favorite game. Doubling the price of BL ticket skins has one purpose, increasing the revenue generated by BL ticket skins.

I don’t think it would make sense for the studio to make a formal announcement or warning about the increase in price unless they planned on making the increase permanent. The only purpose I can see for making an announcement is to gather player feedback and I am pretty sure they know we would prefer to pay less. The studio will get the most accurate feedback about how well this change works as a business model by letting the market respond.

Djinn.9245:

zomgbuffalo.5276:

Djinn.9245:

I also agree with the OP that Taimi should not be the central character of every story. I would like to see more variety. If Asuran tech is indeed the answer to every problem, then they should be the master race on Tyria already. In the beginning, Asuran tech used to be “hit-or-miss” – sometimes it worked but often it went horribly awry. Which is why Asura are not actually the master race. But along comes Taimi and suddenly she has the answer to everything. I HATE that kind of writing!

Asura are master race when it comes to magic and eternal alchemy. They understand it better than anyone else. You have to understand that Tyria is not on the surface of Earth. A whole different set of laws apply to races there. If Charr really wanted, they probably could wipe all the races from Tyria. So really master race is a very abstract term here to use.

No, they really aren’t the master race when it comes to anything. Go back and play Metrica again. Almost every heart and event revolves around an experiment going wrong.

And yet the writers decided to transform our PC from a Commandeer that was able to lead the Pact from near total destruction to victory into a blubberer and stutterer that coddles a vain glorious child’s effort to get one over on Phlunt. Asurans are almost always presented as vain glorious experimenters who don’t care what happens to anyone else and yet our PCs go along with Tiami building a dragon killing weapon in secret that is obviously going to backfire. Why? Because of her rivalry with Phlunt.

The focus on Tiami was fan service at the expense of our PC.

Garb Cost.3718:

Mea.5491:

I agree! I really want short grass skirts and clam bras for my Sylvari girls.

Mate you’re sick – you want to make clothes out of your own people. Wow.

Of all the jokes, the ones that require misinterpreting the definition of species for their punchline are my least favorite.

Leo G.4501:

…polo.

Lesson learned!

Tanner Blackfeather.6509:

I’m actually not at all sure we can’t kill any more dragons, period.
What Taimi simulated was specifically smashing Jormag vs Primordus, and that would blow up the world.

A staggered killing, with something* to absorb at least most of the released magic might very well still work.

*Like possibly a small dragon? Anyone seen a friendly one around? No? Oh well, maybe one might show up…

This hypothetical dragon wouldn’t even have to absorb all of the magic stored by the Elder dragons. Some of the magic could be released unassigned into the world or be absorbed by other magical beings. Of course this would require other magical beings and a non Elder dragon.

I hope they don’t replace the elder dragons with the human gods but instead, evolve the threat of the elder dragons by adding the human gods into the mix.

Marco………..

nosleepdemon.1368:

Ubi.4136:

I would love for them to add a check when selling things on the Trading Post that allows the seller to say “Not for Resale”…so once bought it could not be relisted on the Trading Post.

And, I really would love to see the difference it would make removing the artificial inflation of people just buying and reselling at a higher cost.

I imagine there would be a decent drop in price for a lot of items since the flippers/TP Botters (artificial inflation) would not be able to control the market.

That would be interesting wouldn’t it? I think reselling is partly kept in check by the listing fee, so there needs to be some variance in price before that becomes profitable, but flippers will always have a lot of power with a centralized system like the TP. With a decentralized system, the exact value of goods would be slightly harder to determine, since players would additionally be weighing up the local price of the competition. It would also factor in the relative danger of transporting the good to that location. I expect it would work a lot better in a more dangerous and expansive environment.

I was tempted to give a well thought out response to your previous post but this post makes question your sincerity. Localized markets where it is more difficult to calculate the market value of an item offer more room for flipping, more advantages for experienced and established players.

I think this thread has run its course or at least my interest in it. The last thing I would add to it is this; a game’s economy, the tools it uses to maintain a marketplace, should resonate with the design intent. A game’s economy shouldn’t be judged by how well it mimics the real world unless mimicry of the real world is the design intent.

nosleepdemon.1368:

Regarding open markets, I’d argue that in an MMO there is a definite value to obtaining a good location for selling particular goods. For example, a merchant selling health or mana potions in a dangerous zone could reasonably increase their item price “above market value”, because there is value in not having to return to a town to purchase those items. This is something that the TP really mutes. I’d also say that access to a global market would create a high bar for entry, which is something that I think is also seen on the TP, where players with lots of supply have a global effect on the market. This is super convenient to manage, and may be necessary from the point of view of ANet and managing the game’s economy, but it’s also a bit gross.

Yes, the TP reduces the chance for profiteering or charging a premium based on location. The horror.

A global market reduces the threshold for entry and increases the threshold for market manipulation.

Game development is a group effort. If you are a developer and are fortunate enough to be lead on a game’s design, keep that in mind and hire an economist to help.

Vayne.8563:

FrizzFreston.5290:

Vayne.8563:

Conner.4702:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

You know, the information found in Wikis is only as good as the lay-person editing the page. Anyone can edit a page and place whatever information they choose.

There aren’t enough non-stardard MMO-type games, probably, to merit a CORPG separate entry.

Of course, that doesn’t make a game any less a CORPG, rather than a true persistent-world MMORPG.

Just need to point out that GW2 does not have a true persistant world either. It’s all instances. So I guess GW2 is a CORPG too

Well if you want to get technical, WvW maps are persistent if nothing else, even if they reset once a week. But the meaning is clear.

Guild Wars 2 has a world were MASSIVE amounts of players can PLAY together at the same time. Guild Wars 2 didn’t.

That’s the point of a massively multiplayer online game. In Guild Wars 1 you played with at most 11 other people. No one I know would consider that massively multiplayer.

Playing with 100 people at the same time in the same event? That’s more like what an MMO means.

If you really want to get technical, several of the seasonal events definitely let you play with a large amount of players at the same time.

Not to mention community events held just as massively.

It’s alot more sensible to put GW1 in a gray area between MMO and just MO, than to hold on to some ideal MMO standard that is most likely changing over time. I mean, really, the only thing that is being held onto is the amount of players you’re playing with, all the while the similarities between each of the games are extensive and very obvious.

Plus, even GW1 had grind. There were lots of even more grindy farming methods than gw2 has. Ranger trapping in UW, 55HP monk solo, 600hp monk solo, etc.

Wanted an Icy dragon sword? Get ready to farm. Wanted obsidian armor? Get ready to farm. Crystalline Blade, anyone? And all of it was RNG.

I might agree with you if Anet themselves have said that Guild Wars 1 wasn’t an MMO, both directly and implied by the original Guild Wars 2 FAQ. I don’t think it’s going out too far on a limb to say that Anet knows what they’re making better than either you or I.

Players are just as familiar with GW1 and GW2, or any other finished game, as the studio that made the game. Players are as skilled as any studio at game taxonomy. Of course this is not true of the back end, just the playable content. I agree with FrizzFreston.

Parsing the minutiae of game taxonomy does not help a studio be more innovative. Innovation blurs the lines that divide one game type from another and if we want innovation we need to yield to the position that game taxonomy can be inexact.

nosleepdemon.1368:

You should also consider that a global TP removes the value of logistical operations, which is not realistic either, which I sort of eluded to in my OP but I suppose I didn’t spell it out. I dunno man, the more I read your reply the more I feel that a) you won’t respond and at the very least b) it’s you that needs the 101 :p

101ism describes over generalizing how economies and markets must function based on the simplified abstracts someone learns in Econ 101. Yes, global competition in the steel market does cause ‘problems’, just not economic problems. Economists the world over recommend the open markets that lead to more global supplies. The problems are problems of national interest and do not impact the production of anything that requires steel or economic growth in general. GW2’s global supply can not reproduce those problems.

Just because real world economies and markets have to deal with certain mechanics doesn’t make those mechanics economically necessary. Who cares if GW2’s global supply removes the comparative advantage available from differing “logistical operations”? To maintain comparative advantage, Arenanet would have to employ tactics like limiting the availability of recipes, steeply inclined paths to production efficiencies, and costs for moving materials. Tactics like that work in New Eden but would fall flat in Tyria.

Your argument that Tyria needs certain market mechanics because those mechanics are found in the real world may be tongue in cheek, but it is also trite. Those mechanics would negatively impact something the Tyrian marketplace does well, provide egalitarian access to everything the market has to offer at the most competitive price possible.

edit: To be clear, global markets do not “[remove] the value of logistical operations.” Global markets enhance the value of logistical operations. Access to a larger market rewards the most efficient producers. A divided market makes it easier for less efficient producers to remain competitive. Your idea of a merchant class would result in more work for consumers, and increase the chance that any one consumer would pay more than market value for items.

Linken.6345:

Psientist.6437:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

If its even on the table or not?

The good new is, yes it is on the table.
The bad new is, it’s a reallllllllly big table with lots of stuff on it.

Is there room on the table for old timey swimsuits?

Ofcourse just dont think they will be under the radar scope that anet need to keep track of the reallllly big table.

I am sorry but I can not accept mixed metaphors as an answer. I would be able to accept answers like:

“Yes, but old timey swimsuits are likely below the salt.”

or

“Yes, but from where the studio is sitting at this realllly big table, old timey swimsuits may be beyond their reach.”

Obviously, this has nothing to do with you.

Just a flesh wound.3589:

If its even on the table or not?

The good new is, yes it is on the table.
The bad new is, it’s a reallllllllly big table with lots of stuff on it.

Is there room on the table for old timey swimsuits?

Just another bad idea based on 101ism. There isn’t an economist of merit willing to defend the position that global supply would destroy the real world economy. You are advocating for the addition of market inefficiency and barriers to free trade.

I don’t think the studio has broken any promises but I do think they can be insincere. They would never put a tier above Legendary, just increase the stats for Legendary so the Ascended tier could be added. Prior to launch, the studio certainly suffered from ‘disruptor-itise’, a condition where everything in the rear view mirror but your own reflection is smaller than it appears.

If I use the studio’s definition of ‘grind’ and ‘play as you like’, I can’t call them dishonest. I just think their reward meta is insincere. The meta has become dominated by optional rewards with heavy workloads with little to no relevance to Tyria or the LW. At best, rewards are thematic trinkets. We’ve reached a place where the best defense white knights can use is that rewards are optional and don’t really matter.

I don’t think the story or dragons as the antagonist is the problem. I think how the LW merchandises itself is the problem, only offering irrelevant cosmetics is the problem. Sure, they generate reliable economic activity but they also describe a sentiment that every fantasy story I have read ridicules, foppish heroism. Imo, the LW doesn’t need to be more exciting, just offer more sincere rewards. I think we would be surprised by how that effects the studio’s approach to story telling and zone design.

Defeated players could become environmental weapons. If they are used to do a certain amount of damage they are revived.

I don’t like the studio’s strategy of limited time offers either. I can’t complete my ninja, vampire maid without Belinda’s greatsword. When that skin was offered, I had no idea I wanted a ninja, vampire maid. The gold to gem exchange is the main reason for the strategy. A limited time offer increases the likelihood that players will spend real money rather than convert gold, since they have less time to earn gold. Imo, it is difficult to find fault in them using this strategy.

If you are on a strict real world budget, I would not buy gems with real world money hoping that the studio will offer something you want in the future. Converting gold to gems on a schedule is a much safer strategy since you can always convert the gems back into gold if you find something you want in game. There is a 30%ish difference in exchange rates that can be overcome if you exchange gems to gold when there is an increased demand for gems such as big gem shop sales. As well, if you track the rate for gold to gem exchanges you can find opportune times to convert gold into gems.

TheGrimm.5624:

Psientist.6437:

Leeches could be used to reference blood without showing blood. The dagger’s handle could be an open leech’s mouth that the player puts their hand inside, the mouth closing over the hand. Leeches could even slither up the arm and attach themselves. Excuse me, I have to go shudder.

Um…no, no, no no, not the same image at all lol. You, stay away from Legendary designs.

I can’t. They’re delicious.

Smaller leeches could emerge from the player instead of, or with, the leeches emerging from the dagger. I don’t think stepping blood would work well . That would be a lot of blood to show and if your weapon is a colony of leeches, I would train them to be tidy eaters. Blood demanded by magic would rise in drops from the player, looking like a slow rain.

The dagger could be a beating heart instead. I would give the arteries and veins teeth and barbs.

Leeches could be used to reference blood without showing blood. The dagger’s handle could be an open leech’s mouth that the player puts their hand inside, the mouth closing over the hand. Leeches could even slither up the arm and attach themselves. Excuse me, I have to go shudder.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

Well, right now, one can purchase a different Gathering Tool to replace the one(s) one has slotted. I’m not sure purchasing an upgrade to go into a Gathering Tool slot would be much different. It seems there would still be the same concerns: “I bought this upgrade, and now there is a ‘better’ one I must purchase”. /shrug

Right now, players have to decide between aesthetic freedom and an upgrade to harvesting function. Only one set of tools has the objectively superior harvesting upgrade, so players who want that upgrade and have other infinite tools must repurchase the infinite function. It is those qualities that give players, even the irrationally whiny ones, a firm position to argue about those quotation marks you put around the word better. If the studio unbundled the upgrade and avoided offering increasing percentage bonuses (ie buffs with increasing percentage to drop the same item) then no one would have a defensible position.

The infinite UM buffed harvesting tools can provide an objectively measured increase in function and still not be P2W. The karma versions diffuse any claim of P2W.

In the context of ‘over powered’, I could make the argument that the karma versions are more economically powerful than the gem store versions. Assuming gold was used to purchase the gem store version, the karma version begins earning gold profit sooner and the gem store version will never be able to catch up.

Rather than arguing the minutiae of ‘OPness’ or P2W, just tell Anet what you think of harvesting tool gear progression in general.

The theme is well thought out and presented. However, the studio has never shown realistic bleeding or blood. Perhaps life force instead of blood? I am not sure how life force would be visualized.

Few things make a mmo player more ready to argue than gear progression. That shouldn’t be an excuse to design sloppy gear progression. Sloppy gear progression penalizes the players who are willing to participate in gear progression.

Archranis, in my opinion, your design is too complex, but I completely support the general idea.

Let’s talk about features of the UM buffed tools that aren’t opinions.

In the context of the verb “to harvest”, buffed tools are objectively more productive than tools without a buff. Buffed harvesting tools qualify as gear progression.

In the context of pay to win, as long as a buff is available in game, that buff can not be considered pay to win.

In the context of the gem/gold exchange, what the heck does P2W even mean?

Historically, infinite gathering tools offered infinite uses and a choice of animation aesthetics.

To maintain maximum harvesting tool productivity, to navigate harvesting tool gear progression, past consumers of un-buffed infinite tools have to abandon the freedom to choose aesthetics.

We don’t know yet if the UM buffed harvesting tools will be a permanent offering or a temporary offering.

In my opinion, a temporary offering of gear progression is the most manipulative type of gear progression possible for a game studio to offer.

In my opinion, a studio that has designed a game around the value proposition of aesthetic freedom should not abandon that value proposition.