Guild Wars 2

Funny thing is my wife and I watdhed the Bill and Ted movies (again) last night. These out of sequence plot elements work fine there.

NoTrigger.8396:

if i have to use self imposed handicaps to make stuff challenging then there is something wrong to begin with.
and soloing arah naked is just as easy as soloing it with full gear. it only takes longer.
it doesnt make the content more interesting nor complex.

For what it is worth I was not speaking of solo play. You updated your intent to specify group play so I followed. If something which has a chance of failure has its duration increased then the chance of failure is also increased. This can be considered an increase in difficulty. For example a player who can execute ten dodges in a row flawlessly might find himself missing an important dodge over the course of a thousand.

Then again we were speaking of challenging not interesting or complex.

NoTrigger.8396:

if i have to solo stuff to make the content interesting (even doing stuff solo doesnt make it better) why do i play a MMO?
gw2 always talks about how they want to make people play together and find guilds etc…
gw2 feels more like a single player game.

I agree completely.

NoTrigger.8396:

there is currently nothing challenging for organized group play. nothing.

If this was correct all organized groups would have 100% success rate at everything they attempt. This is not the case.

NoTrigger.8396:

you can run dungeons naked all you want. people have done off-hand only dungeons. it doesnt change anything, no, it even feels completely kittened.
and raids could be a good way to introduce content specifically for organized groups to give them something to strive for and a fun experience.

I agree. The question is what would be the ROI for Anet ?

NoTrigger.8396:

if the content is tuned right and challenging, it will have a high replayability.
if i can just rush through it, clear it first try or within a few days, then i will simply lose interest very fast.

I have yet to see content that didn’t become rote or easy for those seeking challenge within a matter of weeks or months. I am not saying that content cannot be created to remain difficult over time, but I have not yet seen it. I have had to move into PvP to find sustainable challenge in any game I’ve played (and I do not consider myself to be particularly good at games).

NoTrigger.8396:

also, i would like to see your statistics which show that the majority in this game is satisfied with the difficulty of lets say cursed shore champ farming, or in other words, run like headless chickens in circles and spam 1.

I have never claimed this.

NoTrigger.8396:

and captain genius im not a native english speaker. just saying. but im pretty sure you understand exactly what i mean. so it would be nice if you could put your grammar talk aside and stay on topic. thx

I responded to what you said. Upon learning that you meant other than what you said I altered my subsequent responses accordingly. My posts were direct responses to yours and could only be off topic if yours were.

Fernling.1729:

I personally liked the analogy. It makes it easier for people to understand the issues with the personal story since the NPE patch. And, what’s more relatable than Harry Potter?

Episode 1 Frodo throws The One Ring into the volcano.
Episode 2 Bilbo gives Frodo The One Ring.

: )

Leo G.4501:

Red Queen.7915:

The goal of feminism in video game culture is not “stuff that offends no woman ever”, it’s “stuff that treats everyone the same, regardless of their sex/gender”. Of course someone would be offended. There always is someone. But when there are enough options, those someones are free to go look elsewhere. Right now, there aren’t many options, let alone good ones, so if we want to pursue our hobby, we have to put up with it or give up somthing we love. Neither option is very fair.

Almost forgot about this part.

That isn’t feminism, that’s gender equality. Also, please remember what thread you’re posting in. This is a thread that is addressing a particular inequality. I made a weak attempt to keep it on topic but yeah, it seems to be the goal of equality to press the female issue regardless of the topic.

Afraid that I have to disagree.

Treating people the same regardless of sex/gender is not gender equality.
There are significant differences between the genders. Of course people should be treated equally, but that does not necessarily mean exactly the same.

NoTrigger.8396:

Ashen.2907:

NoTrigger.8396:

how is it incorrect? tell me one thing in PvE that is challenging for a group

That is called moving the goalpost.

why? its exactly what raids are for and what i was talking about.

Ashen.2907:

Even so there are options for challenge for groups in PvE.

tell me where the options are please.

You said 100% of the content in this game. Raids do not, currently, exist in this game. As you were speaking in the present tense you could not have been, accurately, speaking of raids. If you were intending to speak of raids then you are correct in that there are not currently any (traditional MMO) raids in GW2.

To be honest I am not sure why you would have felt the need to say so as it is common knowledge. I, for example, would not make a point of stating that there are no interstellar space ship mounts in GW2. To each their own I suppose.

To be clear, you said, “nothing,” not one thing, exists in GW2 for people who enjoy a challenge. Now its no PvE group based content for those who want a challenge. That is the goal post move I referred to.

Still, some dungeons have options that are challenging, or were until people had played them to the point that they knew them like the back of their hands. Personally I have always found PvE content to lose its challenge within a few weeks/months of its introduction. Once you learn the mobs’ builds, behavior, etc the challenge becomes centered around paying attention or staying awake while following a script.

People requesting more challenging content, and I include myself in this, are asking the devs to spend resources on content that many (perhaps even the majority) of players will not enjoy and that those for whom it is developed will render incapable of fulfilling its design purpose by the very act of using it.

I am not a fan of self imposed handicaps to substitute for inherent encounter challenge but has your group done every dungeon path naked, without traits, no utility skills, etc ? If all you are looking for is a challenging experience, with rewards being irrelevant, then these options might very well provide it. It wouldn’t work for me as I want something that is challenging for me/my character at my/his best, but who knows maybe you will like it.

NoTrigger.8396:

how is it incorrect? tell me one thing in PvE that is challenging for a group

That is called moving the goalpost.

Even so there are options for challenge for groups in PvE. I think we need more, and a greater variety though.

NoTrigger.8396:

i want content. i dont care at all about rewards. i dont have a single legendary because you dont get them for skillful play, i spend most of my time soloing dungeons and investing more gold than i earn. seriously i couldnt care less about rewards.
but other people do care about it.

and this post is again egoistic.

You might want to hold off on referring to others as egoistic if you use the word, “I,” half a dozen times in your first paragraph.

NoTrigger.8396:

100% of the content in this game is made so even the worst person can play through it.

This is incorrect.

NoTrigger.8396:

but there is NOTHING for the people who want challenge.

This is also incorrect.

NewTrain.7549:

The thing is, you want to use fear of a complete unknown quantity to restrict design choices and I don’t think that’s a good idea.

Indigo’s main argument seems to be that, without data to show that those desiring exclusive rewards are an insignificant portion of the player base, it is inappropriate, for the sake of fully exploring the issue, to dismiss their desire as off topic or irrelevant.

He is right.

I don’t think that there is anything inherently wrong with someone on an English language server stating so if another player is conversing or posting in another language.

I also don’t think that there is anything wrong with stating that one intends to block another player’s chat.

How those two bits of information are communicated is what determines whether or not anything has been done wrong in my opinion.

SKATE.1394:

Infernia.9847:

I’d love to get on a light armor class to contribute but all I have is a level 80 necro.
If you want I can get on: 2 lvl80 rangers, 1 lvl80 warrior, 1 lvl80 guardian.

The other characters are all under lvl40 (ele, mesmer, thief). It’s taking far too long to level them up in the ‘old’ way so there’s that. If you want though I can take any of them out for a spin.

Yeah we haven’t had any light wearers that aren’t bugged necros contribute anything yet, but whatever class you want would be fine, or all 3 even.

Ashen.2907:

Here are the results of my own accounting:

26 drops total:

4 Light Armor
4 Medium Armor
4 Heavy Armor

11 Weapons that my ranger can use
3 Weapons that my ranger cannot use

Not that big of a deal in my test.

Just to clarify, level 80 ranger, level 80 zone? Wasn’t an instance by any chance was it? Open world?

Level 80 Ranger, level 80 zone, open world only.

Here are the results of my own accounting:

26 drops total:

4 Light Armor
4 Medium Armor
4 Heavy Armor

11 Weapons that my ranger can use
3 Weapons that my ranger cannot use

Not that big of a deal in my test.

Vayne.8563:

Ashen.2907:

Vayne.8563:

Gene Archer.8560:

Um, I’m uh pretty sure Nokaru’s point is that stating that any type of post is “the worst kind of hyperbole” is in itself hyperbole.

I understand. However, hyperbole is overstating what you mean to make a case. I’m not actually overstating what I mean. To me that is the worst kind of hyperbole…thus it’s not hyperbole.

You did not say, “to me it is the worst kind of hyperbole.” You said that it is the worst kind of hyperbole.

If you claim that your statement is not hyperbole because you believe what you said, then his cannot be accurately claimed to be hyperbole unless you can establish that he did not believe what he said.

Also, he did not claim that, “making the first ten levels of a game easier will make people worse.” He said nothing of the sort. He said, essentially, that players incapable of handling game elements like picking up a bundle would be bad at the game. He made no comment at all about the changes making people worse.

The worst type of statement can only be opinion. There is no objective worst. I could definitely have improved my message by saying to me however, just for clarity.

The person I was responding to the first time used the word FACT. Fact is not opinion. I never claimed my opinion was fact.

I will in the future, try to remember to add “to me” to posts more often. I had erroneously assumed that best to worst would be automatically assumed to be an opinion. I know for a fact that facts aren’t actually opinions though, and arguments that state they’re facts when they’re not are, to me, the worst kind of hyperbole.

He used the word worse too.

Interestingly enough his statement was factual. If someone cannot handle the existing difficulty of the game, to the point that the developers have to reduce its complexity/difficulty in order for that someone to play the game they are, by definition, “worse,” at the game than those who could handle the full difficulty.

Seera.5916:

Ashen.2907:

Ravion Hawk.4736:

So…

You all want to be able to get the best loot while playing the Zerker Meta?

I’m enjoying finally getting more than just leather drops for ALL my characters. I play my scholars when I need various cloth scraps and I play my warrior or guardian when I need more metals.

It encourages players to play more classes. But then again I don’t play the Zerker Meta nor do I play the Trade Post.

So far it seems to be working as intended.

Zerker meta doesn’t really come into play with this. The DPS race of zerker applies to all classes.

What this does is, “encourage,” players to play specific classes for maximum reward. If you happen to like playing a non cloth wearer, ranger in my case, then you have your long term goals which require in game currency delayed compared to those who either enjoy cloth wearing classes or who are willing to switch for increased rewards.

If there is even truly a noticeable increase. OP did not give any numbers as to how many times he got loot drops, but I can’t imagine the number is high enough to draw any statistical evidence from at any reliable error allowance.

Anet has stated that the weighting of drops was being done. No beating around the bush. A definitive Yes.

They stated that the changes would be subtle or not very noticeable. Vague obfuscations. No objective measure of what was being done. Do they consider 25%, 35%, or any other specific numerical value subtle or not very noticeable ? We do not know.

So we have a statement from the company that X has been done and a player attempting to measure X.

I think that any argument against the OP’s methods or data pool are misguided. Since the phenomenon has been stated to exist by the ultimate authority of what exists in game the real purpose here should be to add to the effort to measure that phenomenon, not denounce the first steps in the process.

I mean if we were talking about some theoretical phenomenon sure, but when it is stated as a fact by the developers that X exists the whole process changes.

Vayne.8563:

Gene Archer.8560:

Um, I’m uh pretty sure Nokaru’s point is that stating that any type of post is “the worst kind of hyperbole” is in itself hyperbole.

I understand. However, hyperbole is overstating what you mean to make a case. I’m not actually overstating what I mean. To me that is the worst kind of hyperbole…thus it’s not hyperbole.

You did not say, “to me it is the worst kind of hyperbole.” You said that it is the worst kind of hyperbole.

If you claim that your statement is not hyperbole because you believe what you said, then his cannot be accurately claimed to be hyperbole unless you can establish that he did not believe what he said.

Also, he did not claim that, “making the first ten levels of a game easier will make people worse.” He said nothing of the sort. He said, essentially, that players incapable of handling game elements like picking up a bundle would be bad at the game. He made no comment at all about the changes making people worse.

Ravion Hawk.4736:

So…

You all want to be able to get the best loot while playing the Zerker Meta?

I’m enjoying finally getting more than just leather drops for ALL my characters. I play my scholars when I need various cloth scraps and I play my warrior or guardian when I need more metals.

It encourages players to play more classes. But then again I don’t play the Zerker Meta nor do I play the Trade Post.

So far it seems to be working as intended.

Zerker meta doesn’t really come into play with this. The DPS race of zerker applies to all classes.

What this does is, “encourage,” players to play specific classes for maximum reward. If you happen to like playing a non cloth wearer, ranger in my case, then you have your long term goals which require in game currency delayed compared to those who either enjoy cloth wearing classes or who are willing to switch for increased rewards.

phys.7689:

because when things are money based, it is about competitive earning potential

This point is all too often overlooked.

When goals, objectives, rewards, etc are designed to be acquired by accumulating currency in an active market players are competing, even if they don’t realize it, with others for those rewards, etc. If currency is being accumulated by others at a greater rate than one can manage one might not ever be able to afford that shiny whatever-it-is that one desires due to inflation.

“Wow, 500g for X, its gonna take me a while to get there…” six months later, “got my 500g, but X now costs 750g…I guess I’ll keep waiting,” a month or two later, “finally got my 750g….its 1000g now ?!?!” and so on.

phys.7689:

Ashen.2907:

phys.7689:

If only 5% of the population is interested in raids in LOTRO, i think only 5% of the population is interested in getting every visual/mini/title in the game. So its a battle of the completitionist who doesnt like hard content versus the people who like hard content, neither of them = the majority of players.

What do you suppose is the difference between the content development resource allocation between mini-pets and raids ?

People keep saying that a casual player will not be impacted by the introduction of optional more hardcore content with unique rewards… This would only be true if Anet had infinite development resources for the game. As it stands putting content designers etc into producing hardcore content, which (assuming it is not just more HP for the same sort of extremely casual content we see now) generally requires more time and effort than casual content, means less content for the casual minority.

Now I personally think that allocating some resources to developing harder content (with appropriate rewards) is worth the effort. In some cases this provides some longevity of gameplay even for casual players. But claiming that reducing content development for casual players will not affect them is ludicrous.

This is probably why most times harder content uses pre existing resources, (hardmode) or an instance that uses creatures, spells, and background art that also exists somewhere else. Hard content doesnt usually require much more work than having a level designer with a different focus iterate on a design.

Which means, its generally isnt stealing much resources from casual players.

To me hard mode content is more than adding health and more damage to existing mobs. It means better AI, more complicated encounters, more detailed and developed mob/group design, etc. AI development and programming are not inconsequential. Raids, to use your LoTRO example, are major resource investments.

I think it would be worth the cost, but the cost would not be insignificant. If the cost (in time, effort, money) was minimal we would probably already have it.

Personally I think that adding a hardmode setting that affects instanced content, allowing replay of the personal story, and increasing the chances for better drops from the existing loot tables in HM, adding new rewards that have a better net chance to drop in HM, all implemented so that new instanced content inherently included the HM templates so that going forward new (instanced) content addition added to both casual and hardcore player options, would be awesome.

lakdav.3694:

But if one can get a specific material more reliably because of the class they play/farm with, wouldnt that reduce the demand for that material on the TP for those who want to get it while keeping the rest relatively on the same level as before? Wouldnt that practicly be a balancing aspect in the “leather=worthless – silk=new black gold” equation?

No because the classes that will get less silk still have a demand for it . More classes are having their silk drop rates reduced than are having them increased.

phys.7689:

If only 5% of the population is interested in raids in LOTRO, i think only 5% of the population is interested in getting every visual/mini/title in the game. So its a battle of the completitionist who doesnt like hard content versus the people who like hard content, neither of them = the majority of players.

What do you suppose is the difference between the content development resource allocation between mini-pets and raids ?

People keep saying that a casual player will not be impacted by the introduction of optional more hardcore content with unique rewards… This would only be true if Anet had infinite development resources for the game. As it stands putting content designers etc into producing hardcore content, which (assuming it is not just more HP for the same sort of extremely casual content we see now) generally requires more time and effort than casual content, means less content for the casual minority.

Now I personally think that allocating some resources to developing harder content (with appropriate rewards) is worth the effort. In some cases this provides some longevity of gameplay even for casual players. But claiming that reducing content development for casual players will not affect them is ludicrous.

Sounds like some of the fun all night dungeon delves one might find at at a PnP RPG convention.

Very cool.

Duke Blackrose.4981:

ALL Guild Wars 1 content was endgame viable, thanks to hard mode

Very important point (to me).

Baseball has been, “dumbed down,” over the course of its existence (particularly as an organized/professional sport). It started off essentially as a, “dumbed down,” version of cricket.

Football has been dumbed down over the course of its existence (particularly as an organized/professional sport).

WoW has been dumbed down over the course of its life.

GW1 was dumbed down over the course of its life.

Video games in general have been dumbed down in order to draw in a larger audience.

From what I have seen pretty much every large scale form of entertainment has been dumbed down over time in order to draw in larger numbers of paying customers.

Rewards gated by challenging content are not equivalent to rewards gated by gem cost. Many players will never be able to complete content that is challenging for a game’s better players. In GW2 it takes no skill to accumulate gold for conversion to gems. Sure it may take a while to earn enough for a given gemstore purchase but time alone is insufficient for a player of average or below (by definition half of the player base are below average in ability) to complete content intended to be difficult for the best or better players.

fellyn.5083:

No. No they are not. There isn’t a single event in the game that is designed to be failed.

Yes they are. If they were not designed to be able to be failed then it would not be possible to do so.

fellyn.5083:

Further, if what you say is true then anet would not continually nerf fail train farms.

Not true.

Chris Cleary.8017:

There are really two sides to this, and when it comes down to it, you are both right – and you are both wrong. Both sides have the right to complete the task that they set out to do (completing or not completing).

Challenging another player’s play style is the issue here, and since this revolved around an event that was designed to be completed, it is being changed so that the original design of the event can be carried out.

When something in the game (such as this event) changes negatively as this has, we need to step in and remediate the toxicity. The byproduct of this change happens to be that a champion farm is being slowed, but since that was the originating factor for the toxicity, it’s unavoidable.

I encourage players to remember that not everyone has the same goals when they play, and sometimes they will clash.

Note the reference to altering/nerfing due to toxicity, not because failing events is wrong.

fellyn.5083:

Further still, that is the only place in the entire game where players can go do that particular step in their personal story, some of which paid money to do so. There are lots of different places in the game to farm that were put there to appease farmers.

Everyone paid to play the game, including the event in question.

fellyn.5083:

If those places aren’t “good enough” for you then to that I say, stop being so kittenin greedy. You are the reason why it’s so hard to get anything in this game.

I do not farm there. I do not event fail farm at all. As pointed out in the previous post I always play to win.

For what it is worth I would like to see event design altered so that success is more rewarding than failure.

fellyn.5083:

Aenesthesia.1697:

Ayakaru.6583:

“I was so excited to start the new season two story. I had paid 200 gems for the last chapter, and really having enjoyed the previous I jumped straight into. Then, my quests redirected me to the shiverpeaks, to stop the Icebrood. Little did I know that my previous experience with sons of svanir was a false one. Because the enemy was not the Svanir, no, it was the playerbase. They were intent on helping the icebrood succeed in their wicked ways for their greed had been rewarded.
As for today, I still falsely hope for a chance to be able to defeat these svanir, and return to the story that I paid for. Until then, I will just uninstall until the greedy cease to be svanir’s allies. I’m sorry, Mordremorth, another hero will have to stop you, for I cannot until this has been passed.”

I am not denying your right to finish the quest. As i said, the problem is that your gameplay collides with others’. You can try to move to another server, you can wait for anet to repair this mess, or you can troll all the people trying to make the event fail. You can even go and uninstall the game but i doubt you will, because you must be enjoying this game if you are still playing it, and a minor setback like people farming one event should not be enough if you haven’t quit yet (there have been worse things).

Why do people playing the game as it was designed have to go else where?

The logic used here is baffling.

Those playing to farm failed events are playing the game as designed. Who was at the event first ? Which group has the greater numbers at the event at the time of conflict ?

Personally I do not like failing. I play to win at all times (though I do not always succeed) but Anet has designed the game to reward failure more than success and has further stated that the fail farmers have a right to play this way.

Looka.6078:

I went AFK in SPvP matches too. And I tried to leave SPvP matches. And no, I don’t feel guilty at all. Why ? Well, very simple: because I didn’t want to play with or against players that I already blocked for whatever reason.

Then don’t join game modes where you might encounter such people. Punishing others for the fact that you do not want to play with person X is wrong.

CureForLiving.5360:

a possible solution is proposed too, a solution that attempts to keep both parties happy at that.

The OP made no suggestion to keep the farmers happy. His suggestion is to make it impossible for the farmers to continue to farm the event as they have been.

OP,

If you suffer from severe anxiety you may find that it is a good idea to avoid PvP and other high performance team aspects of this (or any other) MMO.

There will still be plenty for you to play and (hopefully) enjoy but if you have a condition that you know will negatively impact both your participation, and that of other players involved, in an aspect of game play it is a bad idea for you to do so. I know that you state that your venture into ranked PvP was an accident but even non ranked PvP would involve elements that you state will trigger your anxiety.

My sympathies for your distress and I hope you are able to continue to enjoy the game and choose, going forward, to refrain from activities that you know will trigger that distress.

Vayne.8563:

Ashen.2907:

Vayne.8563:

I’m sure the devs have said they’re looking into it.

Yes they have. In fact they made changes to the new trait system in response to player feedback.

Some yeah, but it’s only a down payment. More needs to be done.

I agree.

My point was that Anet has demonstrated that not only are they listening, they are acting based on what they hear, and they are telling us so. Pretty much the definition of interactive communication.

Vayne.8563:

I’m sure the devs have said they’re looking into it.

Yes they have. In fact they made changes to the new trait system in response to player feedback.

Vayne.8563:

Or are you saying that Anet compares them as a matter of course now, or even since launch?

Every day.

Vayne.8563:

People are comparing Guild Wars 2 to a much more modest proposition that wasn’t a true MMO.

Yes they have been or are….of course the people to whom I am referring are Anet. If the creators of both games compares them its probably expected that others will as well.

Bloodstealer.5978:

weston.3457:

yolo swaggins.2570:

Cut the victimization. You guys are trying to bar players from content for your own gain and in that sense you are wrong for doing so. Regardless of what you do to help, it doesn’t change the fact that nobody should deny a paying customer from content. And flaming people who exert that privilege only makes it worse. That is the toxicity that starts the cycle.

Now, you might not throw insults and be a complete kitten to players but you are not the other 49+ people. It is almost guaranteed to see people start cussing when players want to finish and it is usually the farmers who start.

i payed for this game, so did the 50 others who ,for them, farming IS the content. your arguement is based solely on the fact that your idea of game progress aligns more closely to the one finishing for LS, rather than the ones farming, whose progress is gold/items they need to get what they want from the game. People don’t understand that progress is different for everyone, and by refusing to let us help them they are barring 50 players from the content that THEY payed for. its usually the farmers that start it? please. maybe 5% of the farmers are toxic at most, its probably about 75% of the players looking for LS that are toxic.

Utter rubbish.. you can try and mask the issue all you like.. LS is the reason for the event and if it wasn’t meant to be progressed then it would not be there.

The reason and only reason the toxicity occurs is because the Failtrain seek to claim ownership of a map event that has implications for others needing to run it.. so quit with your self professed BS .

If the only way this kind of behaviour and attitude can be taken out of the game then I am all for ANET killing the champ loot from these events and making it a win or bust scenario.. with a 1hr timer on the fail timer and then we can all go swimming in your #RIVEROFTEARS

This is why an anti-failtrain zerg began to appear at BLIX to intentionally go and disrupt the failtrains exploitation.. I hopped into a few of their runs and tbh it was so much fun seeing the map chat light up in a blaze of laughter when failtrains conceded defeat and moved on.. posting more LFG’s to make their new map populated.. only to find the failtrain joined the adverts and followed them round… that is the kind of issues these exploits begin to create so if ANET don’t want to act harder on failtrain exploits then I am sure the same thing will happen again.. until eventually it becomes a war of words like BLIX.

Two groups of players.

Each interested in a given bit of content for different reasons.

Anet has stated that both have the right to pursue their given approach to content.

One group chooses to actively attempt to disrupt the other, not for the sake of pursuing the content for themselves, for the purpose of griefing the other group…and then actively follows when the other group attempts to go find a place to play of their own so as to be able to continue the griefing.

Sounds like the toxicity rests, in your own given example, with those seeking to interfere with the farmers.

Harper.4173:

So how come people can suggest changing huge parts of the game that I love and/or overhauling it completely and I shouldn’t feel offended at all .

No you probably should not be offended because someone else likes something somewhat different than you. Feel free to take offense if you choose of course, but player X’s preference for something that you do not want is not an insult to you.

Harper.4173:

since it’s their right to ask for whatever they want but when I tell them it’s not a good idea and maybe they should consider that instead of changing 80% of what this game is maybe it’d be easier to leave the game as it is for those of us who enjoy it and seek out a different game that already caters to their wishes they’re allowed to be super offended because apparently I shouldn’t have any say on whether the game is or not for them.

You do not have any say whether the game is or not for them. There is a huge difference between a customer expressing how a given product might be more appealing to them and you making judgement calls about another player.

Palador.2170:

First of all, thank you. If I can get even you to agree with it, then I’m pretty sure that means I’ve won at least my original point. We may not agree on when the end game starts, but we do agree it’s not at level 1.

Did endgame really start at level 1 before ?

We did not have all of our traits, skills, etc at level 1 before (or at least I didn’t). I don’t think I ever even got out of the tutorial/starter instance without being at least level 2.

Translation of the OP:

“I am unhappy with recent changes to, and the current direction of, the game and shall refrain from spending money on it until such a time as the game justifies my doing so.”

My response:

Excellent. A discerning and responsible consumer. Kudos.

I think that if map completion is meant to serve, in part, as a form of introduction to WvW some changes might be in order. As it stands now the most common reaction, that I see, to map completion in WvW from PvEers is frustration.

Frustration is not a good way to sell the game mode.

I think that WvW should remain part of map completion but that the POI, vistas, etc should be more accessible. Place them so that players need to move around the map. SPend some time there, likely approach game mode objectives, etc. Let these players see a big fight, maybe they will choose to jump in. Requiring that people spend weeks waiting to progress a goal, held back regardless of their efforts, seems like a poor way to encourage them to enjoy that game mode.

Gotta agree with Vayne on this.

Don’t make playing with or helping others less rewarding.

BlueZone.4236:

What leads you to believe GW2 differs wildly from the norm?

What leads you to believe that what GW2 differs wildly from is the, “norm?”

eekzie.5640:

Ashen.2907:

Three and a half million threads (approximately) with upwards of twelve billion posts about the recent update, mass hysteria, big foot sightings, cats and dogs living together….and the gem store is the only thing being updated ?

Did you not see the game update notes?

I was commenting on the ridiculousness of the OP’s claim that it seems only the gemstore is being updated when these forums have been buzzing with response to a very recent major update.

I’m guessing three hundred thousand and two.

Three and a half million threads (approximately) with upwards of twelve billion posts about the recent update, mass hysteria, big foot sightings, cats and dogs living together….and the gem store is the only thing being updated ?

Astralporing.1957:

a combination of mechanism that punishes negative comments with hiding said mechanics from public knowledge would be just plain stupid. The only reason such a thing might have been implemented is to influence forum opinions. Well, it’s hard to bribe/threaten people if they are unaware of the bribe/threat.

Indeed.

The whole point of the doomsday device is lost if you keep it a secret.

Vayne.8563:

Glad you’re doing this, because if it were me, I’d be biased and a white knight fan boy.

Don’t think that anyone, even you, would be considered a White Knight for calling the NPE a series of annoyances strung out one after another.

Rogue.7856:

Your right, its about those 10,000 testers that don’t even play the game.

You sure about that ?

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Ashen.2907:

MikaHR.1978:

On all weapons?

Yes.

You must have really been driven . . .

See, I forgot one on my ranger (Dagger off hand) and found myself facepalming and working on it around level 30 the first time.

I love dagger off hand. Sword/Dagger is amazingly fun (to me).

One of my favorite aspects of GW2 is that I can more fully realize the concept for my main character than I could in GW1. I chose R/W in GW1 because I thought it would be cool to play a character that could switch between bow and sword as desired. My pen and paper Ranger(s) carry a melee weapon back-up so of course I would try to do the same in my first online game….didn’t work so well.

In GW2, however, I could play both swordsman and archer.

MikaHR.1978:

On all weapons?

Yes.

Rogue.7856:

Sure this is an opinion… but to say that the opinion of a vast majority doesn’t matter, is ignorance at its worst.

I guess people preaching the end of GW2 are right because if 1500(ish) people represent a vast majority of the player base there is no way the game can survive.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Vayne.8563:

Sokia.3710:

ipan.4356:

I told them in the beta that choosing a starting weapon should be part of the char creation process.

Yeah. Just like in Legend Of Mana. You choose what weapon you want to start with, and you have a little preview of what it looks like when you are creating your character.

I have mixed feelings about letting people choose their own weapon, certainly for a first character anyway.

A developer can better control the experience balancing the starting area for a single weapon, rather than having to wonder if every weapon has the same rough peformance, which isn’t always the case.

I’m going to have to disagree with you Vayne. I think choosing the weapon is an important choice, and too important to not give the player. Especially when, I believe, you can still purchase basic white weapons (inside the cities) cheaply to experiment with.

Gotta agree with Tobias here.

Weapon choice can be entirely too integral to a character concept to not be given to the player.

In my experience players frequently, if not usually, include the visual/ideal of a given weapon during the conceptualization phase of character creation.

“I wanna play a dwarf with a big-ole axe”
“Totally gonna play a ranger with a bow”
etc.

Brother Grimm.5176:

Terrahero.9358:

…..
And what do you base your stastitics on? Or is it just a gut feeling?
Because we’ve actually seen some stastistics on how 1500+ people feel about the new changes. And it was overwhelmingly negative……

That’s just not true. A bit more than 40% said they HATE it. While almost a 30% said a few tweaks would make them good. That is NOT overwhelmingly negative….that’s not even half negative (despite how you want to portray it).

Also, There is no real indication where those players polled came from, but if it’s from these forums, I wouldn’t think it’s at all representative of the overall player base.

41% hate it
12% dislike it
———
53% is more than half.

29% think that it is currently not OK (not OK is negative)

53% + 29% = 82%.

82% is a pretty solid majority. I would be surprised if any professional poll taker/calculator considered 82% to not be an overwhelming majority.

Now do those numbers mean all that much ? I think they are worth considering, but not to the degree that the face value of the numbers would seem to indicate.