Showing Posts For psionflames.5246:
Nope. That is just how RNG works. No amount of time spent can GUARANTEE you a drop, you just have to hope you get lucky.
I like to be able to have top tier gear without spending a large amount of time.
Well I think that is where the disconnect is. They clearly want top tier gear to be something you have SPEND that time and work towards, so that it feels like a real accomplishment. People with full sets of ascended gear have WORKED for it and presumably are happy with having something they worked hard for. Its not MEANT to be something everyone can just get without really investing themselves in the process.
And I say this as someone who will likely never have a full set because to me it ISNT worth the time. But it wasn’t made for me, it was made for those other people who enjoy putting in the work and having the nicest stuff they can get.
So many people are all “I spent x hours farming but I dont have a key and I deserve to be in this beta!” about this. But while it is certainly fun for the players invited, its primary goal is as a TOOL for them to test and improve their product before opening it to the general public.
Now, no matter what they did they can get enough people to fill out their test, no problem. But by making it a game event they are trying to give us what we have been asking for, something to do. The portals, like precursors, are something that would be awesome to have but that is in no way something you should expect to receive just because you want it.
I’ll log in for an hour or so each night and do a few events in the area just to see if I get lucky, but if I don’t I’m certainly not going to stress out over it. It would be like stressing out over not winning the lottery, you know when you enter you probably wont win but the fun is in hoping you do.
Yes, everyone has been clamouring for something to do, but somehow I don’t think that a grindfest in 2 maps that we’re already tired of counts. There is no new content, simply a carrot on a stick. And yet, the new Gem Store releases don’t cease to flow…
If you are tried of it then DONT do it. It’s like complaining that buying a lottery ticket every week is a huge hassle because you haven’t won yet. For me, its fun because I’m doing events I wouldn’t have tried otherwise and theres that ephemeral chance of getting a portal. But no one should be doing this thinking “this sucks but I’m going to get a beta key out of it” because just like with the lottery its probably not going to happen.
Its also a bit disingenuous to equate content going into the gem store to a lack of content in the game, those are very different levels of effort from what is very probably different teams entirely.
I do agree that there isn’t much else contentwise coming out right now but that is likely because the people responsible for things are off putting out fires in expansionland. We can’t have our cake and eat it too, and I would much rather they deliver a really robust expansion than put out a bunch of filler to keep me distracted until then.
I know all of this is highly subjective based on how I look at things, but all I can really do is share my opinion.
So many people are all “I spent x hours farming but I dont have a key and I deserve to be in this beta!” about this. But while it is certainly fun for the players invited, its primary goal is as a TOOL for them to test and improve their product before opening it to the general public.
Now, no matter what they did they can get enough people to fill out their test, no problem. But by making it a game event they are trying to give us what we have been asking for, something to do. The portals, like precursors, are something that would be awesome to have but that is in no way something you should expect to receive just because you want it.
I’ll log in for an hour or so each night and do a few events in the area just to see if I get lucky, but if I don’t I’m certainly not going to stress out over it. It would be like stressing out over not winning the lottery, you know when you enter you probably wont win but the fun is in hoping you do.
We need a welcome party…
We had a farewell one so yeah… we need it.
This! Whether its official or just unofficial, we should totally have a celebration!
I know its not like she was GONE or anything, but Gaile (and the Frog of course) have been such iconic community figures that it feels like something to celebrate!
What about a simple reporting system, sort of like how you can report someone specifically for botting or selling gold. Make a system where someone can be reported for “siege griefing”, and then if X number of reports from unique players is entered against a person, prevent them from deploying siege for X time frame (preferably lengthy, perhaps scaling with the number of times your account has been flagged as such?).
You’d probably have to play with the numbers a bit to find something fair/un-exploitable, but this kind of system would punish the griefers without hurting anybody else, as well as being automate-able. The downside is that it relies on a large(ish?) number of people being able to identify and report griefers on a regular basis. Idk, just throwing my thoughts out.
People who say “I represent this guild today for WvW, then that guild tomorrow for PvE” – this isn’t how guilds are supposed to work. In my opinion anyway. Guilds are groups where people do different things together – not a “I come as I like” place. People who represent different guilds on different days as and when they like are akin to clan-hoppers.
Alright and as you say that is your opinion. I personally disagree and like the multiple guild system because it reflects how I have very different circles of friends with very different purposes in game. I can join their guilds and represent the one whose interests I am actively advancing at that time. I do believe your opinion is a valid one though and so I think that what is lacking is the ability to enforce what kind of guild you want your guild to be.
I’m just thinking “out loud” now so take this with a grain of salt, but what if you could establish what kind of your guild was somehow. So just like with real world organizations you could set the rules for membership. If you want a guild where people can drop in and out and represent other guilds between, you would have “open” settings, while a guild that required exclusivity would have “closed” settings that wouldn’t allow you to represent another guild without leaving. (And possibly several levels in between but you get the idea)
As long as the settings were made clear to the players joining, (and couldn’t be changed easily, suddenly, and without warning) I think that would be a fair compromise because each player could join the type of experience they prefer. Like I said I’m just kind of thinking out loud right now on break at work, so I won’t pretend to have thought this all the way through. Its just something I was thinking.
Personally, I don’t mind the new changes that much. But I do think some of the philosophy behind the changes is a little weird. These are meant to primarily address the concerns of people who have previously tried and left the game, if I understand correctly…but its changing things significantly for the people who currently play and enjoy and support the game as it is.
You would think they would have research a path that would build value both for the departed players they want to get back AND the existing customer base. And I don’t really think these changes do that. For an existing player who has played through with the existing system, these changes can add frustration, confusion, and even anger… the very feelings that these changes are supposed to PREVENT for new players.
A veteran player should feel as heard and valued as a departed player does at the very least.
Okay but this is true of EVERY MMO. I can’t think of a single MMO you could pick up new today and still get the same experience you could at launch. Games have to advance and change and develop. So they can be just as fun for the person playing through for the tenth time as the person playing through for their first.
Like you said that sometimes means a new player is going to feel they missed out on something, but in the end the content that they missed isn’t really relevant to them anyway. Like with your friend and lions arch, to them its just how it is and they go from there while someone who was around before/doing has the additional impact of the comparison between what it was and what it is now.
There is no perfect solution to this, obviously, but I feel like making everything static outside of instances would be a step in the wrong direction
A new player of Guild Wars (1) can still experience the Prophecies campaign the way it has always been – there are no War in Kryta changes to areas if that player hasn’t started it. There have been changes to the game’s mechanisms but the game experience is still the same as when GW1 first launched, or am i wrong here?
Concerning my friend, she felt at a loss in LA, amidst all the rubble, and i think she hasn’t visited the place since then. I do not think that is how it should be. I think there should be a city for her to visit.
I wanted to add that having new areas as a setting for new changes is imo a good idea. Let Mordremoth devastate Dry Top all he wants to. Outside of it, keep it to instances.
You have a good point there, and I hadn’t considered that as it has been so long since I made a new GW1 character. But the exact reasons why that works for GW1 are why it wouldn’t work for this game. In GW1 everything was completely segregated so once you left town it was pretty much like being in a story instance now. It was easy to segregate old and new content.
Whereas now, you have an open world where people at various stages of the story are interacting at all times and I would hate to lose that. Limited the changes to a few/new zones is fine for regional conflicts, but if we are supposed to be reacting to a global problem it needs to feel global. And its not like they could keep three versions of the map in its pre, during, and posts states and put people in the one their progress matches because from the beginning that kind of player segregation has been against the spirit of the game.
This game is supposed to be “alive” to grow and change. Limiting that to instances and new areas would take away something special about the game. Once lions arch gets repaired everyone who played through the times with the damage will have shared memories of the experience that just wouldn’t be the same if it was just a one shot instance experience you saw for maybe 20 minutes during your playthrough.
The key I think is balance. Balance out these traumatic “area ravaged by x” type changes with positive changes and it wont be such a big deal. Wouldn’t you agree that if a location changed for the better both old player and new player alike could appreciate its current state?
Just a question here because I am curious. The idea of the Living World is that there is a storyline that you take part in, that you are involved in events that shape Tyria in permanent ways—how would you all convey the sense of progression and change without also making changes to the landscape? I see a couple of comments regarding creating things, not simply destroying. Do you all have any other ideas?
…
As a new player i would like to start at the beginning, not be thrown into a world that shows me that i already missed a lot. Okay, the season 2 is playable by new players if they chose so, but LA and Kessex are still destroyed. I think it is time to not let them stay like that, but to let those areas evolve. New destruction should be reserved for instances, at least on a grand scale.
….
Okay but this is true of EVERY MMO. I can’t think of a single MMO you could pick up new today and still get the same experience you could at launch. Games have to advance and change and develop. So they can be just as fun for the person playing through for the tenth time as the person playing through for their first.
Like you said that sometimes means a new player is going to feel they missed out on something, but in the end the content that they missed isn’t really relevant to them anyway. Like with your friend and lions arch, to them its just how it is and they go from there while someone who was around before/doing has the additional impact of the comparison between what it was and what it is now.
There is no perfect solution to this, obviously, but I feel like making everything static outside of instances would be a step in the wrong direction
Just a question here because I am curious. The idea of the Living World is that there is a storyline that you take part in, that you are involved in events that shape Tyria in permanent ways—how would you all convey the sense of progression and change without also making changes to the landscape? I see a couple of comments regarding creating things, not simply destroying. Do you all have any other ideas?
Hi Regina!
I don’t think the change in landscape is what people are complaining about entirely. More that for the most part it has been of a single tone, that of new threat, of destruction, of defeat. I think that for the most part what people are also wanting to see is the balance of that. Changes to the landscape to reflect growth, creation, and victory. Even something as simple as a dynamic event updating to reflect that a problem is at least heading towards resolution. Small struggling settlements we have been helping starting to grow to have slightly stronger defenses due to our efforts. Stuff like that. It doesn’t have to be things that drastically change the nature of the content in that zone, but just something that gives us that…flavor of bringing a small spark of light to a dark world.
On the whole, I have enjoyed the changes that have come so far in the game, but while sudden destruction can be dramatic and powerful, so can the quiet victories that let us feel like we are making a long term positive difference in the world of Tyria. We already get this on a short term basis through some of the dynamic events, it would be nice to see a similar philosophy applied to the longer term content.