(edited by Kaz.5430)
(edited by Kaz.5430)
Here are some great examples of selective amnesia and denial
“Fractals of the Mists” is a set of dungeon paths, that did not exist when the game was released.
- It’s listed as a dungeon on the dungeons page on the GW2 website (https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/dungeons/)
- It’s listed as a dungeon on the dungeons page on the GW2 wiki (http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Dungeon)
If your response is “Fractals is not a Dungeon”, then what is it?
Yes, FotM is included under the umbrella term “dungeons” as far as terminology is concerned. However, in terms of content, a fractal is far from a dungeon. It’s like a tiny bit of a dungeon:
A dungeon has several paths, each with a series of bosses, an multi-part narrative, and a large, complex map. There are associated rewards (tokens/skins/unique items) specific to the dungeon, and a theme tying together several sets of encounters.
A fractal is a single boss, a tiny (usually) linear map, no specific rewards, and no narrative.
A set of four fractals is considered equivalent to a single dungeon path (except that FotM has far worse rewards per time). A dungeon typically consists of 4-5 paths.
Since launch, we’ve seen 5 new fractals and one new dungeon path, and also lost a dungeon path.
Net addition to dungeon content: 5 fractal instances. A little more than one dungeon path worth of content in two years. About a quarter of a dungeon.
If you occasionally run fractals or dungeons and aren’t sick to death of them yet, good for you!
Those of us who regularly run them want more. It’s commonplace to solo the hardest “endgame” dungeon. There’s something wrong with that — more challenging content is needed.
tl;dr Sure, “no new dungeons” is an oversimplification. But what has been added is barely more than a single dungeon path, and that’s just not enough to keep that aspect of the game interesting for the players who enjoy it.
IMO, that’s a great example of changing the definition of something just so that it’s existance can be denied, something that is becomeing a plague on these boards. A dungeon is not ‘defined’ by having 4 or 5 long paths, in an MMO a dungeon is simply a bit of instanced content, that is designed for a group, and generally ends with some sort of boss fight and a reward chest.
Fractals of the Mists ‘is’ a dungeon. Every single ‘set’ of Fractals that culminates in a boss fight, a reward and a choice to leave, is a dungeon ‘path’. Every single possible combination of fractals in a set is a ‘different’ dungeon path. It doesn’t matter if some other games do it differently, that doesn’t mean that the definition of a dungeon changes.
If people stopped complaining by denying the existance of things, with grand sweeping statements that are actually not true, then us detestable ‘White Knight Fanboys’ – as some people like to call us when we don’t agree with the attempts to rewrite history – would actually listen to what you say. But for some reason some of you would rather deny that anything has changed at all, than admit that the ANet developers have actually written a LOT of new content.
It’s not true that there has been no new dungeon content. The actual truth is that there has not been enough new dungeon content, to suit you.
It’s not true that there has been no new end game content. The actual truth is that there has not been enough new end game content, of the type you want to play, to suit you.
As a game developer (no tin the same league as GW2), I can say without any lie whatsoever, that when you read pages of people complaining that you’ve not done anything (when in fact you’ve done a lot), it doesn’t provide that little kick you needed to try harder (not that you needed to try harder).
What it does it it slowly burns you out, and makes you less interested in developing new content.
a new set of dungeons
WHERE?
A new set of dungeons? – Where? Did I miss something?
You say “a set of new dungeons”. There has been exactly 1 dungeon path added in two years, and they removed another path to add it.
New set of dungeons? What do you mean exactly? I’d love to see the new set of dungeons, kitten I’d love to play it for the new armours it must have included, right? Tell me the secret, please!
What new set of dungeons are you talking about? BEcause there are none.
Here are some great examples of selective amnesia and denial
“Fractals of the Mists” is a set of dungeon paths, that did not exist when the game was released.
If your response is “Fractals is not a Dungeon”, then what is it?
The biggest QoL feature that I can think of, that ‘only’ a Guild Hall could provide is as a Megaserver Transportation system.
If only guild members (or invitees perhaps) can access the hall, then it would be an easy place to gather a large group together and be sure to all be on the same map. There could be an NPC that each player speaks to, and by speaking to them, megaserver system is able to get an exact count of the number of players wanting to travel together to a particular zone, BEFORE they try to travel.
Rather than each player loading a zone independently, and the system using predictive logic to try and group people together, it would know exactly how many spaces it needs to have on whichever map the collective attempts to load.
While obviously cool there are some details that would be required to start talking about this.
- How big of a group would be required to create one of these zones?
- Could you join half empty zones or would you always want them guild exclusive?
- Would zones created for your guild stay exclusive to your guild?
- etc.
I’d love to see your thoughts on the details of this proposal to talk through some of the issues and see if it is in fact realistic, knowing that obviously you don’t know how the server infrastructure for megaservers works but I’ll try and be here to guide you.
My initial thought was just about ‘prepping’ the megaserver prediction system so that it can either find an existing megaserver with enough space, or make a new one if one doesn’t exist.
For example, TTS could arrange to meet in the Guildhall 30 mins before Teq. The sheer number of them would end up forcing a new map. A smaller guild could do the same, and get sent to a map that’s already got players, but has enough room for them all.
The ability to create a guild only megaserver would be cool, but it would need to be locked behind a pretty hefty price tag to prevent abuse. Otherwise nefarious players could create a bot guild and farm your own server without anyone seeing or reporting.
This is precisely why I asked the question, “what would you want to gain from your primary guild?” It is an exercise in collaborative creativity to see if someone can come up with something that is actually compelling but at the same time doesn’t make you feel like you made the wrong choice. If the answer was easy, everyone would be doing it already, but most things worth doing are hard.
For me, the entire concept of having a ‘primary guild’ in a multi-guild system is the root of the problem, closely followed by the concept of ‘influence’.
Every part of the game has been designed in order to avoid the negative sides of general MMO’s; you don’t steal kills, you don’t steal harvesting nodes etc. But the influence system is the opposite and promotes the idea of “100% rep or boot”.
Any player that’s a member of a guild, but not representing it is ‘stealing’ influence from the guild and taking up a limited space that could be given to a member that is representing the guild. At all times, a player is wasting a spot in up to 4 other guilds, because they are representing the 5th.
I tend to represent a smaller guild that is mostly filled with members that don’t ever represent the guild and tend to play at different times. I can see that they are usually a few ‘members’ online, but I can’t communicate with them, and because all the interesting guild activities are gated behind representational influence. We can’t draw them back because we can’t unlock the interesting content that would draw them back because we need them to be representing in order to generate influence to unlock the content.
It’s not as simple as saying, "if they wanted to be in your guild they’d represent’, because they clearly ‘do’ want to be in the guild because they’ve used up one of thier limited spots to be there. They don’t represent because their influence pays them back better by being given to a larger guild that can do more.
It’s also not as simple as just making more content that smaller guilds can do, because that content is still going to be locked behind influence, and larger guilds will still be able to do more of the smaller guild content than smaller guilds could.
Essentially we’d have a very similar system by removing the ability to join multiple guilds, and instead letting players create groups in the friends list.
Great points here and I think what I am hinting at is that if there was a way to maintain the current guild functionality of multiple guilds but also add a way to really commit to a singular guild what are the features old and new that you think are important for your basic guilds vs your, for lack of a better term, “home” guild.
Jon
When it comes to guilds IMO there are really only two options (GW2 doesn’t fit in either).
1. The traditional One-Guild set-up
2. Multiple Guilds.
The current system is not really a half-way house between options 1 and 2, it’s really just option 1 with a way to easily switch back and forth between guilds.
IMO ‘representation’ should simply be about which guild shows up next to your characters name, and that’s where the prioritisation should stop. If you’re in a guild, you should be actually ‘in’ the guild, not ‘nearly’ in the guild. As I see it, the whole concept of representation – as it currently exists – is the cause of any feelings of lack of community in guilds. The problem is not in being able to join multiple guilds, its in being unable to interact with 4/5ths of your guilds.
I think everything would work much better, if it was truly multi-guild in every possible sense of the word.
With Chat Channels you’d remove /guild (or perhaps tie it to representation) and would instead create /g1-/g5 which are tied to the 5 guilds that you can join.
With influence, you’d earn an equal amount of influence for all your guilds while you play. With exception perhaps of guild missions etc, where only the appropriate guild would get any influence for success.
With regards to managing the guild, accessing vault, queuing up upgrades etc, you’d be able to manage and look through any guild that you’re a member of, at all times.
If the system is going to ‘prioritise’ one guild over the others, then you should not be able to join more than 1 guild at a time, and it would make far more sense to switch to the traditional one-guild system.
If the idea is to have a multi-guild system, then IMO it should be a REAL multi-guild system, or it’s just pointless.
(edited by Kaz.5430)
Not sure that the printers should have allowed you to make a book of copyrighted material, especially with a bar-code on the back. But it’s pretty kitten ed cool. You should get in touch with ANet and see if they will pay you for the “editing” work so they can release the book officially
@Hybrid.7059
I need to log in onto my email to authorize log-in attempt.
Wow it’s so hard… to understand?
If you click on My Account and then go to the security tab, you can set up Mobile Authentication instead of email authentication. You can then use your mobile phone to ‘authenticate’ the login.
GW2 security page links you to google authenticator downloads for iOS, Android and windows phones. The google authenticator page (on google code) also has an app for Blackberry. You could also look into TOTP authentication programs for your PC instead of using the phone, but that might take a bit of research.
