Guild Wars 2

Vayne.8563:

Trakarg.2095:

Arenanet doesn’t want us to grind? That’s bullkitten. If they didn’t want us to grind, they wouldn’t have implemented gargantuan, mindless grinds (See legendaries for one example).

In fact, let’s examine legendaries more closely. They aren’t difficult to get. They are just time-consuming due to all the mats you must GRIND out. The only thing that’s legendary about legendaries is the length of the grind required to get them.

So, I wonder, why did Arenanet implement legendaries in the way they did? They don’t want us to grind, so why make us grind? Why not make legendaries have legendary, lore-rich quests that involve difficult content? Oh, right, because Anet can’t design such things due to laziness, unwillingness, or simply an inability to design meaningful content in a game without the trinity.

Anet has said all along, straight from the beginning, that there would be things to grind for in this game. That’s a direct quote.

What there wouldn’t be was required grind, such as in other games.

So saying that they said there would be no grind is indeed bull-kitten.

Good thing he did not say that. You aren’t attempting to strawman him there are you ?

Arkham Creed.7358:

And how many of those people got their start in the last twenty years? The real world used to reward skill.

Skill is rewarded in the real world. it just isn’t always rewarded. It may very well often not be so rewarded. Remember that because your skill has not been rewarded does not mean that skill in general is not rewarded.

Something not happening to you, or even to others you may know, does not mean that it does not happen.

silvermember.8941:

you don’t need BiS gear to complete most of the relevant content. /fact

Not as /factual as you might think.

If someone needs to continue to have BiS gear in order to log into the game then he does need it in order to complete the content. You can’t complete the content without playing the game.

Vayne.8563:

The combination of name, race, profession and look all have to match for me to be satisfied.

This is the way it works for me as well.

Happy with my characters ? So so I guess. I focus on one main, a ranger in this case, and cannot say that I am particularly delighted that long coats/trench coats are the primary skin for medium armor. I am a little disappointed that some of the GW1 hairstyles did not make it to GW2. Its not possible to create the appearance I wanted for my main in GW2 (though it was possible in GW1) so there will continue to be occasional misgivings.

Chopps.5047:

Don’t feed the trolls. Everyone with half a brain is loving this change.

You are one hundred percent correct. People with half a brain like this change.

Miflett.3472:

Vox Hollow.2736:

It’s a decent question, but it has it’s limits.

On the one hand things should feel worthwhile without traits, on the other hand nobody is walking around with a blank trait template or makes a habit of wielding weapons outside their build direction.

If you felt you needed Remorseless to make Longbow work that would be a problem. Feeling the need to do some level of investment into the power trait line while using a power weapon just seems like a standard of character building that should be taken for granted.

I find that investing that heavily into MM to make longbow something that it should already be, questionable. Stopping at 20 should be more than enough to get some nice pickups for the LB, and it kinda is, but this trait line more than any needs some consolidation work.

I’d really like to push for moment of clarity and remorseless to be integrated into minor traits as they seem what should be a very integral part of both the SB and LB respectively.

Well said. The trade-offs that need to be made in order to take advantage of the changes are a break even prospect, at best, while the vulnerability shift is a net loss. If, however, the trait investment to take full advantage was less severe these changes would be an overall improvement.

FranBunnyFFXII.3508:

Personally I hate my pet, I wish I could just use my skills and forget about the pet, but pets do damage so its just a nerf to not use them.

I wish rangers didn’t have pets.

^^^ This.

Chopps.5047:

Well, it’s not that I don’t agree. It’s that you’re wrong. Players are valuable—not professions. .

This is no more right, or less wrong, than the individual you refer to.

Chopps.5047:

Regarding your other comment about “it’s not learn to play”, anyone who has spent a great deal of time with longbow immediately recognizes how the new hunter’s shot helps. It is indeed people not knowing how to play that leads to the QQ.

This is not necessarily correct. For example, anyone who dislikes the use of stealth mechanics might find the change to be worthy of complaint regardless of skill level in game.

Chopps.5047:

If I gave you an improved wrench to loosen a bolt but you’ve never actually used a wrench before, the new features won’t make sense. “Why do I want this” the naive person asks, “I just need more torque” when in fact it has a mechanism that’s better than just more torque that the naive user knows little about.

This analogy struggles for the simple fact that the new tool is designed for a completely different purpose. An ,“improved wrench,” is still a wrench, a tool designed to loosen (or tighten) bolts.

The changes to Hunter’s Shot alter its basic functionality. It no longer serves the same purpose, it is a completely different tool, not an improved version of an existing one. To use your analogy, it is now a hammer rather than a wrench. It is no longer capable of functioning as a wrench. Those who needed a wrench no longer have it available as such. It may be the best hammer ever invented, but you will find that it does poor service at loosening bolts.

Hunter’s Shot is no longer capable of providing a group wide damage buff via debuff. That means that it is either a complete failure as a debuffing tool, or it is a different tool entirely.

“Visual character customization is better than it’s ever been.”

I would say that it is different, but not necessarily better. Your mileage may vary of course.

Arkham Creed.7358:

And based on the countless other threads I’ve seen over the last year most people

People that are happy with it are generally not coming to the forums to create threads or posts to go on and on about it.

The fact that those who do not like something are the ones most likely to comment about it on the forums does not indicate what, “most,” people like or dislike.

Fortus.6175:

Ashen.2907:

Soul.5947:

absolutely no incentive to play other then 2 have some fun

Isn’t that the best incentive though ?

mutually exclusive stuff, I would have way more fun if I didnt have to throw away the little money I make. Would make some builds doable, you would see a lot more people playing aggressive, roaming without having to go to a deserted borderland in the hopes that outmanned wont outrun in that fight you were finally able to pick up…

Don’t get me wrong. I get the idea that a game play mode that represents a net loss in income for someone attempting to earn a legendary or something of the sort is a problem.

The point of the post you quoted was that fun should be first, then we should look at things like making sure that we can afford to have that fun (such as sufficient income in WvW to cover your repair costs and then some).

colesy.8490:

I just haven’t seen this all that often. As said before, “more often than not,” death (for me) seems to come from facing insurmountable opposition in the form of numbers, not being outplayed. I am not saying that it doesn’t happen, just doesnt seem to be the norm (which I believe it should be for any form of PvP), or even all that common from my experience.

Basically every time I die in WvW is because I leave the zerg, go roaming and some troll glass thief comes along and ganks me, or yes when the odds are completely stacked, but that’s normally just in guild raids where we see a giant blob, run in thinking why the hell not and then get wasted because the odds were like 7:1 because most of our guys went to bed earlier.

Success in WvW seems to be more about, “git thur fustest with the mostest,” than, “Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate.”

Why are you trying to use poor spelling to try and emphasise your point on WvW just being brainless?

And yes, there are times where when stacking behind a corner the commander explicitly says “don’t reveal yourself”, they have no idea we’re coming, we veil, storm in and the enemy zerg gets obliterated. There absolutely is room for tactics in WvW, people just seem to be stuck in the mentality that it’s purely just mindless zergs crashing in to each other when there’s more to it than that.

You express it very well. There is room for tactics, but much (most ?) of the current iteration of the game mode is stuck in zergs.

I used quotation marks because I was quoting someone else (two of them actually). In the case of the misspelling I was quoting one of the most successful military leaders of his age, who was most certainly not at all brainless.

Soul.5947:

absolutely no incentive to play other then 2 have some fun

Isn’t that the best incentive though ?

Vayne.8563:

Meglobob.8620:

I don’t understand why GW2 is ‘stuck’ on 3 million sales?

A lot of people agree what a good game it is (everyone has there personal issues but overall very good), it tends to get a overall positive vibe across the net AFAIK.

Yet, it sold 2 million initially…3 million by xmas…then kinda stalled…

I know Blizzard are ALOT bigger than Anet but compare that to Diablo 3 for example, D3 got huge, massive amounts of critism, very, very negative internet profile. Yet sold 12 to 14 million initially and is now up to 20 million+…

When you compare official forums D3 is ’dead’ish’ compared with GW2 which is very, very active…

Its weird…why doesn’t GW2 sell a lot more? Is it really just down to the power of advertising?

It’s not just down to the power of advertising. There are a lot of factors. For one thing it’s an MMO. That alone means it sells less.

Compare it to sales of SWToR which had a big advertising budget. MMOs doesn’t sell a huge amount. How many copies did the new WoW expansion sell? Not ten million copies surely.

But again, WoW can continually advertise and Guild Wars 2 can not. But MMOs are, and have always been, relatively niche.

For example, more gamers play consoles than computers and most MMOs are only available on computer. It will be very interesting to see how ESO does because it’s launching on the new consoles.

The thing is, Guild Wars 2 is likely closing in on four million copies, but you’d expect growth to be slow, because most games sell most copies in their entire life span within 3 months of launch. I know this from working in the industry. Very few games continue to sell through the three month mark.

This is why most MMOs tend to come out with expansions when interest lags. It means more boxed sales (but it’s mostly usually the same people that bought the original game.

Guild Wars 2 is apparently doing well enough to not worry about an expansion at this point, which is pretty good.

Also, correct me if my memory is faulty on this matter, but isn’t GW2 still unreleased in Asia ?

colesy.8490:

The “danger” of dying. You may not be able to comprehend it, but people are scared of dying in this game. At least for me, if I get to 25 stacks on a sigil in WvW I don’t want to die either since it gives me +250 precision.

I am not sure that desiring to avoid the inconvenience of having to rebuild stacks to get the maximum yield out of a buff qualifies as being, “scared.”

colesy.8490:

Outplayed as in literally outplayed. For example if I am dueling someone and they anticipate my phantasms so they evade their hits or use invulnerabilities and then chase me down and kill me, they outplayed me. I already mentioned ganking anyway.

WvW does actually involve outplaying too, there are countless times on Seafarer’s Rest where against even or greater numbers, through superior skill and leadership we beat our enemies with well-timed CC, getting the jump on them with a veil or even just outmanoeuvering mid-fight.

I just haven’t seen this all that often. As said before, “more often than not,” death (for me) seems to come from facing insurmountable opposition in the form of numbers, not being outplayed. I am not saying that it doesn’t happen, just doesnt seem to be the norm (which I believe it should be for any form of PvP), or even all that common from my experience.

Success in WvW seems to be more about, “git thur fustest with the mostest,” than, “Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate.”

Still it can be very fun, and I highly encourage those who have avoided it because of negative PvP experiences in the past to give it a try.

colesy.8490:

And no, I’m saying people who don’t play the PvP game modes are too scared of facing danger. There’s nothing wrong with it, people don’t enjoy getting ganked or outplayed (most of the time), it’s just the reality.

1) What danger ? What is there to be, “scared,” of ? Its a game played at a a degree of remote safety lacking anything even resembling, “danger.”

2) Outplayed how ? Losses or character deaths occur more often than not due to being vastly outnumbered, or due to random chance (fifteen members of the opposing zerg targeted you or your area at the same time and you were downed essentially instantaneously). WvW is, in its current iteration, not about outplaying, or being outplayed by, an opposing combatant.

Those who do not care about the leaderboards can ignore them if they so choose, so its somewhat ridiculous for them to be removed. Arguing for the removal of something that does not matter to you, but that you know matters to others is singularly repulsive.

Ask yourself how you will feel knowing that your team would have been better off taking pretty much any character other than yours…

Tunney.6475:

My whole point was, and still, is, the fact that these badges
are-tailored-towards-a-specific-aspect-of-the-game.
They are useless for anyone else.
We’ll, perhaps not useless then, but certainly not considered valid rewards.

How can a reward not be considered valid if it can be converted into gold and/or gems ?

goldenwing.8473:

I have other issues I don’t trust ANet over. The list is moderately long but incredibly shorter than any other list from other developers I have encountered over the years.

Nicely said.

Something that is easy to lose track of sometimes is that, even if ANet is less than perfect (a lot less) they are still better than any other MMO developer that I have done business with.

Online gaming, particularly MMOs, have certain unavoidable pitfalls inherent to the random multiplayer/group play experience.

This situation is one of them. Its going to happen. I am not suggesting that the OP, or anyone else, be happy when this sort of thing occurs, but it might be a good idea to be prepared to let it go when it does happen.

If you play football you will occasionally get hurt. When you play slot machines you will generally lose money, and when you game with random people on the internet you will meet kittenbags. In each case your best bet is to recognize that there is a downside to pretty much everything and accept the inevitable bad with the good…and move on.

CrossedHorse.4261:

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s pay to win are they? they’re just questioning whether or not it should be limited in terms of availability considering it is a stat, not a strictly cosmetic gear option.

Well the OP does state that he believes that this is, “leaning towards pay to win.”

I tend to agree that limited availability on specific stat combinations is a less than ideal situation, but, unless the limited stat combination provides a clear and objective advantage over all other options, its not really even close to any form of pay to win (IMO of course).

andeysmandey.1647:

Ashen.2907:

andeysmandey.1647:

2-600 euros a month on gems here, i feel like the kite is the least i should get in return.

Did you not get the gems that you were paying for ?

Yes`? And i still believe that we high spenders deserve some items like the kite, without whiners clogging the forums.

Interesting. You believe that you deserve more than you agreed to as part of your purchase contract with ANet.

I wonder if ANet believes that they deserve more money from you for the gems they have already provided. If they did come to this conclusion would you feel in any way obligated to pay another 600 euros per month for the gems you have already received ?

Well, in any case, it seems as if you may very well have enough gems to purchase the kite.

Does the stat gear in question provide a clear, objective, advantage over other gear options ?

If it is not clearly and objectively superior it cannot be pay to win.

Hmmm, a new phrase or two might be in order:

1) PtL (pay to lose)
2) PtBA (pay to be average)

andeysmandey.1647:

2-600 euros a month on gems here, i feel like the kite is the least i should get in return.

Did you not get the gems that you were paying for ?

Elothar.4382:

I have a bit of a different perspective on this. I have owned and operated a private business of about 15 years and I look at this, and similar issues, through a decidedly business filter. In my mind, what happened is that customers received something for which they had not directly paid…and it was given as a surprise. When I make a purchase decision regarding gems…or anything else…I use the basic economic principles of utility and cost. I determine how much I want or need something and then determine whether the asking price is worth it for me. When I purchase gems, it is because there is something in the gem store that I think is worth my money (typically extra bank slots, bag slots or character slots). The deal is consummated…I get what I want…they get what they wanted…deal done. But now, I get something extra as a surprise “thank you.” It has no strings attached…no conditions. Just a simple “thank you.” Maybe they planned it all along…maybe not. But…the minute that they tell you in advance, it is no longer a free thank you gift but rather another incentive to get you to spend money. Kind of a like a “but three and get one free” deal.

A surprise thank you gift seems thoughtful to me. I take the gift in the spirit in which I believe it was offered. Had they given me advance warning and told me that if I purchased X amount of gems I would get a free kite, it would not really seem like a free kite to me…but rather a part of the packaging of the deal – gems plus a kite for Y dollars. Both are legitimate marketing tactics but I am less likely to tumble on to the package deal than to buy what I want “straight up” and be pleasantly surprised by a free gift after the fact.

All that said, though, I am not sure what either tactic has to do with trust. They did not cheat us out of anything. They did not falsely represent what they were selling…or the price. No bait and switch that I can see. The only thing I can discern is they decided to give out a gift without prior “warning.” While others may well look on this warily, it does not seem like a trust issue to me.

Very well said !

Jam.4521:

I prefer to see weapons that were actually used in real life,

Like magic rifles and staves, as ranged weapons, that shoot sparkles.

I kid, I kid.

Shifty.5187:

Ashen.2907:

Sorry, but you hold GW1 to a standard of, “to be effective,” and GW2 to a standard of, “the best possible.”

That is, by definition, a double standard.

You can be effective in GW2 without the best gear. The amount that the stat gain going from rare to exotic armor/weapons affects your build in GW2 is far less than the difference between an unranked character with nearly half of his entire skill bar comprised of PvE skills and that same build with max rank.

I see your point, but you should also see his. He gives a very reasonable clarification of his position. Would you mind focusing on the actual problems at hand?

What problems at hand ?

The only problem, if you can call it that, presented in this thread is that the OP is comparing the grind inherent in getting the minimum level of performance affecting elements of GW1 with the grind inherent in getting the maximum performance affecting elements of GW2.

As the OP is using GW1 as an example of the ideal approach to avoiding grind while getting the very best performance his entire position is rendered invalid by the fact that the grind for, “the best performance,” was much higher in GW1 than in GW2.

It doesnt get more blatant than stating that you, “can be effective,” without the grind in one game while claiming that merely being effective is insufficient for the other.

Beyond that, OP you can be effective in GW2 without the grind you seem to despise. Problem (?) solved.

Vayne.8563:

Yes, actually. After the manifesto came out, due to the confusion it caused, Anet posted a clarification of the manifesto. It was widely talked about at the time.

Ree is talking about the personal story. Everything you do in your personal story stays that way. Colin is talking about dynamic events.

Editing for style caused confusion and Anet clarified it. People knew what Ree and Colin were talking about.

Without the clarification it was indeed confusing but you obviously couldn’t have a permanently rescued village in the open world. Which brings me to the next point.

AFTER the manifesto this stuff was discussed and expounded upon and explained ad nauseum. It was done at conventions and the panels are still available to view. It was done in interviews. It was done at AMAs on Reddit. It was done on Guru. There are so many times and ways this was explained.

Sure if you came to the game today, this might be all new to you if you didn’t follow it, but there’s NO excuse for anyone following the game not to understand what was meant in the manifesto. Anyone who says otherwise is being liberal with reality.

You make a solid argument, in this very thread, that the manifesto was an ad for GW2. I agree. It, along with my time spent in GW1, is what encouraged me to buy the game. I don’t know what AMAs is (American Music Awards ?), have never visited Reddit, stopped visiting Guru before the GW2 Manifesto was announced. So the question is, were the clarifications being presented with the ad ? I mean neither of us considers what was done to be really an example of bait and switch, but a published ad whose content is revised at unconnected outside sources is exactly that.

And again, what specific clarification references whether or not a boss stays dead, or a village stays saved, etc. Dynamic Events rotate fairly quickly. The manifesto refers to permanent changes…nothing associated with a character’s interaction with a DE is permanent.

Shockwave.1230:

Ashen.2907:

Shockwave.1230:

Did you have to grind out titles for any PvE skills to be effective? No they were naturally effective. Up to 3 skills in your bar gained marginal power by grinding. Do I like that this was true? No. But I also understand that when you got the skills they were still incredible on their own with even trying to do the vp associated with them. Do not mistake the skills existence with vp. Just playing the game you had r3-r6 for various titles, without grinding at all. When you got those skills they were still incredible without the grind. Asura summons were wasted skill slots in my opinion. SoS or an MM was better for dealing and soaking up damage, but that’s neither here nor there.

The point is you can’t try to say that the marginal increase in power obtained from vp grind that affects 3 skills in a bar was a philosophical pillar that Guild Wars lived by. It was obviously not.

You are exhibiting a double standard here.

You use the standard of, “to be effective,” for GW1’s version of vertical progression while you hold GW2 to a standard of, “best,” gear.

The reality of the matter is that no you did not need max rank with a PvE skill to be effective in GW1. Nor do you need the best possible gear in GW2 to be effective.

If you chose to put the time in to maxing your ranks to fuel your PvE skills in GW1 you would have higher performance than if you did not. If you choose to put the time into gaining the best possible gear in GW2 you will have better performance than if you do not.

It could take hundreds, if not thousands of hours to max out your titles to power your PvE skills in GW1. It takes a fraction, a tiny fraction, of that to get the best gear in GW2.

Both games had vertical progression that affected character performance. GW1’s took longer to pursue.

I also stated that I didnt like the vp in Gw associated with PvE skills, bcs it was a grind to max them and it was a chore.

I was able to deal with it bcs the power increase impacted 0,1,2, or 3 skills in a build and the increase in power was small enough from what they were naturally obtained at to be mostly unnoticable.

Additionally the vp imact on PvE skills were added towards the latter half of Guild Wars’ life. It was not a foundational pillar of the game.

The only double standard I am holding is that I dealt with the minimal to 0 impact of vp to only part of builds in Guild Wars as opposed to the much heavier impact gear vp plays on entire builds in Gw2.

Sorry, but you hold GW1 to a standard of, “to be effective,” and GW2 to a standard of, “the best possible.”

That is, by definition, a double standard.

You can be effective in GW2 without the best gear. The amount that the stat gain going from rare to exotic armor/weapons affects your build in GW2 is far less than the difference between an unranked character with nearly half of his entire skill bar comprised of PvE skills and that same build with max rank.

Shockwave.1230:

Did you have to grind out titles for any PvE skills to be effective? No they were naturally effective. Up to 3 skills in your bar gained marginal power by grinding. Do I like that this was true? No. But I also understand that when you got the skills they were still incredible on their own with even trying to do the vp associated with them. Do not mistake the skills existence with vp. Just playing the game you had r3-r6 for various titles, without grinding at all. When you got those skills they were still incredible without the grind. Asura summons were wasted skill slots in my opinion. SoS or an MM was better for dealing and soaking up damage, but that’s neither here nor there.

The point is you can’t try to say that the marginal increase in power obtained from vp grind that affects 3 skills in a bar was a philosophical pillar that Guild Wars lived by. It was obviously not.

You are exhibiting a double standard here.

You use the standard of, “to be effective,” for GW1’s version of vertical progression while you hold GW2 to a standard of, “best,” gear.

The reality of the matter is that no you did not need max rank with a PvE skill to be effective in GW1. Nor do you need the best possible gear in GW2 to be effective.

If you chose to put the time in to maxing your ranks to fuel your PvE skills in GW1 you would have higher performance than if you did not. If you choose to put the time into gaining the best possible gear in GW2 you will have better performance than if you do not.

It could take hundreds, if not thousands of hours to max out your titles to power your PvE skills in GW1. It takes a fraction, a tiny fraction, of that to get the best gear in GW2.

Both games had vertical progression that affected character performance. GW1’s took longer to pursue.

Vayne.8563:

The only statement I consider to be “false” is the everything you love about Guild Wars 1.

I do not fault ANet for failing to completely follow through with every bit of the manifesto, but does that village stay saved ? Does the boss stay defeated ? Do they still not want us to grind ? Do they still not like the idea of dailies ?

No amount of post manifesto, “clarification,” can change the fact, not opinion, that numerous elements and points made in the manifesto did not come to fruition.

My response to the fact that a company with limited experience producing a full-fledged MMO had to face reality and make adjustments to their intentions in order to bring their product to market….so what. It happens. Its life. Its business. That doesn’t mean it didnt happen though.

Shockwave.1230:

This argument doesn’t hold true. I started playing Guild wars after the nightfall campaign, and started caring about getting gold the 4th year of the games existence. Just to do it I filled my characters gold up to 100k, then I got over a million gold to see if I could fill up my bank. Was I ever going to have stacks of ecto or zkeys or armbraces? No, but then again it didn’t matter, bcs max sets of armor were only 1k and most armor mods were just as cheap. It only took about 20k to get a set of max armor with alternate head pieces. That’s like 2-4 runs in UW or FoW, which take about 1.5 hours. I also got my Obsidian armor late in the games life only having enough transferable wealth on my account to be 1/3 of the way there. It took like 6 months, but I got it and the best part is that it’s cosmetic only.

The only items that were out of reach in the original guild wars were mini’s that had a limited volume by design. Literally no other way to get these minipets than to trade another player for them.

Basically the inflation that existed wasn’t painful, at all.

In Gw2 the gold sinks hurt and the trading post is run by semipro stock brokers.

The problem with gear that results in people grinding is that there is no low fixed price for the best stat gear like in GW1. It’s all variable and driven by the trading post. This is bcs they go from no vertical progression to more than a casual player can manage, especially if you want to play multiple builds.

1) You can get max armor with Karma. A character that saves most of his karma until he reaches level 80 will have more than enough to buy a set of armor without spending gold.

2) You can buy armor on the TP for fairly low sums. The amount of time needed to, “farm,” to get enough gold to buy a set of armor is measured in hours, not tens of hours, hundreds, etc. Getting a max stat weapon can be managed in an hour of play.

3) Whether or not inflation is painful very much depends on what you want to buy.

If you can get a max level set of armor without spending a silver, and a max level weapon for the price of an hours play I am not sure that there is a valid complaint about grind.

Vayne.8563:

Ashen.2907:

Vayne.8563:

Stuff said years before a product comes out doesn’t apply to bait and switch.

Agreed.

Of course if that stuff is still being said at, or near, the time the product is released its a different matter.

As I’ve said, repeatedly, there was so much accurate information released by Anet leading up to the release, that ANYONE could have done a minimal amount of research and found out about mostly anything in the game.

Another point is that the game launched and had a refund policy for months and months and months. They gave refunds to people who played the game for six months. That’s unheard of. So even if they had said something different before launch, the fact they were willing to return people’s money for the first six months (when people well and truly should have known what they were getting) means that bait and switch doesn’t exist. There are a whole lot of people who played this game for free.

Additional information available to those who do research is irrelevant to whether or not something qualifies as bait and switch. Otherwise putting small print, in Sanskrit, on the sign in your store’s window would be a viable way of offsetting, “everything 50% off,” with, “excluding everything except one item which is no longer in stock.” After all the customer could have researched the Sanskrit right ?

In addition, a liberal refund policy has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not something is bait and switch. The company I work for learned that the hard way (millions of dollars in fines as well as a permanent, literally for the life of the company, injunction) a few years before I was recruited.

Personally I do not think that there was any bait and switch, in the literal sense, here. The company did not hold as closely to the ideals of GW1 as I would have liked, but the reality of the matter is that they were trying to make an MMO and were going to have to make compromises no matter what they did.

Vayne.8563:

Stuff said years before a product comes out doesn’t apply to bait and switch.

Agreed.

Of course if that stuff is still being said at, or near, the time the product is released its a different matter.

The reality of the matter is that the dye system the OP is complaining about is an improvement, favoring the player heavily, over the one that existed previously.

The other elements he mentions specifically seem to have been adhered to reasonably well considering the fact that the game was a work in progress at the time they were mentioned.

Top end gear is very easily obtainable in GW2. Prices are very low on the TP, where only skin rarity drives high prices…kind of like in GW1. Overall there is a bit more effort to achieve max stat gear in GW2 than in GW1, but we are still speaking of a very minor investment.

A two pound dumbbell is a 100% increase in weight over one pound, but both are easily lifted.

Allisa Wonderland.8192:

When I hear people saying " ap doesn’t matter," it sounds more like " I suck at the game, so I will make statements to minimize the validity of scoring to make my insecure self look less vulnerable than I really am."

I agree with most of your post, but this part seems a bit off. The reality of the matter is that one does not need to be good at the game in order to have a high AP score. One merely needs to be willing to spend a bunch of time grinding.

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

captaincrash.6528:

Keep in mind new players will have to work for this, everyone is getting them now because they’ve worked for the achievement points earlier.

Yes, but so far, in order to earn WvW badges, you had to do WvW. (Similarly, if you want fractals gear, you have to do fractals.)

With the achievement chests, you can get the badges without ever stepping foot in WvW.

To me, that kind of defeats the purpose of those badges.

Disclaimer: I’m not a WvW player

Agreed.

Vayne.8563:

If the GW1 achievement points didn’t count to the leaderboard it would solve everything.

I agree.

SpyderArachnid.5619:

Well, what about SoS, F&F, Lost Shores, and Last Stand? If you missed those, you can’t ever get them again. So people who got those achievements will always be ahead of everyone else no matter what.

SpyderArachnid.5619:

Yet not one single person is complaining about that..

You do realize that the above ^^^ is completely contradicted by the below right ?

SpyderArachnid.5619:

I see it brought up here all the time,

joshc.3129:

When Anet first started to talk about GW2 they said they did away with the henchmen and was going to have a single NPC companion system, then got rid of that idea. They went on talking about how PVE was going to be solo friendly but encouraged teamwork because it’s more fun.

I guess what they meant was only the starter areas where solo friendly. In high lvl areas where a character has max out exotic armor and max out exotic weapons completing events unless they are just straight forward is impossible. Take on a champion by yourself and you’re dead in 2 or 3 hits.. To make matters worse in the high level areas like Orr I’m almost surprised to run across another player. In Orr there are certain Karma NPC I want to spawn but I know there is no chance in hell of being able to complete the meta event required alone.

I’m not saying they should make the game easy, I’m just saying it’s a bit unfair to players who want to complete an event but can’t when no other players are around or no players that are around is interested in doing it.

Also is it just me or does anyone else think champions (yes I know they are the bosses in the game) are way overpowered?

I solo in Orr very frequently. I enjoy the zone’s aesthetics.

There are specific events that I cannot solo (pretty sure that they are not soloable at all actually) but most events are pretty easy (and were even before getting max gear).

Some champions can be soloed, though I am sure that build matters quite a bit. I do not think they are overpowered at all.

Mkalafut.1273:

What friendly competition are you speaking of? The achievement (read: elitism) leaderboard that is causing strife because players are rewarded for being loyal? Yeah that’s some friendly competition there.

Friendly competition is where people don’t care who wins or loses – they do it for the fun and the rush of competing. When someone tries to take away from others in a competition, it’s no longer friendly.

Stick to your guns. You’re either for friendly competition or you’re for the removal of HoM achievement points. Can’t be both because they directly contradict each other.

You are mistaken. They are not in contradiction.

A competition can be both friendly and to win. Compete means trying to win. Trying to win a competition does not have to be, and probably shouldn’t be, unfriendly.

Asking to be allowed to pay the referee for an advantage in a competition is generally neither good competition nor friendly.

VOLKON.1290:

Those of you that didn’t play GW1 need to understand… this is a nice little token to those of us who have been supporting the company in some cases for nearly a decade. If you weren’t a part of it you wouldn’t understand, but believe me, it’s in no ways at all meant to be a slight to anyone that started this run with GW2.

I would agree with this except for the fact that ANet decided to turn achievement points into a competition. A form of PvP. That is what a leaderboard represents.

Tolmos.8395:

Ashen.2907:

Tolmos.8395:

This is Guild Wars 2. That means a Guild Wars came before it. It would be expected that there would be some sort of rewards for those loyal customers who stayed with the games through both iterations.

There are such rewards even without inflating AP gain from GW1.

Also, it might be noted that these bonus APs from GW1 are not loyalty rewards. There is no tie to how much a given player supported GW1 financially, or even how much time someone played. These are rewards for being willing to engage in specific grinds.

Someone who played ten thousand hours, bought six copies of each game, purchased every cash shop option available, and so on does not get these rewards for his loyalty, but someone who played a fraction of that time and spent a fraction of that amount can.

Hmm, for that matter I have spent approximately nine hundred dollars on GW2. Does that make me more loyal than someone who has not ? How many APs per dollar spent should we be getting for our loyalty ?

I played for roughly 3000 hours before HoM became a thing and the knowledge of GW2 rewards came about. Just by playing those 3000 hours doing whatever looked fun, I achieved 24/50 of the HoM points. I never really went back to get any others.

Someone who played GW1 at for 10,000 would have to try really really hard to not end up with 40 HoM points just doing whatever. They would actively have to AVOID HoM stuff to get less than 40.

This is incorrect.

One need not actively avoid HOM to get less than 40. One need merely enjoy, and play, elements of the game that did not reward HOM points. How many points were awarded for RA for example ?

Hmm,

I do play WvW with some degree of frequency, but would play more if:

1) Success was less tied to zerging.
2) Stealth mechanics were changed or removed.
3) Non BM Rangers were more competitive.

I got my GW1 points (35) in a very few months. Bought some. Got others just playing the game.

Tolmos.8395:

This is Guild Wars 2. That means a Guild Wars came before it. It would be expected that there would be some sort of rewards for those loyal customers who stayed with the games through both iterations.

There are such rewards even without inflating AP gain from GW1.

Also, it might be noted that these bonus APs from GW1 are not loyalty rewards. There is no tie to how much a given player supported GW1 financially, or even how much time someone played. These are rewards for being willing to engage in specific grinds.

Someone who played ten thousand hours, bought six copies of each game, purchased every cash shop option available, and so on does not get these rewards for his loyalty, but someone who played a fraction of that time and spent a fraction of that amount can.

Hmm, for that matter I have spent approximately nine hundred dollars on GW2. Does that make me more loyal than someone who has not ? How many APs per dollar spent should we be getting for our loyalty ?

I am a long time GW1 player (2005-2013).

Despite that, perhaps even because of it, I tend to agree with those opposed to large sums of APs being awarded in GW2 for GW1 achievements.

I fully support the idea of rewards for those, such as myself, who pursued HOM titles specifically because we were told they would provide us with titles, cosmetic options, pets, etc in GW2. These unique rewards were promised and delivered upon. They provide us with a link between our time spent in GW1 and our characters in GW2.

Having those rewards provide an advantage in any form of competition in GW2 cheapens both the GW1 rewards as well as the GW2 AP competition.

The rewards themselves are cheapened because they now go beyond the spirit of a thank you from the company whose game we devoted so many hours playing and instead have retroactively tainted a friendly competition in this game.

The GW2 AP competition is cheapened because success is now influenced by money spent in another game. Any time a referee of a competition tells a competitor, “hey, thanks for that cash you slipped me, I’m just going to let you win,” the spirit of the competition is ruined.

ilr.9675:

If all you do is invite the sheep/mice of the game,

“Constructive,” “objective,” and “non-troll,” do not equate to sheep or mice.

They do equate to important traits of a useful tester though.

Someone who is constructive and objective is, by definition, critical where criticism is merited.

ilr.9675:

YOU CAN’T IGNORE TESTERS ON BALANCE/ABUSE ISSUES and still call it “Testing”..

Of course you can, and probably should some or even most of the time, when dealing with volunteer (especially player) testers.

Balance and abuse issues are generally much more subjective than UI/graphics bugs and issues. Keeping those issues most subject to bias away from those most likely to be affected by bias is perfectly reasonable.

fuzzypanda.9365:

Greifing is when they camp and never let anyone through. Especially when people are there for the achiement. Like the Cache being in the Oblivion. And I’m pretty sure that’s the reason why I’m seeing people camp the JP. I’ve never seen anyone just camp and troll people in any of the WvW JPs untill this point. This is what I call griefing. If it wasn’t for the fact Anet put something unrelated to WvW in WvW was a mistake on their part. But should people camp and troll people when they know they are there for the cache. I was sitting on a ledge because one server was camping the entire JP and we weren’t the only server waiting for them to give up and go home the third server was waiting as well. This is trolling/griefing just for the sake of it. And no large WvW group is going to help people go through the JP. I’ve asked. But woah unto me to think people have at least some decency. I don’t think what they did was right. Not during this time period anyway.

It does not matter why you are in a PvP zone. It does not matter that you are there for a reason other than PvP. It does not matter that you are there for a living story element. The fact of the matter is that the zone is intended for PvP. If you choose (and it is a choice as no one is forcing you to do so) to enter a PvP enabled zone, for any reason, you are agreeing to participate, even if only passively, in PvP.

People do have some decency. They are decently waiting for you in a section of a PvP zone, decently attacking you in that PvP zone, and decently defeating you in that PvP zone. They are, with all decency, playing the game as it is intended. The only indecent behavior here is insulting others for PvPing in a PvP zone.

Other players are the challenge that is meant to be overcome in order to gain rewards in a PvP zone. Would you complain that NPCs in a PvE zone are not acting with decency because they don’t fall over dead at a glance, allowing you to get that ori node, or boss chest, or whatever without a fight ?

I think that stacks dropping on downed is perfectly appropriate. Downed has been presented as a sort of second chance, a means to get back into the fight after being overcome. If that is the case, and I have seen much to support it and nothing to contradict it, then being downed seems to be meant to be undesirable. Having buff stacks lost on downed supports that intended undesirability.

Excellent video.

/signed for being able to shoot asurans out of catapults.