Guild Wars 2

Xaevryn.5687:

Yeah. I won’t disagree that this new system may very well work for new players. But ultimately, veteran players once again get overlooked and even hamstrung a bit. It seems Anet is forgetting that player retention is just as important if not more so than drawing in new players. I had many guild mates just up and leave, as well as friends. I’m considering leaving as well, due to other circumstances (Used to get a solid 30 fps in Lions Arch, now its down to 10? that echoes across all of my gameplay) so considering the fact the game was playing perfectly fine directly before the update, and then after the update my PC sounds like it wants to burst out of its chassis and it chugs along, idk man.

Anet, why do you do this kinda stuff? Instead of hamstringing your vets and forcing a lot to leave, why not work of optimizing your game?

Because right now its about as optimized as a knife to the throat. For reference I can play Skyrim, EVE, GTA IV, and other similar games on kitten near max graphics without any hiccups.

I’m guessing the performance dip is due to all the commander tags turned on everywhere. It’s now becoming glaringly obvious that they need to address that problem.

For a quick fix, they could just disable tags in major cities. It’s not like you need to lead anyone inside them anyway.

Piecekeeper.4361:

How could they do this? How could the get the info to everyone at the same time? Not through the forums, most people don’t read them. Patch notes? We all know a lot of people don’t read those either. They could wait until the patch releases, with absolutely no info given out before hand, but how long would the playerbase go along with that? We all demand to have the info early, plus, they need to generate some buzz.

Actually you don’t need to read patch notes. All you have to do is log in curious and look at your Rare Collections – boom, Treasure Hunter tells you about many of the now skyrocketed items that you’ll need.

Of course, releasing the info when the patch goes out has its own set of problems; some people can’t log on right away and so those who are sitting at their computers waiting to log in get the first crack at it. But at least then it would guarantee a greater number of people the same chance, as opposed to semi-obscure preview videos.

I completely understand their desire to generate buzz – don’t get me wrong. But they could have limited the access to select, trusted people and told them under legal threat with NDA not to show certain collections. At the end of the day, what’s done is done, but for future reference, I do believe there are better ways to handle a situation like this.

nexxe.7081:

Yes, only for the few that follow the game as closely. It’s the same thing. The majority of people don’t visit woodenpotato’s videos or dulfy’s website. Items shouldn’t be revealed until patch releases, otherwise the “select few” still have an advantage.

Right, I’m inclined to agree. Keeping up with the latest preview videos and such isn’t insider trading, but it is still a potentially unfair way to reveal info in a patch like this one. It’s said so often on these forums that a lot of people don’t go read the forums, or whatever other social media. So for them, they are behind purely because they stick to watching the game itself.

Which I don’t really consider fair and I’m not even one of them.

This would be amazing. Just hide it as an option on an obscure NPC in Lion’s Arch or something, so that only players who are experienced enough to look for such things would even find it (e.g. no concern about newbies accidentally choosing it).

I wish they would at least give veterans the option to get these abilities and such faster. I don’t blame them for making it easier for newbies, but I can already imagine it’s going to be insulting to level an alt and feel like the game is patronizing me every other minute.

schneiw.4896:

I would be ultra impressed if Anet does a bait n switch and changes some of those requirements at the last minute before releasing the patch

Part of me kinda wishes they would. I don’t have anything against people trying to make money, but buying stuff up just to hike up the price because they know that demand is about to skyrocket is a selfish practice.

There is really no way to put it that doesn’t make it “taking advantage of other people.”

Come on, you know this would be cool.

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Labjax.2465:

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Of course I do as I stated before I have seven Legendaries and almost double that in Ascended…

Well, that explains everything. You don’t like the thought of someone getting what you have for less effort. You feel entitled to a consistently equal playing field.

Omg you quite literally have NO IDEA what you are talking about… you do realize that the entitled equal playing field is what he wants right?

I’m not sure you follow. I’m saying you feel entitled to others having to go through the same amount of effort as you to get what you currently have.

I’m just trying to show you that it goes both ways. You are accusing others of being entitled, while acting like you have a right to the game staying a certain way.

Try to imagine that in this scenario you had 0 legendaries and ascended items to your name, and no gold. Do you really think you would still be acting so vehemently against this idea and against the person who came up with it?

There is a distinct difference between arguing against something on principle and arguing against it because of personal reasons. I hope you are being honest with yourself and making that distinction.

I know the devs have talked about not wanting to give too much “inspect” information when looking at another player (if any) because of the fear of people being elitist about gear scores and such.

However! What I’m imagining is a way to have a “Wish List” – essentially a list of items that you want to acquire at some point. You would then have 4 or so settings for it: Private (only you can see it), Public (anyone can see it), Followers (Followers and Friends can see it) or Friends (only Friends can see it).

The idea of this feature is to make friendly gift-giving play easier! Say you want to give someone a gift, but you aren’t sure what he already has and what he’s looking for. Now if his Wish List is visible to you, you can look at it and see what he’s looking for.

This would also be a neat way to keep track of what items you’re personally trying to get. Like a “goal” list.

Let me know what you think!

pdavis.8031:

That still doesnt make sense. If the level 1-10 story doesnt unlock until level 10, then when you start the story at level 10, the steps 1 thru 9 would be super easy, as you way higher level then the story step.

Maybe they’re making it so that each story chunk is level equivalent? Like instead of it going steadily up in difficulty, the level 10 story is all balanced for a level 10 character?

Which would be kind of dumb imo, but I guess we’ll see for sure tomorrow.

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Of course I do as I stated before I have seven Legendaries and almost double that in Ascended…

Well, that explains everything. You don’t like the thought of someone getting what you have for less effort. You feel entitled to a consistently equal playing field.

These are people who are essentially forced to be casual players, when you think about it. They are working full-time jobs doing game development and some of them have families too.

It would be a wonder if some of them have made a lot of progress. And perhaps a bit disconcerting, considering how little time that would mean they’re spending on activities not related to GW2.

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Let’s look at the current system shall we? This would be crafting from scratch on ALL of them…

This is based on 150g per weapon crafted.

Well, given there are only 10-12 USEFUL stat combos…. lets say 12 for argument’s sake… you are talking MAX 1800 gold…

If he just wanted to be pedantic and have the extremely worthless combinations , that makes it a total of 18 which would be 2700 gold which is STILL slightly below most Legendaries…

I would think that his method would reduce that cost significantly…

So I still have a valid point in that he wants a weapon with Legendary capabilities for significantly less cost (and time invested which you conveniently don’t mention) which is just not going to happen…

You do understand that stat-swapping is not the only reason people craft Legendaries… right?

Bel Geode.8129:

(Disclaimer- In Real Life I have scuba dived.. a lot)

It’s funny you say this because just the other day, I was thinking how having familiarity with the 3 axes is unnatural for most people, unless you’re a scuba diver or something. :P

Nini.8941:

The underwater areas are beautiful and the sound effects are great. I really enjoy swimming around now and then. The problem for me is the 3 axis and mobs.

You see a place that you want to explore, there is a mob to kill before being able to do so, so you start fighting. But since it’s kind of hard to orient underwater you often bump in to another mob…and another….and another.. and another and then they start to respawn. Then I just get to the point where it’s not worth my time time to even try to explore the area.

Yes, this too! It’s something of a skill I’ve developed, trying to avoid mobs in MMOs and leash when they aggro me – something where my experience is essentially worthless underwater because depth perception confuses me and it can be hard to pick out where the mobs are, among all the miscellaneous underwater objects.

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Buuuuuuuuuuuut….. he doesn’t want to spend the gold to craft additional Ascended… he wants his to have the same capabilities as a legendary for SIGNIFICANTLY less effort and he wants them because he FEELS (this is where the sense of self entitlement comes in) that he should have the ability to move them to his alts and swap the stats around… and ability that is EXCLUSIVE to Legendaries for a reason…

You are just reaching at this point. Do you have any idea how much gold it would add up to, to get an ascended weapon to the point of having every stat combo with the kind of system he’s proposing? (Here’s a hint: It wouldn’t be cheap.)

Honestly, it’s starting to sound to me like you have crafted a Legendary and you’re afraid of it being devalued.

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

1) Do you even KNOW the ENORMOUS difference between crafting a Legendary versus crafting an Ascended?!

2) You are incorrect later in the thread he exposes his true motives… he feels he should be able to switch the stats around so he can swap the weapons from toon to toon… Which is exactly that… a feeling of self entitlement.

3) Here’s an idea… rather than try and debate semantics, why don’t you try and discuss the actual points with counterpoints? Or, are you bad at debating those as well and that is why you are avoiding them?

What “actual points” are there to counter? I’ve been countering what I see. It’s not my fault you’re not exactly putting out elaborate debating points.

Do you understand the fact that you can already craft multiple ascended items and keep them on hand, effectively using them the same way you would with stat swapping?

And oh no, big deal, he exposed his “true motives” that his main concern is dealing with alts… which still comes back to him asking for one simple thing that doesn’t indicate entitlement at all: An option to unlock a set of stats for swapping that takes somewhat less effort per-desired-stat than crafting an obscene amount of ascended items (and in fact, still takes a significant amount of effort from the way he is proposing it).

There is no war to fight here. You’re hacking away at shadows.

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

1) He wants a capability that is exclusive to one type of item for 1/50th the effort…

2) You are wrong…. I use the phrase “sense of self entitlement” which means feeling you have the right to something…

How is this 1/50th of the effort? Gotta love hyperbole…

The idea would be to create Ascended with one stats and then by mixing it in Mystic Forge with: new ascended insignias (so market is balanced), explorable item (scavenge hunt), and some skill points (sink) to unlock that new stats on that ascended weapon.

explorable item – would be different item (or a group of items to combine in MF) from many contents in the world (gatherables/bosses/temples/dungeons/etc) that would add a bit for exploration and scavenge hunt for people who want to upgrade their gear. (!) but not a grind, more like do something not only pay for it.

And the reason you’re using it wrong is because you’re applying it to people who aren’t acting like they have a right to something. They’re just asking for something.

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

Wanting something for nothing is exactly that, a sense of entitlement…

Jesus Christ this thread is so full of entitlement it makes me sick… This is EXACTLY what is wrong with current MMO culture…

I WANT THIS NOW AND I WANT TO DO NOTHING TO GET IT!
MAKE EVERYONE EQUAL WITH EVERYTHING FROM DAY ONE!
#usesenseofentitlementtogetallthethings

Like SERIOUSLY?! Here’s an idea… you want it… do what EVERYONE one else did and work for it… to sit there and expect get something that gives you the same capabilities as something else for 1/50th the effort is appalling… to even TRY to claim it isn’t a sense of entitlement is a joke…

Except that if you would read the OP, you’d see that he’s not asking for something for nothing… he’s asking for something for something.

But I guess you just want an excuse to rant about your apparently favorite reason for what’s wrong with MMOs these days.

Also, you are using and abusing the word “entitlement.” What entitlement is, is when people feel they have a “right” to something. That’s not the same as asking for something or desiring it. I can ask for a cookie from the cookie jar without feeling entitled to one. It’s a very distinguishable difference in attitude.

Kamui.2961:

Here is ma Tooth Fairy!

That looks really cool. Nice work.

Esplen.3940:

Problems with underwater combat:

3 axis opposed to two (sure, you can jump, but you don’t actually fly, meaning your z axis isn’t particularly used). This actually causes problems such as camera angles, depth perception, and other things. Depth is a kittene, because when we see depth in a video game, it’s usually tied to something such as size and/or position on a plane. However, we don’t see that plane so it’s reliant entirely on size and not everyone has experience with size-relative depth. This can make it confusing when you’re checking your range to see which axis you need to change to be in range.

Camera orientation is stuck in “gravity” oriented. While this makes it easier to know where “up” is, while you’re downed, it makes the fighting very, very hard to do. Water is similar to space (yeah, no, it’s not that similar, but in a virtual reality where there’s no gravity pulling you down…) the only “up” and “down” are defined by you, yourself, meaning that down should (or could) be in relation to how you orient your camera, and not how your camera orients itself. If anything, this can be released as a level-gated thing to help ease new players into it, or it could just be there from the beginning (and will revert to the current camera system upon downing).

Not enough keys for control. Defaulted, you don’t even have enough keys. There’s swim down, swim up, move forward, backwards, left, right, turn left, right. There also needs to be rotate axis of control (see camera section). Of course, this makes there be a ton of keys that aren’t very intuitive to control, but it would help make the combat more fluid for people who like to stay in it.

Disparity in skills because, god knows, we can’t have fields underwater. Oh wait, we do. Now, I understand it’s hard to get ground-target skills without, you know, ground all over the place. But that doesn’t mean there can’t be variations. If there aren’t variations, there should be water-only utility skills. Also, there needs to be more variety in water weapons. 2 weapons is enough for players without weapon swap (ele/engie) even though they only have 1. At least 3 or 4 for players with weapon swap. This allows for fluidity and control of combat based. 3 is a good one for players with weapon swap, as most players don’t typically utilize weapon swapping too much, currently.

Tl;dr: Treat water combat like space and stop trying to force the camera on us.

Solid breakdown. Well said.

BlueZone.4236:

First person camera in too confusing and overwhelming for players to handle and so is movement in three dimensions.

Not enjoying something doesn’t require that you are also overwhelmed by it and don’t understand it.

tigirius.9014:

I call SWTOR a Freemium system because it forces players to buy. To me however GW2 has a similar system in place for new players that may not have endless hours to grind out enough gold to buy things they need to setup 1 much less multiple toons to catchup with friends, it’s cleverly disguised behind a conversion market system on purpose, so that people will think it’s an okay system to use.

If they removed for example the requirement to use gold for things like Sigils/Runes or the cost of traits it wouldn’t be as bad as it is but because it directly tied to progression and because so many people have issues with loot dropping the design becomes a serious issue.

Perhaps so. It is subtle though. I’m not one to greatly defend all of Anet’s F2P choices, but it seems to me that traits are an already-admitted mess that they would like to fix.

And as for Sigils/Runes, I don’t know what the answer is. One could argue that with Sigils, you can just buy the Major ones until you can afford the Superior version (which is something I’ve done before). But the Runes are not so simple because Superior has 6 slots and Major only has 4.

Maybe they should consider expanding some of the Major rune sets to 6 slot upgrades, only with a weaker set bonus overall. This might alleviate the issue you’re referring to.

I hope they keep forgetting. :P

No, but seriously, I hope you get some content you’re hoping for. I just can’t stand underwater combat myself. Maybe if it was designed such that I could use my normal abilities, I would enjoy it. But instead, I just feel weak every time I pop my head down there.

And because most combat is above-ground-single-axis-combat, I never quite get skilled at maneuvering in an extra axis underwater. Not to mention the big mobs like Megadestroyer, who bounce around crazily with their confusing hitboxes and somehow manage to hit you when you’re practically out of range.

I’m not surprised if SWTOR if making way more with less people. Their F2P is one of those disgustingly in-your-face designs that reminds you all the time of how better an experience you could be having if you paid money. Which would (unsurprisingly) drive lots of people away, while getting the remaining people to more often pull out their wallets.

GW2 is not exceedingly off-putting in that way and it would be silly of them to try it because their game systems require a large, active playerbase to give the intended experience.

Because healing that is too strong in PvP creates more QQ than you can possibly imagine.

Thing you gotta realize about PvP is that for some people, talking crap is part of the experience. They don’t genuinely wish harm to you or your mother – they’re just having a go at you and seeing if you’ll hit back.

There is another kind of crap-talking PvPer as well – the one that I would call a “rage case.” They will basically get mad about anything and everything (particularly if they lose in some capacity).

Your best bet with the former is to ignore them or hit them back. Your best bet with the latter is to put them on ignore.

My current that I’m most proud of (my screens aren’t the best visual quality ever, but the gist of the outfits is there):

Khisanth.2948:

Just finished watching the compiled version and it seems fine to me.
It delivered the relevant information and provided some short description of the reasons behind the change where necessary.

Yeah, that reminds me. The fact that he gives a little snippet “here’s why we wanted to make this change” is awesome and something that’s difficult to communicate through patch notes in quite the same way.

Allow these poor folks to salvage them for Dark Matter at least. No economic impact and they get something out of it.

Ice.5162:

The game needs way more armor skins that doesn’t involve burning your wallet.

More leather pieces that are not kitten trenchcoats, more heavy leggings that are not tassets, more light pants that are not kilts.

Like, seriously. You can’t just do that. Add more skins, armor and weapon customization is probably one of the biggest things players care about, put your artists and modelers to work, and scatter new skins all over lower level zones, not just the kittening gemstore.

Seriously, the low level newcomers will love it.

It does kind of bug me how 90% of light legs are insanely billowy and 90% of medium legs are barely varied long pants. I wish they woulda mixed and matched a bit there. :/

Smooth Penguin.5294:

For some players, that “reliable alternative” won’t be an option. Just look at all the complaints for Mawdrey. The requirements were mild compared to what I anticipate Precursor crafting to be like. The TP may be come a blessing for some at that point.

For some players, that “reliable alternative” may not be a good option.

Is what you should have said. Obviously Anet is going to take things like that into account. If it was stupid simple, we would have seen an alternative implemented already.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

I’m certain you’ll be in for a shock once Precursor crafting comes out. If Anet does what I’m sure they’ll do, prices will remain as they are. If, by chance, Anet fails, and makes it too easy to craft, you’ll see a crash in the Precursor market. That’ll send shockwaves throughout the economy.

No, I’m certain I won’t be in for any shock. The whole point of asking for a system to obtain one somewhat consistently is that the cost will be relatively consistent as well and the path will be clear.

At that point, it doesn’t matter if the TP prices remain the same because there will be a reliable alternative.

Oh and for the record, I don’t care whether it is 90g or 1500g. I just think the system should promote moderately consistent costs. Which would probably mean a way to get precursors that is more akin to the ascended item track.

Ohoni.6057:

But as I’ve pointed out several times, and you willfully ignore each time, is that when people say “precursors are too expensive,” they are not being entirely accurate in expressing their real concern. They are not worried about the precursor market in the abstract, they are worried that the specific precursor(s) that they want IS too expensive, and the price of the low-end precursors is entirely irrelevant to that.

You are confusing a poorly phrased complaint for an invalid complaint. The sentiment is a valid one, if perhaps people are sometimes inarticulate in voicing it. Any rational observer should understand the point they are attempting to make, however, and react to that rather than engaging in semantic discussions about their word choice.

^What this guy said.

What you are doing, Penguin, is you are essentially taking peoples’ complaints literally, so that you can tell them they are wrong. It’s an underhanded way of talking about things that accomplishes nothing.

Esplen.3940:

I’m sorry that some players can’t afford a 90g item, but they also can’t afford a 1500g item, either. If they’re unwilling to make the effort to [save to] buy a 90g item, then why should it be made easier to get a 1500g item?

I had a feeling this would get misinterpreted. I mainly meant that in reference to him saying that he can buy dozens. Which is either willful nonsense or unintended hyperbole because 90g times 12 or more is over 1k gold (not far from the price of the most expensive precursors being sold).

But addressing directly what you’re referring to, the function of the items is exactly the same, so the better question is: Why should precursors be designed in such a way that the only reliable way to obtain them is through buying from other players, making the cost to obtain them significantly different?

I think the answer has pretty clearly been “we’re going to try to figure out a better system” in the past, from Anet. So I don’t understand why this is even a point of contention. The whole thing feels like an elaborate excuse to talk down to people who make complaints about precursors.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Currently, they’re quite easy to get, and very affordable. I could go out and buy dozens of Precursors from the TP right now. So what’s going on here? People complain because they feel Entitled to getting a certain item they really want.

The solution isn’t to make Dusk or Zap easier to get, just to satisfy the Entitled masses. The real solution is to change mindsets of people. Lots of players want an item that’s very rare, so that item will be very valuable. The less these players desire said item, the more affordable it will become.

You must be swimming in gold if you can easily go out and buy dozens of precursors. Even at 90g per, that’s still not cheap for the average player.

Furthermore, you continue to ignore one important point (I’m honestly not sure if it’s unintentional at this point): People want stuff like Dusk or Zap, or even The Legend because they are popular items in general.

Staff guardians are incredibly popular for farming in PvE. Warriors (who often love to use Greatswords) are one of the most popular classes, as far as I know. Guess what, warriors also use Swords. So do Thieves (another popular class). Heck, Mesmers have viable builds utilizing Staff, Greatsword, and Sword in various ways.

These are popular weapon choices. You are not going to sell people on shifting their mindset and investing hours of mat gathering and gold farming to create an item whose primary distinguishing mechanics will be noticeable by frequently using the item (particle effects and stat-swapping), only to have it rarely used in actual combat.

Yes, there are people walking around feeling entitled, but that’s not what this is about. It’s about the painfully obvious truth that most people who want a precursor are simply not interested in more than half of them – at least, not when the effort required is so high.

What you’re confusing here (and I think someone already said this, but it bears repeating) is that a lot of people don’t want a legendary, they want one of the legendaries that fits their primary weapon set. I can tell you right now that the only way I would ever consider putting in the time to make a legendary, is if it was for a weapon that I knew I would be using nearly all the time on a toon that I play most of the time.

Otherwise, it is just not worth the time.

Absconditus.6804:

PS: I don’t think Ascended should be able to swap stats. Reserve that for Legendary items. We need stuff to strive towards in the game. It allows us to set ourselves some goals.

Cause crafting a full set of ascended armor and weapons isn’t a goal to strive for…?

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

This isn’t about changing a toon’s build… this is the selfish need to want to have an account bound weapon with adjustable stats that you can switch between your level 80’s… your post is about your sense of self entitlement… Gotcha!

The game already has that… it’s called a Legendary… stop expecting everything to be handed to you on a silver platter… go and do the work to get it or just buy exotics end of story…

Since when is wanting something automatically a sense of entitlement? …what?

Morsus.5106:

Throw a completed Ascended weapon with an inscription with different stats into the mf, and you unlock the ability to change to those stats. Seems like a fair compromise to me.

Agreed. For those who are thinking this is a request for a hand out, the OP talked about an extra hoop like this that you have to jump through… for every single stat set that you want.

I think that’s more than fair, if not too much work. We are talking about a process that would still be expensive and time-consuming – just somewhat less so than crafting the pieces a billion times over for every toon and purpose.

TheBlackLeech.9360:

The thing is….. if the whole notion of “the old system” didn’t exist….. nobody would even be complaining.

Imagine…..
Filling your car at the station was completely free for the longest time….
Then someone comes along and says….
From this moment onward, you need to pay for your gasoline.
Imagine the uproar.

back to reality…. if you did the same thing…. asked the same question in the world today….. nobody would be complaining about having to pay, since it has always been this way… and nobody knows what it is like to get free gas. Of course everyone is going to want to get it for free….. but they aren’t going to think that paying for it is so absolutely horrible that they need to complain about it (and sure people will complain about the price…. but they never knew a world where it would be free…. so the notion of paying is already normal)

Same exact thing here.

The only reason anyone is complaining about this is the notion that it used to be given away before.

Although I can see why you’re saying this, I can testify personally that it’s only partly true. I came into the game after the trait changes; yes, it’s true that I didn’t realize what I was missing until I found out what the system had been before.

But… I was never a fan of having to run around doing various crazy tasks to unlock my traits. Case in point, I’ve yet to unlock all of them on a single character and I have 3 level 80s.

In fact, the only reason I tolerated it for a time is because I thought that’s what everyone else had to go through.

In short, it was cute when I was leveling my first character, but it wore on me very quickly and left me feeling stunted at max level, when I wanted to experiment with builds.

It’s already super crowded when it comes to flipping. I don’t think much is gonna change. Maybe more people selling at a set price, instead of to buy orders? But I dunno.

Yeah, so basically, the information we have on it means nothing. It will affect level 80s, but it supposedly won’t be noticeable. So what’s the point of it? I guess that’s for them to know and us to find out after hours of testing drop rates.

Which you can bet will happen within a week of release.

rapthorne.7345:

Anyone you know who you’re willing to trade with directly is probably someone you trust enough to mail you gold for the item anyway

Yeah, that’s what I would think.

Honestly, I can think of two reasons for face-to-face trading in this game: 1) You want to trade between friends/guildies, or gift someone an item. 2) You want to bypass TP taxes.

The former can be done with little trouble by using mail and the latter will only hurt the economy long-term. You will have short-term monetary gains from avoiding the tax, only to have long-term pain in the kitten when inflation is rampant.

To be fair, usability testing probably went into this in some form. As much as I want that projected profit, UIs are not something you can just slap things onto at random and hope that people will “get it.”

Arewn.2368:

You may find points of contention for my individual examples, but the fundamental assertion is not “debatable”, it’s a reality.
Business models have varying effects on the development of the game. Devs of various titles have brought this up, and you can (as I just did) evaluate it for yourself on a game per game basis.

You mentioned the time gated and daily stuff from GW2, but this is very different from WoW’s setup. In GW2 these are optional time sinks that are unnecessary to your ability to participate in and complete content, but in WoW they are a progression requirements that will literally stop you from seeing content passed a certain point based on you/your groups item level (this being more so the case in the past then now, but is still present)
I would also argue against your assertion that people being unable to afford 15/month sub fee is “the main drawback”. It falls much more into the category of “don’t want to”. It’s all about value. Why pay 15/month for a game when something else is offering just as much without the forced expenditure.
It’s true that all MMOs have to get people to keep returning, but how they do it, and for what reasons, and around what schedule, will vary based on a number of factors which include business model.

My wording might be a bit unclear, but the point is that a sub fee is a barrier. See what Scott Hartsman says here about the old sub models: http://www.sramanamitra.com/2014/09/01/thought-leaders-in-online-gaming-scott-hartsman-ceo-of-trion-worlds-part-2/

We started to see that the economic issues globally caused that barrier to become an even bigger problem. In terms of customer behavior, players started migrating with their friends in packs. What would happen is players would all go play the games that all of their friends could go play. The greater the barrier up front, the less likely it would be for a group of players to adopt your game. This very much impacted the kinds of games we were making at that time, which were big, synchronous MMOs where the success depended on having a large group of friends to play with.

Anyway, I’m not trying to say that the sub business model has no impact on gameplay, ever, in any way, shape, or form. I’m saying that putting it up against free-to-play and the ways in which gameplay gets impacted by cash shops is an absurd comparison. For the latter, the effects are a pitfall of potential errors that you have to constantly tiptoe around. For the former, the major affects (such as the ones you were naming) can also be attributed to regular game design.

Arewn.2368:

Devs of various titles have brought this up

I would like to see some examples of this from devs, pertaining to sub models.

Curtis Johnson.8456:

Collective.9206:

Curtis Johnson.8456:

Snip

Thanks for the clarifications Curtis, would it be possible to clarify the missing “Projected profit” UI element, it seems to be missing for no real reason other than to now arbitrarily calculate yourself how much money you make per sale instead of being able to see it directly on the screen.

We felt it was important when selling something to know exactly what price your buyer was going to see. The change also is the least cluttered way to address feedback we received previously about profit including / not including fees and wanting to be as clear as possible on the order of operations.

We’re balancing a lot of UX design against desire for more information with the new UI.. We’ll be watching to see what sort of confusion comes out of this and may or may not re-introduce a net profit display later.

With all due respect, confusion is not the issue here – at least, not among those of us who are vocally talking about the disappearance of the “profit” display. It’s a requested convenience.

I can pull out a calculator and make the listing/exchanges fee numbers pointless to look at by shaving a % off of the total. A computer program could do it for me, which would make the interface more robust.

That’s it.

Arewn.2368:

Yes really. For arguments sake, we’ll pretend that sub fee games afford you full access to everything while paying the sub (even though that’s not really the case anymore. Many sub games now have cash shops and payed services on top of the sub, and xpacs on top of sub have always been common). But that doesn’t mean the sub fee doesn’t affect development.
A game with a sub fee has to incentives players to return and pay each month. Take WoW as an example. What do you see in that game’s content? a large list of daily quests/daily quest hubs that take several weeks of repetition and slow unlocking to get through and that have many rewards centered around them, main currency(s) with extended time barriers, and lockouts of dungeons and raids that restrict not only how fast you can get rewards, but also by extent how fast you can progress through them(raids). These are mechanisms put in place to keep people on a fast track to paying next month’s sub fee. Flight paths vs fast travel systems is another good example, but most aspects of the game will have to take into consideration the chosen business model to varying degrees. Things like leveling speeds, crafting, gear acquisition, etc.

Business model, especially in a genre such as MMOs which have ongoing development through their entire lifespan, will always affect the game’s content. Consumers simply have to “pick their poison” so to speak.

That’s debatable. It can just as easily be argued that time-gated reward systems are in place to keep people playing the game (which doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with monthly subs and everything to do with having a large, active playerbase).

An MMO has to incentivize players to keep returning, period. Some examples in GW2 and it isn’t even a sub game: Daily reward chests from world bosses, time-gated crafting materials for ascended items.

The main drawback of the sub model is the sheer number of people who simply can’t afford to pay $15 a month, or don’t want to. And the fact that when people with lots of money want to throw money at the company, they more or less can’t.

Arewn.2368:

Monthly subscription fees contaminate the reward system of games that they are included in as well.

Not really. The difference with sub games is that (excepting for 1 or 2 expansions in the whole lifetime of a game) as long as you are paying the sub fee, you get access to everything, no question about it.

In F2P games (not necessarily talking about GW2 specifically), you can range from paying as little as nothing and eventually getting access to everything, to paying hundreds of dollars just to keep up.

garganor.9824:

My concern is related to the most important aspect of selling something for me… How much profit will I make. This picture doesn’t seem to show the profit.

Yeah… to be honest, I prefer having projected profit be a little bit off, over having one extra number that means nothing to me unless I pull out a calculator. :/

kimeekat.2548:

^ This is my only concern at the moment, besides no wishlist/watch feature, which I assume is a QoL thing that can come in a future update.

Wait, there isn’t going to be a projected profit button?

I don’t know why they didn’t just call it “Trading Post 2.0” in the “hint” name. I guess that would have been giving it away…

That said, even glancing over it, I could see quite a few, “Yes, I’m glad you’re making that easier now” moments for me. It will take some getting used to, no doubt, but I’m happy to see the UI getting some much needed attention.

Vayne.8563:

@Labjax….

You mistook what I said.

When I said saying that content wasn’t significant is useless it’s literally true. What’s the difference between these two complaints.

“This game has no significant content updates.”
“I play this game to do dungeons and there aren’t enough of them.”

The significant content comment, in and out itself does nothing. If you clarify it, it STILL does nothing. It doesn’t help in and out itself.

There’s literally no advantage to using those terms at all, and some people will be offended. If they get offended there will be backlash.. Then the person is defending something they said, and their point gets lost.

So yes, it can be said, but in and of itself, it’s unnecessary and only helps to muddy the issue.

I don’t think you’re understanding the meaning of feedback. And it’s not about an “advantage” to using those terms (I don’t know where you got that from). It’s just that it’s not posters’ responsibility to do their utmost to avoid being offensive – they shouldn’t have to.

By the way, this tangent of yours is missing the whole point of my initial example. My point was not to say the most hypothetically offensive thing and justify it – my point was incredibly simple: Some things are objectively true or false, while others are subjectively true or false based on opinion. When people treat a subjective claim like it is an objective claim, they are obfuscating the point and confusing the subject matter.

That’s it.

The reason it’s bad is because it turns everything into an argument, when some things are just meant to be a tempered discussion. And as we all know, when we’ve gotten into those Pepsi vs. Coke type of arguments in our lives, arguments based on opinion have no logical conclusion other than “wow, this is silly and we’re wasting our time.”

Vayne.8563:

Sure, and phrasing it that was is actually combative, without you realizing it. By say that, what you’re really doing is saying to everyone who liked the content that their content isn’t significant. You may not feel that way, but others do and that’s what they respond to.

Significant only really means worthy of note. So if you dimiss a bunch of stuff because you don’t like it, you’re actually maligning people’s hard work and trivializing what other people like. You can say it, but expect feedback because people don’t actually like to see themselves marginalized.

Now if you said, I like dungeons and that’s the main reason I play and I’d like to see more dungeons, because no dungeons have been released since the TA aetherblade path and existing dungeons are still filled with flaws", no one could argue that.

The whole significant content statement is actually not helpful to anyone including devs. Everyone has a different idea of what is significant.

Just to be clear, the statement I gave is not something I actually mean. I’m just using it as an example. But no, I disagree that it is combative; it is only combative if you perceive it that way.

Yes, I could – in such an instance – phrase the words in a way that is black-and-white “this is my opinion,” but it’s not necessary. If people cannot read between the lines on such a statement and realize that it is opinion, that is not the fault of the poster.

Obviously this does not apply to claims that are of an objective nature (e.g. “this game hasn’t added any content since launch” – which is objectively true or false).

Side note: Personally (see, even right now) I often emphasize that things are my opinion. That is just how I operate. But I don’t believe that there is fault in failing to emphasize it. Part of the reason I do it is because I have too often been faced with the reality of posters who will take my words as an objective claim, when I am attempting to give my opinion. But it is not my responsibility to outline the difference between the two in every post I make.

It is just a choice I make to avoid people being combative with me. Because quite frankly, it’s a pain having people misconstrue what you say half the time.

Vayne.8563:

The whole significant content statement is actually not helpful to anyone including devs. Everyone has a different idea of what is significant.

After re-reading, I noticed this and I want to address it. If no information as to “why” is ever given, then yes, it’s not helpful. It becomes a nebulous complaint with no meaning. But as soon as a “why” gets added, it is absolutely helpful because it is honest feedback. The fact that everyone has a different idea of what is significant is integral to what feedback is; we all have different perspectives, different expectations, different desires, etc. And the devs need to know that stuff sometimes, so that they can figure out where the various perspectives and desires align into something that a large amount of people will enjoy.

Edit: Also, you are missing the point when you say that it is maligning someone’s hard work. First of all, feedback is going to feel harsh sometimes to the receiver, no matter how it is given. That’s just the reality of creating things and sharing them with people. Second, dismissing stuff because I don’t like it is not maligning hard work and trivializing what other people like. That’s like saying that proclaiming that I don’t like Pepsi and prefer Coke is trivializing Pepsi fans. It’s an opinion.

Maligning hard work would be if a waiter brings my food out and after tasting it, I ask the waiter to tell the cook that the food is horrible and he should quit being a cook because he’s terrible at it. There is a huge difference between saying the food is bad and saying that I don’t like the food.