Since we have a global (-China) economy they want to keep rates low so as to not flood the market. They do this b/c it is the easy option. If they were to increase the value of drops on the micro scale (make the individual’s better), they would flood the economy (given no other changes), which would decrease item value……a catch 22 if you will.
To avoid these opposing forces they would need to get creative, which is not as easy said as done. It however would be to the game’s GREAT benefit if they would.
Since we have the sale going atm remember to exploit conversion of kitten (tier one to tier two…how does that get filtered) mats (refined) while t1 are in large supply due to new accounts. Cheers!
I wouldn’t mind the unidentified dye drop were increased or at least put back into the gathering.
High supply will result in low prices for all dyes even those that don’t cost much now. It may increase unidentified dyes sales as they would be lower as well.
They can’t really do that as it would ruin the dye market.
Just out of sheer curiosity, what effect would ruining the dye market actually have? A few players making gold off dyes cease doing so? Am I missing something?
I really hate to recommend a prebuilt, but atm there is a 30% off sale (code: 30SPRING) at HP. So it makes it tolerable when you can get an i7-4790k and a gtx 980 in one for about 1k.
I really hate to recommend a prebuilt, but atm there is a 30% off sale (code: 30SPRING) at HP. So it makes it tolerable when you can get an i7-4790k and a gtx 980 in one for about 1k.
I’m too sexy for my armor too sexy for my armor
Too sexy by far
And I’m too sexy for my hat
Too sexy for my hat what do you think about that
I’m a model you know what I mean
And I do my little turn on the catwalk
Yeah on the catwalk on the catwalk yeah
I shake my little tush on the catwalk
I’m too sexy for my too sexy for my too sexy for my
Cause I’m a model you know what I mean
And I do my little turn on the catwalk
Yeah on the catwalk on the catwalk…. yeah
I shake my little tush on the catwalk
I’m too sexy for my cat too sexy for my cat
Poor kitten poor kitten cat
I’m too sexy for my post too sexy for my post
It’s going to leave me
I think the better question is what kind of computer can you get for $600, than what do I need for 40fps.
That said IF you take full advantage of deals to be had, you CAN get a really nice setup for $600.
If you live anywhere close to a Microcenter, they offer combo cpu/mobo deals that are very hard to beat (i5 4690k+z97 for <$250). Also use deal sites to find the best prices on the rest of your components. Quality 500w+ brand name psu’s can easily be had for <$50, 1600mhz 8gb dual channel ram <$60, 1tb hdd <$50, case <$50, and ofc a gpu (r9 280 for $160). That comes to $620, which can easily be brought under $600 depending on psu, case, hdd, and ram choices. Ofc I’d go for a cpu cooler so $20-30 (212 or the like), but room can be made for that as well.
So I’d say if you’re willing to put in a little effort, YES $600 can get you a pretty nice rig.
Hi John,
I was just wondering if there were any plans to add “giant eye” drops to any other areas of the game besides heavy moldy bags from Orr? I decided that I wanted an “Immobulus”, but they are currently non-existent at the trading post, and the cost for buying the mats to make one is through the roof! To grind for the mats would take an impossibly long time, considering the very low chance of getting the eyes from the bags. I was wondering if this material was simply overlooked. I would love to see more chances to for this to drop.
Thanks for your time!
John is not allowed to comment on future plans.
He would be about this as it has already been mentioned on guildwars2.com.
For most maps, the bonus reward will be crafting materials. For instance, playing in Cursed Shore could reward you with ancient bones, charged cores, charged lodestones, or giant eyes during one rotation, and powerful venom sacs, glacial cores, glacial lodestones, or globs of ectoplasm during another rotation.
Or it’s always fair… depends on what you mean by fair. No one is given an advantage over any other person in the eyes of the Gods of RNG.
Actually not quite true.
Its a kind of a fake random. For it be “random” there will be those that are somewhere in the middle, but there will also be others that fall on either the super lucky end or the horribly unlucky end, and there is no way for it to shift. (This all came up in the thread specifically about RNG.)
So, no, not really fair.
So you’re defining fair as parity in outcome not in opportunity. I think since everyone gets the same RNG chance it’s equal, so I’m more focused on opportunity.
In terms of a game where more or less you want customers/players to have fun……the outcome is rather important. It is not good for players to have highly varied experiences as it really only serves to have higher numbers of players displeased with your product/game than if their experience were more even keeled.
gw2: outputs are more of a function of rng
other games: outputs are more of a function of inputs
This is a concept that many other games acknowledge and have measures in place to assure. Unfortunately GW2 seems to have missed the memo in this regard.
That’s not what I said now is it? I said that different accounts have different magic find. When RNG interacts with that magic find (which is different for each account) it produces different results. It’s the whole underlying premise of magic find. Therefore the statement of " RNG doesn’t use anything of the user" is meaningless as RNG in of itself is meaningless until it interacts with our accounts (which again have variation).
That said….in the same thread……(if I recall right..the very next comment)…I noted that JS missed the correlation between a “stuck account” and an “outlier”. An outlier is essentially a stuck account till the time in which it is no longer an outlier. Basically the two are one in the same. It would be like saying “We don’t have weapons, but we have things to hit people with.”, which ofc doesn’t hold water.
I can’t believe you spun what John said into something completely different. John indicated, correctly, that all accounts are made equal in the eyes of RNG. No one account is luckier than another. It’s a cognitive bias. You compare your string of bad luck against someone with good luck, and based your assumptions that your account is worse off.
Now you are correct in saying that Magic Find does affect the outcome for each individual account. But realize that John wasn’t basing his answer on this. He’s talking about everyone’s account at a zero sum. RNG doesn’t discriminate, nor does it have preference. If Dusk has a 0.05% chance of dropping, it applies to everyone (before MF modifiers).
I did nothing that wasn’t spot on. I didn’t spin it into anything that it wasn’t. I simply explained why what was said, was either inaccurate (like the 2nd point) or inconsequential (like the 1st). I did not say anything about my own experiences in that post.
But you’re trying to make it sound like John is incorrect in his statement by spinning the facts in your favor. All accounts are equal, period. No one individual account is luckier than another.
It’s like saying Newton’s law of universal gravity is incorrect, because there’s no way for us to correctly calculate it 100 million light years from the sun.
I’m not trying, he was incorrect, at the least in his wording for that specific case (the one where he contradicted himself).
Your analogy refers to the other case. For that, a better analogy would be saying that “gravity effects everything the same”. Which is fine, but basically useless until you consider the relevant variables…ie…mass and distance.
Actually John was correct and his wording was perfect.
There isn’t such thing is some accounts getting stuck lucky. Yes there’s an RNG, yes it’s random and there are streaks and outliers and an even aggregate distribution.
Can you confirm whether it is an RNG that uses some sort of value from the user’s account or whether it is purely random/session based? I have a friend who swears that smack-talking an anet dev during a beta weekend pvp match doomed his account to poor rng for life.
Absolutely it does not use anything to do with a user.
His response is clear, there is no special value on the user’s account that affects RNG, it is purely random based. So for example account name, or account creation date or anything of the sort play no role in the RNG for loot. He is not talking about Magic Find here
I swear people don’t read. They just jump on whatever they don’t like and ignore everything else.
That was not the quote from JS that I said was incorrect. The one I said was incorrect was the one where he said “there are no accounts stuck”…then in the same post said “there are outliers”. It was incorrect as the two are for our sake the exact same thing. So he was incorrect in saying we didn’t have one, yet had the other.
Look, a space to denote separate thoughts ^…… The premise to which your responding is the one that I noted with the gravity analogy..NOT the incorrect statement.
F=G(m1m2/r2) G the gravitational constant is like our RNG. m1, m2, and r2 are like our magic find and other variables. F (force) is like our loot, roll, or whatever. While G is constant, it means bupkis in terms of F (loot) until figured in with the other variables.
Please tell me Penguin what part of this ^ is too complicated to understand? It must be something……bupkis? perhaps?…it means “nothing”.
That’s not what I said now is it? I said that different accounts have different magic find. When RNG interacts with that magic find (which is different for each account) it produces different results. It’s the whole underlying premise of magic find. Therefore the statement of " RNG doesn’t use anything of the user" is meaningless as RNG in of itself is meaningless until it interacts with our accounts (which again have variation).
That said….in the same thread……(if I recall right..the very next comment)…I noted that JS missed the correlation between a “stuck account” and an “outlier”. An outlier is essentially a stuck account till the time in which it is no longer an outlier. Basically the two are one in the same. It would be like saying “We don’t have weapons, but we have things to hit people with.”, which ofc doesn’t hold water.
I can’t believe you spun what John said into something completely different. John indicated, correctly, that all accounts are made equal in the eyes of RNG. No one account is luckier than another. It’s a cognitive bias. You compare your string of bad luck against someone with good luck, and based your assumptions that your account is worse off.
Now you are correct in saying that Magic Find does affect the outcome for each individual account. But realize that John wasn’t basing his answer on this. He’s talking about everyone’s account at a zero sum. RNG doesn’t discriminate, nor does it have preference. If Dusk has a 0.05% chance of dropping, it applies to everyone (before MF modifiers).
I did nothing that wasn’t spot on. I didn’t spin it into anything that it wasn’t. I simply explained why what was said, was either inaccurate (like the 2nd point) or inconsequential (like the 1st). I did not say anything about my own experiences in that post.
But you’re trying to make it sound like John is incorrect in his statement by spinning the facts in your favor. All accounts are equal, period. No one individual account is luckier than another.
It’s like saying Newton’s law of universal gravity is incorrect, because there’s no way for us to correctly calculate it 100 million light years from the sun.
I’m not trying, he was incorrect, at the least in his wording for that specific case (the one where he contradicted himself).
Your analogy refers to the other case. For that, a better analogy would be saying that “gravity effects everything the same”. Which is fine, but basically useless until you consider the relevant variables…ie…mass and distance.
Actually, John is correct. You’re spinning what he meant to fit your arguments. Each account is equal in the eyes of RNG.
Allow me to use another analogy. It’s like John saying a Hamburger is a burger on a bun. Then you come along and say it’s really a Cheeseburger, since it’s been modified with a slice of cheese after it was cooked and put together. Take away the cheese, and it’s still a Hamburger, but you insist on putting the cheese into play, thus altering the end result.
You’re mixing up the two points. One was about outliers and players being stuck. The OTHER was about rng effecting accounts. The points I made were specific to each.
PS edit: that analogy was really really bad btw
Let’s go back to the gravity analogy b/c it actually works.
F=G(m1m2/r2) G the gravitational constant is like our RNG. m1, m2, and r2 are like our magic find and other variables. F (force) is like our loot, roll, or whatever. While G is constant, it means bupkis in terms of F (loot) until figured in with the other variables.
That’s not what I said now is it? I said that different accounts have different magic find. When RNG interacts with that magic find (which is different for each account) it produces different results. It’s the whole underlying premise of magic find. Therefore the statement of " RNG doesn’t use anything of the user" is meaningless as RNG in of itself is meaningless until it interacts with our accounts (which again have variation).
That said….in the same thread……(if I recall right..the very next comment)…I noted that JS missed the correlation between a “stuck account” and an “outlier”. An outlier is essentially a stuck account till the time in which it is no longer an outlier. Basically the two are one in the same. It would be like saying “We don’t have weapons, but we have things to hit people with.”, which ofc doesn’t hold water.
I can’t believe you spun what John said into something completely different. John indicated, correctly, that all accounts are made equal in the eyes of RNG. No one account is luckier than another. It’s a cognitive bias. You compare your string of bad luck against someone with good luck, and based your assumptions that your account is worse off.
Now you are correct in saying that Magic Find does affect the outcome for each individual account. But realize that John wasn’t basing his answer on this. He’s talking about everyone’s account at a zero sum. RNG doesn’t discriminate, nor does it have preference. If Dusk has a 0.05% chance of dropping, it applies to everyone (before MF modifiers).
I did nothing that wasn’t spot on. I didn’t spin it into anything that it wasn’t. I simply explained why what was said, was either inaccurate (like the 2nd point) or inconsequential (like the 1st). I did not say anything about my own experiences in that post.
But you’re trying to make it sound like John is incorrect in his statement by spinning the facts in your favor. All accounts are equal, period. No one individual account is luckier than another.
It’s like saying Newton’s law of universal gravity is incorrect, because there’s no way for us to correctly calculate it 100 million light years from the sun.
I’m not trying, he was incorrect, at the least in his wording for that specific case (the one where he contradicted himself).
Your analogy refers to the other case. For that, a better analogy would be saying that “gravity effects everything the same”. Which is fine, but basically useless until you consider the relevant variables…ie…mass and distance.
That’s not what I said now is it? I said that different accounts have different magic find. When RNG interacts with that magic find (which is different for each account) it produces different results. It’s the whole underlying premise of magic find. Therefore the statement of " RNG doesn’t use anything of the user" is meaningless as RNG in of itself is meaningless until it interacts with our accounts (which again have variation).
That said….in the same thread……(if I recall right..the very next comment)…I noted that JS missed the correlation between a “stuck account” and an “outlier”. An outlier is essentially a stuck account till the time in which it is no longer an outlier. Basically the two are one in the same. It would be like saying “We don’t have weapons, but we have things to hit people with.”, which ofc doesn’t hold water.
I can’t believe you spun what John said into something completely different. John indicated, correctly, that all accounts are made equal in the eyes of RNG. No one account is luckier than another. It’s a cognitive bias. You compare your string of bad luck against someone with good luck, and based your assumptions that your account is worse off.
Now you are correct in saying that Magic Find does affect the outcome for each individual account. But realize that John wasn’t basing his answer on this. He’s talking about everyone’s account at a zero sum. RNG doesn’t discriminate, nor does it have preference. If Dusk has a 0.05% chance of dropping, it applies to everyone (before MF modifiers).
I did nothing that wasn’t spot on. I didn’t spin it into anything that it wasn’t. I simply explained why what was said, was either inaccurate (like the 2nd point) or inconsequential (like the 1st). I did not say anything about my own experiences in that post.
Upgrading mats to the higher tier in mystic forge is guaranteed.
Please allow me to complete that statement~
“Upgrading t5 mats to the higher tier in mystic forge is guaranteed to net you fewer than if you’d sold them and spent the resulting coin on buying t6s…”
Between the terrible return ratios, burning a t6 mat AND t6 dust as part of the inputs, and the skill point item fee, its a thing, but its not a good thing.
One of the fun things about crafted pres is that demand and therefore price of pres will decrease. This will in turn reduce one of the main creators of t5 demand (flushing rares in the toilet). So forging t5 to t6 might actually become a thing worth doing for a brief stent once this all sorts out.
There isn’t such thing is some accounts getting stuck lucky. Yes there’s an RNG, yes it’s random and there are streaks and outliers and an even aggregate distribution.
Can you confirm whether it is an RNG that uses some sort of value from the user’s account or whether it is purely random/session based? I have a friend who swears that smack-talking an anet dev during a beta weekend pvp match doomed his account to poor rng for life.
Absolutely it does not use anything to do with a user.
Yes, there are things that could be done that can help minimize the negative impression that RNG/grind put onto players while also accomplishing the goals that Anet have. I believe Silverwastes is a good example.
But everyone knows that quote to be pointless. RNG as a mechanism has no bearing alone and must have other factors to interact to funtion. Magic Find (which is based on the user’s account) is one of those factors. We also have other examples where certain batches of players have been effected by issues or bugs (whatever you prefer to call them)while others are not. That also shows that all accounts are not equal when RNG reacts to them.
Point being we know without a doubt that there are differences in accounts. Now the RNG in of itself may not have issues, but it has to interact with our accounts which do. That creates inequalities as RNG essentially does not exist when not interacting with our accounts.
Do you have evidence to support this? Anet has stated that there isn’t such a thing as some accounts getting stuck lucky or unlucky. If you believe otherwise, present your quantitative evidence.
That’s not what I said now is it? I said that different accounts have different magic find. When RNG interacts with that magic find (which is different for each account) it produces different results. It’s the whole underlying premise of magic find. Therefore the statement of " RNG doesn’t use anything of the user" is meaningless as RNG in of itself is meaningless until it interacts with our accounts (which again have variation).
That said….in the same thread……(if I recall right..the very next comment)…I noted that JS missed the correlation between a “stuck account” and an “outlier”. An outlier is essentially a stuck account till the time in which it is no longer an outlier. Basically the two are one in the same. It would be like saying “We don’t have weapons, but we have things to hit people with.”, which ofc doesn’t hold water.
There isn’t such thing is some accounts getting stuck lucky. Yes there’s an RNG, yes it’s random and there are streaks and outliers and an even aggregate distribution.
Can you confirm whether it is an RNG that uses some sort of value from the user’s account or whether it is purely random/session based? I have a friend who swears that smack-talking an anet dev during a beta weekend pvp match doomed his account to poor rng for life.
Absolutely it does not use anything to do with a user.
Yes, there are things that could be done that can help minimize the negative impression that RNG/grind put onto players while also accomplishing the goals that Anet have. I believe Silverwastes is a good example.
But everyone knows that quote to be pointless. RNG as a mechanism has no bearing alone and must have other factors to interact to funtion. Magic Find (which is based on the user’s account) is one of those factors. We also have other examples where certain batches of players have been effected by issues or bugs (whatever you prefer to call them)while others are not. That also shows that all accounts are not equal when RNG reacts to them.
Point being we know without a doubt that there are differences in accounts. Now the RNG in of itself may not have issues, but it has to interact with our accounts which do. That creates inequalities as RNG essentially does not exist when not interacting with our accounts.
Can’t wait for Map Bonuses….Finally a direct method of gathering what we want instead of having to resort to using the trading post. Burn Evon BURN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’m slightly concern about the collection of skins part for precursors.
Are they including some of the insanely high price skin like Volcanus, Jaggument, Foefire series and so on?
Why would they, they aren’t precursors.
Also, I assume Jaggument is supposed to mean Juggernaut? That is a legendary, so it will be obtainable this way?
Or did I misunderstand your question?
Sorry, I meant the Ele thunder hammer skin.
But from what I see, it says you have to do some unlocking of other skins for precursor no? I hope it doesn’t mean ALL skins other than precursors/ legendaries/ and bl weapons.
The ele hammer is Mjolnir*
I REALLY hope this isn’t the case, but I wouldn’t be surprised if you have to collect 2,000g worth of skins for a new precursor. Ha ha would make me laugh.
I really hope not. That would almost completely negate the pros of them being non-tradeable. However with who we seem to have in charge of rewards, it really wouldn’t surprise me much as they have proven to have no conceptual grasp of how it effects players’ perceptions of reward.
Guys … you know that the condition damage that AFFECTS confusion has been buffed by 33%, not condition damage itself! So the condition damage RATIO has been increased, the base damage is still the same.
So for something like the guild bounty Diplomat Tarban (which spams massive confusion) it would essentially not matter?
After reading a line in the email I thought it might be based on hours played, but then I saw Vayne (I know he has about the same hours as I) didn’t get one, so there goes that theory.
Anywho…very nice that no additional stuff is required to participate.
im starting to realize, that most of the people disagreeing with fixing silk/ascended, are basically just trying to protect their current racket.
No man, I’m against it because it will invalidate all the effort I have put into getting ascended gear for all my weight classes. I also don’t want the rest of the players who have put in that effort to feel burned either. Phys, you are not taking into account the silent/vocal backlash Anet would get for making silk changes from people who have already finished or are most of the way through the ascended grind.
While there are definitely some here, that do have vested interest in silk going higher, it doesn’t mean everyone adverse here does as well.
The same can also be said for those already paid into the current system. Not all who have already made such armors would be against a change where silk is not elevated.
We made a game where everyone dominantly plays one class b/c it’s better than the rest, but that’s okay b/c….choices. They don’t have to play underpowered classes. They have the choice to play an underpowered class and the trade off is variety. We think that’s fine besides everyone has different tastes.
So what are they trading for a more difficult progression? What is the benefit that they gain for in exchange for the extra effort?
I think they are trying to say that a players disposition for a class is the tradeoff. “people are willing to work more b/c they like necros” type of deal…..lol….What else could it mean?
I see no reason not to add them. I’ve only had 1 during my time playing this game. It’s not like keeping the supply low to keep prices high is making a real difference for those who get any from bags. Instead of getting a random 4g once maybe twice every 2 years, they could get 1-2g on occasion for killing a giant. I’ll take the second option all day long.
Addressing the tp as an alternative method of acquisition. It’s not an alternative if its the only realistic option.
I’d go war. It’s easier in spvp…significantly. War also has swiftness (perma) for mapping that doesn’t put you in combat+sword leap gs dash ww to make it even faster. I find necro’s aoe to not hit hard and fast enough for decent farming. Besides why would you use anything to farm pve other than loot stick? Idk, Ive done 100% mapping on 7 professions and am on 70 something with my 8th my necro…there’s a good reason I left it to last. I am very much hoping GS with the expansion changes things for my nec.
The design decisions to make silk (a lesser material) worth more than a higher tier material “Gossamer” makes no sense at all.
That’s b/c they are just based on macro economic numbers with disregard to most everything else. Common sense? Doesn’t matter. Fun? Doesn’t matter. Eloquent? Doesn’t matter. Sum:(1-n)</>Sum(1-r)=x Means Everything……you know b/c numbers are the only things that matter :/
If that’s the case, why even bother playing if you’re going to depend on just about everyone to cradle you through nearly every aspect of the game?
And those are only indirect ways to acquire them. Getting all those skins directly by buying gems > converting to gold > going to x vendor is very much impossible. Fractal wep skins has no such vendor, and all others require indirect means.
Lastly, unless one could successfully convince Anet to re-release discontinued skins (bunny ears, aviator glasses, wide rim glasses, tequatl wings, shattered wings, ect); that’s just pointing out even more how false “the statement” is.
I’m not saying I agree or participate in it or not. I’m just saying it’s a thing.
Definitions, by definition limit words or terms. Words can be and are used to create terms. P2W is a term with a specific meaning. Definitions can certainly evolve. However, in this case, people are trying to adapt the term because of its negative connotation, which is rooted in competition, not in “winning” by getting a rare cosmetic item.
As to your examples:
Boosts are irrelevant to P2W in the context of this thread. A case could certainly be made that boosts are P2W, but that’s not what’s being debated here. Gems —-> gold does not enable the purchase of boosts.
As to Ascended gear, this gear can be attained in game over time, with no expenditure other than the time to collect everything and a trivial amount of coin. Ergo it does not pass the other test for P2W (cash being the only means to acquire the advantage, or in game methods being so egregiously difficult and/or time consuming as to be unattainable in any realistic time frame. As much as I despise Ascended gear and the laundry list of mats to make it, its proponents argue that it is not that hard to make). At best, purchasing Ascended would be “pay to win sooner.”
How is “knowledge about the area” (presumably the dungeon) something that can be purchased?
I just don’t buy into p2w having a set definition that doesn’t evolve and that’s agreed upon. Is there a valid dictionary that says that it’s specifically limited to certain scenarios? Is there a standardized criteria that has been agreed upon that something must meet written somewhere?
I’m really not trying to adapt it to portray a negative connotation. I am simply applying logic to the discussion.
Stat-wise, nearly all items, some are time gated (ascended -> laurels/guild commendation). As for skins, you definitely cannot get them all simply with gold. Fractals, Wvw, Pvp, dungeon and boss/event skins are all barred from using gold to acquire them.
I’ve been thinking about this one a little and the only ones I am having issues not finding method of payment for are wvw. One can pay gold to others for dungeon runs. One can pay pvp teams to carry them or pay for custom arenas. One can pay to be run through fractals. One can pay gold to bypass most timegates as well. I just can’t really think of how to pay for a wvw skin aside from paying to transfer to be on winning servers for rewards that are distributed. Idk…there’s probably someway. As they say “Where there’s a will, there’s a way”.
short version, we should create a new term to define that type of system? a Rose by any other name? still the same is it not?
Honestly at this point, from a semantic standpoint, the word may evolve, this debate that comes up constantly is because some people are evolving the word, and others dont think it should evolve in that direction.
essentially this is a war on word definition, that will basically be decided by consensus at some later date.
but really it doesnt matter what word we use.
This seems spot on.
the crux of the matter is some people are disatisfied with being able to gain things built to be obtained in the game world with money from outside the game.
the OP proposes to remove that functionality to solve the debate.
Personally I’m not really bothered by it. I am however bothered by the declaration that it doesn’t exist. It’s kinda like someone trying to claim a platypus isn’t a mammal b/c it lays eggs. There’s no real hidden agenda besides discussion/debate. I mean isn’t that kinda what forums are for?
i think that while the issue at hand is worth discussing, i think the solution presented, really has no chance of happening.
I see the same faulty premise time and time again, that winning is confined to one objective only. Winning it completely dependent on the goal at hand. If the goal is building a better sandcastle, then tools that help achieve such, help in winning. If the goal is to knock out an opponent, then brass knuckles help in winning. If the goal finishing an achievement, then ofc anything that aided in such helped to win. It’s very simple logic.
To be replaced with your faulty premise that all competitive play is now being compressed into a single objective? Pay-to-win should be reserved to subjects that involve competitive play. As such, it should be reserved for things which can be purchased that provide a numerical advantage.
Pay-to-win is a term that has a stigma in western gaming culture. Those seeking to expand the definition to encompass anything they dislike about a game’s payment options are seeking to use that stigma to shame the developer into removing any and all for-cash options they dislike.
As to "simple logic,’ the logical extension of a process by which more and more pay options get stigmatized is that any optional payment features put in by a developer will be pay-to-win.
Dislike gems —> gold all you like. However, in changing the definition of a pejorative term to suit your point because the term is a bugaboo, all you’re doing is distracting the discussion from the real issues.
You misread…I was using that compression as an example of why winning cannot be confined to a single objective.
I did not misread. You’re posing a strawman argument. Deciding that P2W refers to purchasing a numerical advantage in competitive play is not an attempt to confine the term “win” to a single objective, it’s confining the term pay-to-win to the entire range of competitive play available across all games, which was its original meaning.
If you (or others) want to coin a new term which means “pay to accomplish an in-game goal,” knock yourself out. Attempts to migrate the existing term are bullgravy though. Why? Because the underlying intent is to borrow the disgust people feel at players using cash to beat another player in a game (with the implication that they wouldn’t win a fair fight) and attach it to some other aspect of a game.
I disagree. You’re confining it via “your definitions” of numerical advantage and competitive play. I was explaining why doing such is illogical. Take dungeon speed clears for example. Go onto gwsc.com or whatever it is and ask if it’s competitive. Then ask if things like speed, armor, and/or strength boosters, if one team uses all ascended gear and the other cannot afford it (max full ascended is expensive), or if one team has knowledge about the area that the other, count as having advantage. Does the difference in it’s objective from the standard pvp model invalidate the possibilities of p2w?
If you really want a straw man I can oblige. I hear that originally “marriage” was coined to only be between one man and one woman. I think we know your opinions on that.
Yes, trading post is sky-rocketing the prices of some items…
I think arena net should do something about that..
This is getting out of control and it’s crazy..
People who play Trading post more then actual game, ruin the gaming experience.
Trading was never that horrible as it is in GW2.
I hope we can have some changes to that. Ty ArenaNet.
I bolded the word “some” as it is key to your point. While maybe not the most eloquently put statement, the sentiment behind it is partialy correct. Players who have access to higher returns will determine prices as long as their demand outweighs the supply. This is not limited to tp players alone and yes it will effect others going for such items.
But anywho, whether or not anything should be done about it…..I’m going to leave that bit alone.
I see the same faulty premise time and time again, that winning is confined to one objective only. Winning it completely dependent on the goal at hand. If the goal is building a better sandcastle, then tools that help achieve such, help in winning. If the goal is to knock out an opponent, then brass knuckles help in winning. If the goal finishing an achievement, then ofc anything that aided in such helped to win. It’s very simple logic.
To be replaced with your faulty premise that all competitive play is now being compressed into a single objective? Pay-to-win should be reserved to subjects that involve competitive play. As such, it should be reserved for things which can be purchased that provide a numerical advantage.
Pay-to-win is a term that has a stigma in western gaming culture. Those seeking to expand the definition to encompass anything they dislike about a game’s payment options are seeking to use that stigma to shame the developer into removing any and all for-cash options they dislike.
As to "simple logic,’ the logical extension of a process by which more and more pay options get stigmatized is that any optional payment features put in by a developer will be pay-to-win.
Dislike gems —> gold all you like. However, in changing the definition of a pejorative term to suit your point because the term is a bugaboo, all you’re doing is distracting the discussion from the real issues.
You misread…I was using that compression as an example of why winning cannot be confined to a single objective.
Then everything is pay to win by that very broad definition which is very far from what it originally refers to when it was coined.
I’m definitely going to win by fulfilling my dream of flooding my bank and inventory with stacks of soiled rags when I buy gold through gems in the gem store.
It completely depends on the goal ofc. Eating lots of pie wont help in running a marathon, but it will help win in a pie eating contest.
Except that pay to win is typically associated with paying to get an ADVANTAGE, and cosmetic items don’t offer any advantage PHYSICALLY. they don’t offer more damage. They don’t autokill mobs etc.
Anything that helps in obtaining a goal when it’s present over when it’s not is (yes) an advantage. They are not limited to physicality. A mental advantage comes to mind.
If the terminology is to be applied to varied scenarios where there are various possible goals, then it needs to evolve to encompass such. If not then it can only be applied to the situation where it was coined, thus not applicable to any other thing. To elaborate: If someone rejects the evolution of the term then it would only possibly be applicable to the single goal of where/when it was coined. So if that goal was to win a 5v5 by killing all the opposing team members, then that would be the only possible scenario where p2w would be applicable. Other games with other goals such capture the flag, king of the hill, etc etc….would not have possible p2w scenarios…ofc unless evolution of the terminology is accepted to encompass other goals. Which leads us back to…….being dependent on the goal at hand.
I see the same faulty premise time and time again, that winning is confined to one objective only. Winning it completely dependent on the goal at hand. If the goal is building a better sandcastle, then tools that help achieve such, help in winning. If the goal is to knock out an opponent, then brass knuckles help in winning. If the goal finishing an achievement, then ofc anything that aided in such helped to win. It’s very simple logic.
Dont use mystic toilet, they made that for addicted gamblers so they can earn money.
Didnt you watch south park ?
And why would you even gamble with something that has so little chance…
Gamble only if you have 50% or more chance. Or be smart and never gamble.
I’d like to see a casino that gives a 50% or higher odd in any game, I’d play there in a heartbeat. Even roulette isn’t 50/50 when playing black/red (0 and 00 are green spaces).
At least casinos state odds and will most likely comp your room or something along those lines if you lose big. What conclusions can we draw…….Casinos have a bigger heart than Anet? lol
My main issue with the whole deal is that this is a game which after everything is said and done is supposed to be fun for those that engage with it. The current implementation of RNG allows for some users of the game to be basically be “kitten” upon with no regard. That is not fun and goes against the core ideology of the game. That is a major flaw imo, one that definitely warrants correcting.
36, living in the eastern U S of A
Retired, worked in entertainment industry from age 10-16, retired project manager in commercial construction at the age of 30
Got a degree from JMU (I believe the value of a degree in society has become grossly overestimated….but that’s a rant for another day), I am the only non-doctor in my family
Played GW1 prior to GW2 and have to say that it changed my life, I used to drink a lot and it got me locked up…..a lot. I also used to smoke, which I have not had a smoke (of any sort) in 6 years
I’ve been to every state in the US except Hawaii, Mexico, all the Canadian Provinces, 7 countries in Europe and will be going to my 8th in less than 2 weeks
I love, love, love fishing and coffee, enjoy watching American football
I have a Maltese, she has sundowners syndrome
Most of my friends are the beer bellied rednecks everyone stereotypes, I wouldn’t appear to fit in with them from the outside , but I’ve known them my whole life
I prefer alt rock but mostly listen to country due to friends, yet I am a classically taught pianist
I am a firm believer in an altered form of the Golden Rule. I treat everyone the way I would like to be treated and expect the same of others. If people treat others poorly, I reciprocate the favor. So if I’m rude to someone it’s due to them being rude 1st.
I’m sure others like Wanze will rip your statement wide open
I stopped reading when he wrote that Anet is retracting items from the economy.
Yes, that confused me as well. I’m not sure what proof the OP has of such things, as I have observed the opposite to be true (i.e. Silverwastes and Dry Top chests, PvP reward tracks, ascended material recyclers, &c.).
And not to mention a wider range of exotics and an increased chance for precursors from the forge. It’s now easier than ever to get items, even rare ones.
I believe he meant their nerfs to farming.
What nerfs to farming? I can still make gold, I can still craft, I can still farm, I can still do the same things I’ve done before they altered events to reduce their abuse.
You answered your own question…“the ones the altered”.
I’m sure others like Wanze will rip your statement wide open
I stopped reading when he wrote that Anet is retracting items from the economy.
Yes, that confused me as well. I’m not sure what proof the OP has of such things, as I have observed the opposite to be true (i.e. Silverwastes and Dry Top chests, PvP reward tracks, ascended material recyclers, &c.).
And not to mention a wider range of exotics and an increased chance for precursors from the forge. It’s now easier than ever to get items, even rare ones.
The small increase to pres happen a long time ago way b4 the change to the range of outputs. I don’t believe the range change was ever agreed upon as a good thing as it was also accompanied by the level degradation change.
Edit: some other farms that have been nerfed include the Union point farm, linen farm, skelk farm, Blix farm, cof farm, and I’m sure quite a few others.
I would be less concerned with the global economic ramifications than the fact that adding a vendor value isn’t an elegant solution, you should get something for that material that isn’t 2c, because 2c never feels good and just adds to the money supply.
edit: double post for forum formatting
That’s pretty easy right? Make more uses for bricks that aren’t gated by things like t6 mats and/or t7mats. It acts as a gold sink via thermocatalytic reagents, a karma sink via obby shards and gets rid of dust. Take a look at what we currently have, evaluate why they don’t work as brick sinks, and create something that doesn’t fall to the same shortcomings.
I didnt factor in each different stat per armor. So 23 different stat types over 6 different skins adds in an additional 828 different pieces, just for light dropped armor. And of course you have about the same for crafted armor, and all the named light armor. So that makes up for the rest, so 3000 isnt that All that far fetched.
Wow plenty of sources for silk…why do people say its so hard to get!?
A lot of players do not like buying everything off the tp. They like going out and getting themselves directly. That’s where the issue lies.
