Why would they since dungeons don’t have an affect on PvP? Where as inserting PvP into PvE would indeed have an affect on PvE.
Of course development of dungeons has an impact on PvP. Its the most reasonable argument against developing open world dueling (IMO). Every dime spent on one aspect of the game is not being spent on another. Opportunity costs. Unless a developer has essentially unlimited resources anything added to the game is comeing at the expense of something else.
I’m pretty sure that when proponents of other sets asked for the gap to narrow, they weren’t just asking for berserker to be lowered — they were asking for others sets to be more effective/desirable. This is not what will happen. No mob changes, no adjustments to the effectiveness of other gear set-ups.
What ANet is doing is the functional equivalent of adding ~10% to the health of mobs — but only for dedicated DPS-max groups. The experience of non-berserker groups will not change at all. The experience of groups with a berserker or two will be slightly longer run times. Dedicated speed run groups are no more likely to be willing to accept soldier or cleric users than they were before.
This change is nothing other than ANet taking the easy way out by adjusting some numbers in tables — rather than accepting the harder task of actually fixing mobs to be more diverse, have better AI, and to demand more diversity because of their mechanics. It’s a cop-out.
They could be doing both you know. I assume you understand how hard AI in an open environment is to code. This means long development, and a massive amount of testing.
Open environment… we are talking fractals and dungeons as well… that’s where there are speed runs.. not in open world. There is no reason not to fix 5 man group dungeons for a more diverse build/class make ups.
How would you fix it, then? I’m genuinely interested.
Also, Mob AI is kind of a global thing.
Do you think it would be possible for mob AI to be altered in dungeons ? I know that setting the game to hardmode altered mob AI in GW1. Do you think the varying AI based on instance settings could be managed here ?
One thing which people do seem to overlook is that in almost every MMO I’ve ever played, you have all your skills available to you at once.
In Guild Wars 1, you have to load out your skills before you leave an outpost.
This is one of the aspects I prefer about GW1 over most MMOs. I do like the ability to shift things around while out of combat without returning to an outpost.
^^^This
No reason to provide more tools for people to act like nimrods.
Any content addition whatsoever is a tool for people to act like nimrods. So no more PvE development ?
Give an example of PvE development that will do so.
People have been rude or outright griefed each other in the use of the LFG tool.
People have been rude or outright griefed each other in dungeons.
People have used chat to be rude to or outright grief others.
People have been rude or outright griefed each other in the pursuit of champion trains.
and so on.
I have not seen a single playable aspect of the game that has not had people involved in it, or use it, to be obnoxious towards other players.
Your examples are not of PvE development but what already exists. So we should add one more with PvP in PvE?
The examples show that things developed (perhaps more of which will be developed) in GW2 allow for griefing and that more development following the established pattern of what has been developed would do the same.
Even so:
The champ trains were created post launch by development studio alterations to the game.
The LFG tool was added to the game post launch…giving those so inclined more opportunities to be obnoxious towards each other.
Any dungeon added to the game will give those inclined an opportunity to grief others.
LS additions were used as an opportunity to be obnoxious towards others.
Etc.
Every piece of playable content included in the game at launch has been able to be used to be obnoxious towards others.
Every piece of playable content added since launch has been able to be used to be obnoxious towards others.
Is there any reason to think that this will not continue to be the case ?
To clarify, I do not fault Anet for this. This is not a GW2 phenomenon, it is an online gaming phenomenon. People find ways to use whatever tools available to be kittens.
^^^This
No reason to provide more tools for people to act like nimrods.
Any content addition whatsoever is a tool for people to act like nimrods. So no more PvE development ?
Give an example of PvE development that will do so.
People have been rude or outright griefed each other in the use of the LFG tool.
People have been rude or outright griefed each other in dungeons.
People have used chat to be rude to or outright grief others.
People have been rude or outright griefed each other in the pursuit of champion trains.
and so on.
I have not seen a single playable aspect of the game that has not had people involved in it, or use it, to be obnoxious towards other players.
I would love to see the option for a ranger to be less dependent on his pet, or to be able to forgo a pet entirely without losing effectiveness. I am not suggesting that pets be taken away from those who enjoy them however.
^^^This
No reason to provide more tools for people to act like nimrods.
Any content addition whatsoever is a tool for people to act like nimrods. So no more PvE development ?
If they can adjust these coefficients properly, zerker will still be plenty viable but not the out and out dps winner by such a stretch.
That is kind of the problem IMO. The glass cannon gear suite should be the out and out DPS winner by a stretch. Ideally the game itself should have more situations where the zerker tradeoff of survivability or versatility for extra damage is more meaningful. Right now there is little or no opportunity cost for going full berzerker.
No, not by a stretch. Yes, it should be better though not so much so that it turns into ‘the only choice.’ Not so much better that it seemingly renders all others obsolete by comparison. Thus the issue we have right now. It drives the ‘zerker or gtfo’ mentality, which should not exist.
That is not a problem with berzerker, it is a problem with encounter design (IMO of course).
If an individual’s, “attitude,” is a valid reason for his desired or preferred gameplay mode to not be developed we would see a complete cessation of development of WvW, sPvP, open world PvE, instanced PvE, and so on.
Open world dueling is annoying.
Then, if it is implemented, don’t participate in it.
It’s not me telling you what to like or not like, you miss the point. Anyone who’s not being disingenuous knows full well that fun is a matter of personal taste. What one person finds fun another person doesn’t.
And yet you told me what would be fun for me after I said that it wasn’t.
What you’re doing is trying to say the devs were wrong or misleading for calling their game fun, because you don’t find if fun…specifically the combat in their game. That’s like a company saying their car looks good, and you saying they’re wrong because you don’t like how it looks. Sure you can have a contrary opinion, but it doesn’t mean the company has gone back on it’s word. It’s rather that you just don’t like it.
What I said was that this aspect of the manifesto was subjective. That for some people it was true and that for others it was not. You said that it was not subjective. A claim that something is not subjective is a claim that it is objective. You keep claiming that I do not like the combat. I keep pointing out that you are wrong. As you have been informed of the truth (that I do not dislike the combat) why do you keep making this dishonest claim ? Why do you claim to know better than I do what I do and do not like ?
If you want to say I don’t enjoy the combat in Guild Wars 2 so the manifesto isn’t true for me, I support that 100%. Of course, you should have known pretty fast that you don’t like the combat and you six months to get a refund and go play another game, and then by posting here, you’re essentially just being contrary..
Yet again comments about me not liking the combat in GW2 when I have pointed out that this is not the case.
Still I wonder. When I claimed that the grind to get to the fun part of the manifesto is true for some and not true for others you did not support that 100%. You claimed that it was not subjective which means that you were claiming that it was true for everyone. Hardly 100% support for someone saying that it, “isn’t true for me.”
My point is not changed at all by you liking or not liking the combat, nor is it changed by you having fun or not having fun. The point is is that there’s no great change in either case from the day the manifesto was written and published till now.
It might not hold true for someone who doesn’t like what Anet was trying to do…but they did in fact try to do something and continue to try to do it. A manifesto is a statement of intent. They may have failed you specifically, but that’s not a lie, and that’s what’s been implied by many people throughout this thread.
I made no claim that they lied here. I merely stated that this particular aspect was subjective, that some people did have to go through boring grind to get to the fun stuff even if some people did not. You then stated that it was not subjective.
I believe you’ll find that in 90% plus of MMOs that exist today, you need BIS gear to do some end game content.
I don’t recall this being mentioned in my post. In fact it has nothing to do with anything I said as I made no comments about 90% plus of MMOs.
If you don’t think games have trained people what to expect from new games, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong.
Also not a part of my post. You quoted me and then said, “you people.” That is not a generic reference to MMO players in general. I have never, not even once, sought or attained BiS gear in a game where it is required…as you claimed I had. Fabricating falsehoods does not support your position.
I liked this aspect of GW1. Would be cool to see it implemented here.
No, Sir. In order to have fun on your guardian you just have to play the game.
It is a bit odd of you to claim to know what I find fun better than I do. I can assure you that you are wrong.
Again YOU don’t like the combat, so to you, combat is the grind. I LOVE the combat, and so I’m never grinding when I combat.
Again you claim to know what I like/don’t like (you are mistaken).
He’s saying it’s no longer a grind to get to fun stuff.
And yet sometimes it is.
I did not say anything about vertical progression. I did not say anything about gear grind. I pointed out that this aspect of the manifesto is subjective because one person might not have to grind to get to the fun stuff while another person will. Since fun is subjective the claim that it’s no longer a grind to get to fun stuff cannot be anything but subjective as well.
The compromise was to make it so BIS gear wasn’t necessary. That WAS the compromise.
No it was not. That was the state of the game before the claimed compromise was made.
You guys are so fixed on the actual letters BIS, so trained by games where that was an absolutely necessity that you still feel you must have it.
You are mistaken. I have not once pursued BiS in any game where it was, “absolutely necessary.” You have spoken of hyperbole as weakening one’s argument. Might I suggest that either lying or fabricating your supposed facts does the same ?
Another thing is that the guard could take bets. That way you can duel for gold!
No. If there were open world dueling there should be no achievement points or other rewards tied to it. The pro-dueling crowd says the reward is being able to duel with friends or what ever it is they want to do. If you start adding rewards to dueling then PvE turns into duel wars 2.
People that want dueling keep saying they just want to be able to duel friends, guild mates and so forth where they want to. That should be the only reward if open world dueling was to happen.
As long as the guard was only holding bets between players I don’t see it as a reward system. I do have concerns about betting though.
Well it is different in one case, which is why I came in the first place to ANet’s games: I don’t have to pay $##/mo to play, nor get “nickel and dimed” on microtransactions to “stay in the game”.
Sorry, that was a reference to leveling up to get to level gated content. I absolutely love GW2’s financial model.
without taking away whatever you’d like to name the group of players you belong to wanted
To have BiS gear be easily attainable without grinding for it.
Except that such was taken away. Not much of a compromise when one side had what they wanted taken away without gaining anything. Pretty much the antithesis of what the word means actually.
gw1 lore and gw2 lore is different
This game is GW2. GW2 lore supports dueling in PvE.
not gonna keep responding to something the community as a majority has agreed should not be in PVE !
Luckily for you the majority of the community have not done so.
it’s not about your ability to auto deny duels !
it’s about immersion and how PVE dueling goes against the established lore, all races cooperating with each other instead of fighting each other.The established lore involves having to challenge members of the other races to duels in order to convince them to join in the crusade against the dragons. Anet specifically chose to include PvE dueling in the lore. Also not all members of all races are cooperating.
ugh, this has been discussed to death NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !
NO dueling in PVE world !
if they want they can enable it in the mists and I wouldn’t care !
but NOT in PVE world !!!
I completely understand your preference for a lack of dueling in the open world. It was your inaccurate attempt to cloak your preference in terms of lore and immersion that I was disagreeing with.
The lore of the game supports it.
You do not want it.
Fine.
If you were not required to participate in dueling in PvE, and (as previously pointed out) the lore of the game supports it, why are you so vehemently opposed to something that other people could enjoy with little if any impact or even interaction on you ?
And that isn’t different than every other MMO once the new MMO smell wears off how?
It isn’t any different. That was part of my point.
He’s saying you don’t have to get through 80 levels of boring grind to get to fun stuff.
Then he would be wrong according to my example right ?
Playing through those 80 levels would be a boring grind to get to what is fun.
Only if Arah were the only fun stuff in the game. Again, he’s not saying you don’t have to level to get to ALL the fun stuff. He’s saying fun stuff is there right from the beginning. I know this because it was reiterated several times afterwards at conventions. That’s what he meant.
You can twist it any way you want, but it’s not reasonable to assume that you can do everything when you start..there would be some skill progression involved at very least. One part of the game trains you to play the next part of the game. That’s why there are harder and easier zones. No one could start the game and do Lupi on day one. It would be impossible.
But he said there’s fun stuff to do right away, not that all fun stuff can be done right away. You’re deliberately misinterpreting it to try to make a point.
I am not misinterpreting anything. My statement is very simple as is my example. In order to do what would be fun on my guardian I would have to endure boring grind. Period. Leveling him is a boring grind, and nothing in the game at his current level is fun. Technically the lower level dungeons might substitute for Arah or HotW (my personal favorite) but in order to do ANY of the fun things, ANY AT ALL, requires boring grind first in order to get to it.
it’s not about your ability to auto deny duels !
it’s about immersion and how PVE dueling goes against the established lore, all races cooperating with each other instead of fighting each other.
The established lore involves having to challenge members of the other races to duels in order to convince them to join in the crusade against the dragons. Anet specifically chose to include PvE dueling in the lore. Also not all members of all races are cooperating.
He’s saying you don’t have to get through 80 levels of boring grind to get to fun stuff.
Then he would be wrong according to my example right ?
Playing through those 80 levels would be a boring grind to get to what is fun.
It’s about fun things to do without grinding to get to them.
So if I want to play through Arah explorable (a fun thing) with my level 11 Guardian (leveling him is a grind) I can ?
Or would I have to grind to get to the fun thing ?
See, the whole argument about the Manifesto is subjective. The people arguing that it was not delivered upon are every bit as correct as you are in claiming that it has.
As long as there would be an setting to automatically refuse duel requests I would support this request.
Hardcore is spending 2-3 doing the various activities associated with achieving long term in game goals – high level fractals, ascended gear, legendaries, etc.
You consider crafting hardcore ?
Hmm, some pretty hardcore grandmothers out there with all that knitting.
If your grandmother can do this, yes I’d agree she’s hardcore.
Touche’
If they can adjust these coefficients properly, zerker will still be plenty viable but not the out and out dps winner by such a stretch.
That is kind of the problem IMO. The glass cannon gear suite should be the out and out DPS winner by a stretch. Ideally the game itself should have more situations where the zerker tradeoff of survivability or versatility for extra damage is more meaningful. Right now there is little or no opportunity cost for going full berzerker.
Hardcore is spending 2-3 doing the various activities associated with achieving long term in game goals – high level fractals, ascended gear, legendaries, etc.
You consider crafting hardcore ?
Hmm, some pretty hardcore grandmothers out there with all that knitting.
In my experience GW2 is closer to other MMOs than some people claim, but not as close as others argue. It does seem closer now than at launch and seems to be getting closer over time.
You couldn’t really “hold aggro though”.
Yes you could.
AI also targeted based on health level. We had tanks that could take and hold aggro regardless of the number of monks or necros in the group. Pushing their health low, while relying on pre-protting, good reactions from both the prot and heal monks, as well as his own defensive array, allowed our alliance’s top tank to hold aggro (and survive) with an almost perfect record (once he had the technique down).
Okay I stand corrected on that. I probably didn’t play with parties are organized as yours. But then we never played with tanks and I still beat all the content.
No worries. It was very counter-intuitive. The lowest health guy in the group acting as tank ? We generally didn’t bother except when doing things like half party vanquishes and the like.
You couldn’t really “hold aggro though”.
Yes you could.
AI also targeted based on health level. We had tanks that could take and hold aggro regardless of the number of monks or necros in the group. Pushing their health low, while relying on pre-protting, good reactions from both the prot and heal monks, as well as his own defensive array, allowed our alliance’s top tank to hold aggro (and survive) with an almost perfect record (once he had the technique down).
I think you might be thinking of GW2 for your description of firestorm and meteor shower. Both of those required a target in GW1. Only PBAOEs didnt.
I still say people who PvPed have a lot more reason to be annoyed here than people who PvE.
We did both really. Some were PvPers who dabbled in PvE, others were PvEers who dabbled in PvP. It was a great alliance.
To be clear, I am not trying to claim that my own experience in this regard was at all representative of, “most,” or anything of the sort.
In Guild Wars 1 damage mitigation was stronger than healing and the same is true in Guild Wars 2. Neither had ways to hold aggro (there’s no taunt mechanism here, unlike most MMOs). In fact, neither had a true trinity.
Aggro holding was quite possible in GW1 ( although taunts were not involved). Add in body-blocking and a prot/heals backline and you had a pretty solid semblance of trinity play.
Anyone who doesn’t know that MMOs change during development shouldn’t be playing MMOs.
Careful with that, friend, not everyone who plays MMOs are completely reasonable and logical adults. Some are just too young to really grasp how things happen and games have things just . . . not manage to make it.
I think it’s completely reasonable even independent of a developer telling you that you would have things you loved from an original to a sequel to expect something.
We got nothing, except lore.
Well, I wouldn’t say, “nothing,” but I see very little of GW1 in GW2.
I’m not being funny but i struggle to see anything, take away the lore and the name, what in gw2 reminds you of gw1? what did we get?
FDS
Races
ummm….
Do you honestly think that it is possible to please everyone all of the time ? 100% of the people 100% of the time ? Can you name a single endeavor where this has happened ?
Of course I don’t. But I don’t believe in not trying to please the bulk of the population and the population is pretty varied in their tastes, generally speaking.
In other words, I don’t think Anet is doing the wrong thing by catering to different tastes, whether or not someone is dissatisfied by a single aspect. In fact, with a game with any significant overhead, I think they need to please as many people as possible. Narrowing your focus to one group isn’t going to do it.
what enrages me the most is that it’s their main audience (that of gw1 and manifesto) that now is not pleased.
they already got our money, and now chase a new kind of population that i’m sure brings them more money than the older.good for anet. good for ppl that like this way.
bad for us.People keep saying this. Do you have any evidence that most Guild Wars 1 players are displeased? Because it’s been repeated a lot. I’m a Guild Wars 1 player, I bet I logged as many hours in Guild Wars 1 as you (probably more) and I’m not displeased.
So what percentage are we talking about?
You talk about Guild Wars 1 players as if they’re a club that only has a single opinion. I’ve never found this to be the case. It was a divided population.
I’m sure, for example, that PvPers are far more disenfranchised generally than PvE’ers are.
I agree that it is a bad idea to try to speak for some large group of unknown individuals (such as all GW1 players). I suppose the best I can say is that only one of the people I knew from GW1 that bought GW2 still plays. This is entirely too anecdotal to carry any weight, a few dozen people means little as a sample for a game of this size, but I can certainly understand how one’s perceptions can be colored by seeing everyone you know from GW1 quit GW2 in the first few days, weeks, or months.
Anyone who doesn’t know that MMOs change during development shouldn’t be playing MMOs.
Careful with that, friend, not everyone who plays MMOs are completely reasonable and logical adults. Some are just too young to really grasp how things happen and games have things just . . . not manage to make it.
I think it’s completely reasonable even independent of a developer telling you that you would have things you loved from an original to a sequel to expect something.
We got nothing, except lore.
Well, I wouldn’t say, “nothing,” but I see very little of GW1 in GW2.
Do you honestly think that it is possible to please everyone all of the time ? 100% of the people 100% of the time ? Can you name a single endeavor where this has happened ?
Of course I don’t. But I don’t believe in not trying to please the bulk of the population and the population is pretty varied in their tastes, generally speaking.
In other words, I don’t think Anet is doing the wrong thing by catering to different tastes, whether or not someone is dissatisfied by a single aspect. In fact, with a game with any significant overhead, I think they need to please as many people as possible. Narrowing your focus to one group isn’t going to do it.
Trying to cater to different tastes, as many people as possible, is a bit different than trying to please everyone. I completely agree that aiming at a single group is entirely too narrow a focus. Most players that I know personally enjoy at least a couple different aspects of gaming. A player that is primarily a middle of the road open world PvEer, but who enjoys dabbling in PvP (this would describe me by the way), will likely look elsewhere for his gaming fix if a given game offers only one or the other of those options.
@zamalek: EXACTLY — there’s little value in hiding an expansion at this point if it’s coming in 2014. Imagine the marketing boon that is an expansion announcement along with supporting media. Giant ancient dragon ftw!
They announced GW2 itself years before release (not months, not one year, not two years… many years).
And “big projects” might not be what the community thinks it is. Given the size of the LS updates, a “big project” could be a single new zone (which wouldn’t be bad at all, everyone would love it, but it’s not the equivalent of an expansion and all the hype that goes with it).
There is tremendous value in hiding an expansion at this point, depending on the reason the expansion is being made.
Generally, games time their expansions to head off competition. The less the competition knows about their plans, the harder it is to set release dates of their own. There’s this whole cat and mouse thing that goes on with companies.
Anet released the game before MoP, which is one of the reasons why so much was left undone. I’m guessing they felt they had to, because they didn’t know how good/successful mists would be and if it was ultra successful, it might impact sales for a long time after.
By launching a month before, they even got some sales from people with a month to kill.
Guarding your releases and release dates is just as much targeted at keeping the competition guessing as promoting it to your fans. In business, timing can be everything.
Agreed.
I also would not be surprised to see any possible expansion held off until after the China launch.
Sorry to say but I disagree with this statement. Take something like Disney World…which is oddly enough a themepark. Something themepark MMOs try to do.
Disneyworld provides myriad experiences for people who crave different things. If you’re a thrill ride seeker, you’re going to largely be disappointed with disney world. If you’re a person who only likes theater shows, you’re going to be disappointed.
But a percentage of people do a bit of everything and that’s what makes places like Disneyworld so successful. It’s a play where you have a bit of everything.
People seem to think most people prefer only one thing or two things, but some people like variety and Guild Wars 2, by making a game for everyone, is offering that variety. I’d wager there’s a fairly large segment of the population that likes to do different things.
So they do some PvE in the open world, some dungeons, some bosses, then jump int WvW for a while, play some minigames.
I never claimed that anyone would like only one, or even two, aspects of the game. “I’d wager,” that everyone in the game has some aspect that isn’t their thing.
To use your theme park analogy, I owned season passes for Disneyland for years. Have been to the park more times than I can accurately count. Still don’t like the tea cups ride.
Saying something is a truism doesn’t make it a truism. It has some value, but you have to question that kind of statement further, because so many truisms have completely contradictory truisms.
Absence makes the heart grow fonder. Out of sight out of mind. Both of those things are considered truisms, but they directly contradict each other. Putting weight on truisms because people say them is intellectually dangerous.
Do you honestly think that it is possible to please everyone all of the time ? 100% of the people 100% of the time ? Can you name a single endeavor where this has happened ?
There is a reason that, “you can’t please all of the people all of the time,” is a truism. Different people like different things. Doing one thing, even if only for a little while, will delight some people while disappointing others. Then the others will get something they like while still another group is disappointed until its their turn. Until a game development studio has access to nigh unlimited resources they will disappoint people with everything they do. The goal shouldn’t even be to avoid disappointing people, it should be to please more people than they disappoint.
Disappointment doesn’t mean, “hates the game.” It can be as trivial as not getting what you want out of a given BLC or Teq’s chest this time. It can be dissatisfaction with the current SPvP meta for a while and so playing WvW instead. It can be dislike for the current living story arc and so waiting for the next.
and so on.
Most other MMOs, almost all of them, have content that can’t be enjoyed if you don’t get up, but that’s simply not the case here.
It’s called a compromise. Anet gave people who wanted it something to work towards, while not ruining the game for casuals who don’t have the time or money or energy to get it.
This is inaccurate.
Nice detail in your reply. If you can’t share with us why you think it’s inaccurate, then it’s pretty much a pointless post, as there’s nothing to back it up.
There is content in the game, high level fractals specifically, that is designed to require Ascended gear. I suppose technically someone might enjoy failing and dying repeatedly due to not having the appropriate gear for a given fractal level.
For some casuals, myself included, the game was ruined by the addition of Ascended.
You may have a completely different definition of casual than I do, but casual players don’t generally do level 49 fractals. I think you’d find that that content wasn’t created for casuals.
My statement was certainly true for my definition of a casual player.
The statement about content that cannot be played without gearing up had no reference to casual players. It was a claim, pure and simple, that there was no content in GW2, unlike other MMOs, that required gearing up.
Most other MMOs, almost all of them, have content that can’t be enjoyed if you don’t get up, but that’s simply not the case here.
It’s called a compromise. Anet gave people who wanted it something to work towards, while not ruining the game for casuals who don’t have the time or money or energy to get it.
This is inaccurate.
they don’t even make noticable difference for that gold.
As is this.
I sacrifice defense for offense. I still don’t die.
This is either because I am very good at active defense or the content is poorly designed.
Zerker doing high damage and having low effective hp means the gear is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. There’s nothing wrong with zerker gear, it’s the environment which allows it to flourish.
This.
Sacrificing one aspect of your character (defense) in order to boost another aspect (offense) is a valid approach to character and play style customization that has worked in games for as long as RPGs have existed.
What is broken here is that the sacrifice has little to no impact in much of the game. Zerker is not broken the game environment just ensures that there isn’t enough glass in the glass cannon.
The poster implied over all disappointment.
There is a rather large difference between him implying something and you choosing to infer something. A statement referring to addictive gameplay seems like a fairly solid counter to a claim of implied, “overall,” disappointment.
Now that you’re going into specifics then yes, I have been disappointed by an introduced feature of the game (no, not Ascended), but I’m not disappointed by the game in general.
This is where I stand as well (with the exception that Ascended is one of my points of disappointment). Much of the game is some of the best of its type that I have ever seen, certain specific aspects are disappointing.
The direct statement was that everyone was disappointed.
That is not actually, “the direct statement.”
You have expressed disappointment with aspects of the game on these boards in the past.
If you are going to claim that something is demonstrably false…demonstrate the falsehood. Personally I have yet to interact with anyone, even some pretty hardcore fans of the game, who have not experienced some degree of dissatisfaction with some aspect of the game. I’ve yet to meet anyone, even some pretty hardcore fans of the game, who found it to be absolutely perfect, lacking in any faults whatsoever.
I’m more than happy to tell you that I’m not disappointed by GW2. I’ll get Vayne to point it out so he can demonstrate it.
You have never been disappointed in any way by anything in game ? The individual who brought up disappointment did not claim disappointment with the game as a whole, merely that people experienced disappointment.
(edited by Ashen.2907)
You made a statement that is directly and demonstrably not true.
Would you be willing to demonstrate that not everyone has experienced some disappointment regarding GW2 ?
They should use more carrot and less stick then.
Isn’t giving out rewards, in the form of title/etc, for doing something pretty much the definition of, “carrot,” rather than, “stick?”