Showing Posts For Serrenitei.2601:
“Punched in the gut”? Really?…..its just a game. Not being a bit overly dramatic are you?
Before online gaming got popular, how many of us blew 50-60 bucks for whatever game in a box looked interesting? And we either like it a lot, a little or outright hated it…and it was consigned to the ever growing pile of little used game boxes on a shelf.
And never gave it much thought other than…“Hmmph, didn’t like that as much as I thought I would. Oh well…”
Now, for whatever reasons..its like its the end of the known world if a game isn’t quite what you expected. I gotta say..I just don’t understand you people at all.
Agreed. And just because something changes doesn’t mean they are going back on what they promised. No plan has ever last beyond the first few minutes of execution. Everything changes…it doesn’t mean they lied to you, it means something changed for the good of the game overall.
Hey Anet -
Thanks for doing this – it’s awesome. I’m pretty set about what you’ve talked about so far, I just had a couple questions that are tagentially related ….
1) I heard talk about guild halls/player housing being available sometime after launch. I wondered if 1) that was still the case and 2) what quarter you are currently planning to launch in?
2) Do you have any sorts of changes in mind for world travel? I’ve seen a rather good point on the forums that you’ve crafted a beautiful world that generally gets seen once by players, then they quick travel through it all.
@Astralporing
Counter points :-)
1) Forums as a medium as feedback are fine and no doubt devs read it, but saying that the forums represent the majority opinions of the game is silly. If we use WoW forums as a case study, less than 1% of the total player base actually comments on the forums. Now, that number won’t translate directly here because the gateway to being able to participate is different. But even if we assume 2-3x that number of people being active on the forums, you are still looking at only 3-5% of the total game population present on the forums.
Does that mean that the issues being brought up on the forums aren’t shared by those who aren’t on the forums? Not at all — all I’m saying is that you can’t cite the forums as being representative of the whole when they aren’t. It’s a logical fallacy, pure and simple.
2) I think you need to reconsider defining the addition of Ascended as a massive change. True, there’s a minimal stat bump – but it’s hardly justification for saying its a massive change to design. Especially when you consider that they will be adding additional ways to get ascended gear, and had planned it from the start. The benefit that you get from the 3 meager pieces of Ascended Gear currently in the game can hardly be classified as required for anything, other than ego. The have stated that Fractals are not the only way to get Ascended gear, just the only way right now.
3) No, it’s not a binary design decision. There can be both — I played Guild Wars 1 as well, there was vertical progression. You didn’t start the game as level 20 with level 20 weapons — there was progression to get there. You worked the way up from lvl 1 to lvl 20. That, like it or not, is vertical progression.
What the game needs to maintain is a diagonal progression—with a very gradual slope. Vertical progression keeps the game fresh and allows them to evolve the game. Horizontal keeps from feeling like an endless treadmill of gear.
That the game was stagnant only when you stopped development is opinion, and as such totally unverifiable. Clearly the devs thought the game was stagnant before that point.
And you can’t predict anything with good precision — you don’t hold any of the cards in this game. What you can do is predict what you think are going to be trends based on increases off of 3 pieces in the game — you assume what the other gear will look like. You have no validation that any prediction you’ve made will pan out. You (the theorycrafters) make a long, long series of assumptions based on a very small sample of data to guesstimate at the ultimate outcome. And then cite it as if it’s gospel.
So because the devs didn’t add something in the time frame you deemed appropriate means they won’t do it any time soon? If I were in their position, if I did have a rollout planned for the other ascended pieces, I would put it on hold because of the rage around the 3 pieces already in game. I would take a step back, even if I didn’t think I was going to change anything to make sure I introduced them in a way to make the least rage and most accessibility.
Patience is a good thing.
I would love the idea of mounts in game. Not because of the speed boost, I could care less. I enjoy the aesthetic value of mounts. In WoW, I had like 50 I could pick from (granted, I only ever used 1-2 but you get the idea). I think mounts would add another collectible and something else to strive for in the game. I don’t think it needs to have any gameplay value to make it valuable in the game (if that makes sense).
I’ve been silent thus far on the Vertical progression vs. Horizontal progression kerfuffle going on here. First up – misconceptions that people seem to enjoy making.
1) The forums are representative of the whole playerbase — they aren’t. The forums represent a very specific subset (and very small) of the overall player base. You can’t take the forums as representative of the whole because the people who come here to post have an inherent inclination to do so to begin with — and not all gamers (or even most gamers) have an inclination to brave the forums. If you only use the forums as your basis for making a decision or for viewing trends in a game, your results will always be skewed and unreliable.
2) Design should stay the same, without exception – because WoW was totally flawless at the start? Because devs never ever miss anything, or make assumptions about how fast people will chew through content or anything — clearly, devs should never make a mistake. (please note: sarcasm) Anyone who works in development at all knows that people find ways to do things they weren’t intended to do — no matter how solid the design. You can’t get everything right directly out of the gates. There will be bugs. You can QA for months and there will still be bugs.
3) VP vs. HP has to be an all or nothing philosophy. Black and white statements don’t really benefit anyone. Saying all VP is bad and only HP is good is silly. Even the original Guild Wars still had VP — just a make higher dosage of HP. WoW on the other hand has much more VP than HP – but the HP is still there. It’s never an all or nothing deal when it comes to design.
The Devs said that one of the downfalls of Guild Wars 1 was that the game got stagnant. There were some people who loved it — but that doesn’t mean it was the holy grail of design. The devs want a little bit of vertical progression because that keeps the game interesting and evolving — in a way that Guild Wars 1 never did.
The fact that they added a tier of gear has such a minimal impact, I fail to see the rationale in making a mountain out of this molehill. For those who say that they’ve gotten a lot of bad press over this … where? The controversy is just on the forums and a few select gaming sites. Whereas it being ranked as one of the best games of 2012 saw much larger release. Do a google search for guild wars 2, or guild wars 2 review—you won’t see anything but positive for the first 3 pages. Even do a search for guild wars 2 ascended gear, and there’s a measly 2 articles, both from Massively, on the first page about it.
I think the key here is that a small amount of vertical progression isn’t terrible. There are still a multitude of ways to get the best gear. Think about WoW, the ONLY way to get the best gear was to raid. You didn’t have any other options. In GW2, all you have are options. GRANTED, the other ways of getting it aren’t implemented, but Anet has said repeatedly, there will be other ways to get the gear.
For all the people who say they’ve quit, or sold their accounts, or everyone they know quit playing — really? You aren’t fooling anyone. You come to the forums because you are invested in the game, not because you quit and want to let everyone know how cool you are.
I won’t restate the obvious – Aggro meters are pointless in a game without traditional aggro tables.
Now to the DPS meters — I hope to God they don’t ever make an appearance in this game. It’s one thing to say that if you don’t want them, you don’t have to use them, but it’s a pretty narrow sighted view. The said the same thing of WoW, and now a DPS meter is required for any sort of co-op play. To think that it would be any different in GW2, and that a DPS meter/DPS requirement would be any less mandatory is just naive.
Even making it personal only, someone would create a site to upload to screenshots of the DPS meter with date/time/character name, etc — even personal meters would gradually build the same DPS requirements in other games.
As for the “leechers,” I haven’t run into it — it might be a problem, I dunno. I don’t like the idea of an Inspect — I like the fact that everything about my character is known only to me. What I think might be cool is to have certain buffs add to a general character ‘glow’ or have an glow intensity someone on the character to indicate general magic find (if it really is a huge issue…)
There are many, less intrusive ways to show what buffs someone has.