Guild Wars 2

Guardian or Warrior 4 Dungeons?

Guardian 4 dungeons.

Stooperdale.3560:

GW2 has some good ideas how not to run an MMO but still doesn’t know exactly what to do instead. This leaves some players very happy about open access events, living story, no subscription, etc but leaves others unhappy because they don’t see what replaces grind, expansions, gear treadmills, instanced raiding, trinity, etc.

This.

They have stripped away the features of a traditional , classic MMOs and replaced them with.. well.. nothing really.

Likely a heat issue, either you GPU or your CPU.

Kaiser.8504:

Mac.3872:

Bringing a thief to a dungeon run is an ideal way to do you daily revive achievement.

I suppose that’s true if you’re the thief in question.

I see what you did there. xD

Bringing a thief to a dungeon run is an ideal way to do you daily revive achievement.

Nice post OP. I do agree with most of it although I continue to play the game.

I feel it is important for Anet to receive this kind of feedback. If customers just leave without saying why, then how are Anet to know what they did wrong? (at least in the case of that customer).

Not surprised to see people trying to sweep this issue under the carpet and have the thread locked though, with" just leave" and “can i has ur stuff?” comments. Some people are happy to only care about themselves and spam 1 to win and dont want the game to change is any meaningful way. These will be the first people to flood the forum with their tears if the difficulty level of the game was ever increased.

Good luck to you in your future endevours.

Several answers have been suggested for the question of why players grind. A major motivating factor is the players’ desire to pursue what appears to be the game’s ultimate goal, which for many games is to reach the highest level.¹ Sometimes players might actually enjoy repetitive tasks as a way of relaxing, especially if performing the task has a persistent, positive result.⁴

One reason that is less influenced by player choice is a lack of game content or to be able to battle stronger enemies.² If the player experiences all interesting content at the current level before reaching the next objective, the only alternative might be for the player to grind to the next level.¹ “Interesting content” is key here since the player might have been given “new content” that is too similar to previous content to be considered interesting by the player. [note 1]⁵

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grinding_%28video_gaming%29

Dusty Moon.4382:

Im Mudbone.1437:

The GW2 servers can barely handle the load of just the game, they would self destruct if fed even more load.

It is not the servers – it is your PC/CPU that can’t handle the load. This game is very CPU heavy and single threaded.

*As for the OT, there are plenty of MMO’s that do not have COMM software built in. There are plenty of other free programs for this.

We on TC server have our own MUMBLE server and every guild has specific channels and special WvW channels*.

Yes this is fine for organised grouping and zergballvZergballvZergball.

The problems arise when it comes to Ad-hoc grouping— the current lack of ingame voice comms is not pug-friendly. Its also very unfriendly to the casual gamer who may not have a large network of guildies/ allies/ friends to need a 3rd party programme to communicate with.

The ease-of-use of an in-game voice comm would be a great addition to this game.

Yes they do need fixed.

Skipping the majority of a dungeon then burning a boss down in 3 seconds is beyond tedious.

It does appear that your idea of cheap and my idea of cheap is indeed different.

(Maybe I picked you up wrong on this next part, if so I appologise)

There are many other game with in-game voice , it has been around for years.

The current EULA (which Anet most likely has the right to change as and when they see fit) would maybe be enough to cover the use of in-game voice by simply including it under “Chat”.

Im not sure which part of the world you live but Im inclined to believe that out-sourcing is a common practice.

Calys Teneb.7015:

Here’s a fact:

Hundreds of hours of audio communication between players created daily would not be effectively moderated by GMs who already spend a full day working on player reports and issues in game. You have a company that’s very small who have a player base half the size of WoW’s.

The logistics of being able to police such a large amount of data with a small team is staggering.

Then perhaps they could spend some of their profits on out-sourcing this task to India or something, for much cheapness.

Yes.

Its seems it just for fun, not farming goldz.

Obvious troll is obvious

/signed

The way it currently works in Fracts and dungs is terrible.

Fix this.

shadowraiden.8394:

Mac.3872:

CureForLiving.5360:

Why would ANet go through the effort of making and supporting a VoIP service when they can just shift all that effort on third parties?

It does seem a tad ‘unprofessional’

alot less unprofessional then having a voice client built in that is extremely poor quality(played thousands of games with built in and they all suck in quality) that also causes extreme lag on the servers which barely handle the game in its current state.

Hyperbole.

hosting for the amount of people on gw2 would be huge and at a cost that lets face it would force anet to consider a monthly cost just to cover the voice servers alone.

Hyperbole.

Teamspeak/Mumble/Ventrillo have been developed over years and now are extremely reliable unless brought from bad host sites.

from what ive gathered you want it for dungeons well its not hard to find a group that do dungeons every day together and ask them if they wish to join a teamspeak/mumble or even skype but even then do u really need it for dungeons as lets face it dungeons are extremely easy.

personal opinion.

Lets focus on facts?

CureForLiving.5360:

Why would ANet go through the effort of making and supporting a VoIP service when they can just shift all that effort on third parties?

It does seem a tad ‘unprofessional’

Brother Grimm.5176:

Dark Catalyst.1028:

No. It would be too easily abused in game, just like dueling in PvE, therefore we can’t have it.

Wow….dig up any dead horses lately….(and do you wanna use my club or are you just gonna use the shovel)?

While the thought of an integrated VoIP communication is valid, the SUPPORT costs and issues would be horrific. Everything from voice lag to cursing would spawn endless issues the just don’t have to deal with now. Anyone that want voice communications can get it from a variety of 3rd party apps and services.

But it not being in the game is obviously a conspiracy to prevent PvE dueling….

Hi, it is an honour to have someone with ur in-depth knowledge on the subject joining the discussion.

Can you please provide us with an detailed breakdown of the support costs?

Also

Can you elaborate on these endless issues? you mention lag and cursing (which is something we already have in-game) and everything in between. What exactly is the in between?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Noob

Blude.6812:

Mac.3872:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Mac.3872:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Thanks for the information.

I feel an in-game voice comm would be far more reliable than third-party software, not to mention more convenient for Ad-hock grouping.

Definitely something you guys should consider implementing , especially if you intend to develop more dungeons and fractals, or dare I say it? raids.

See below:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

I’ve used all three, and they work well. No need to spend money to reinvent the wheel, when you can get the wheel for free.

I have also used all 3 and in my experience they can go down for hours, usually at the worst possible time too.

Is that truely your experience?

Yes.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

Its not a very realistic thing to suggest that people should alt tab out of the game and set up a channel on a third party programme each and every time they want to group up for dungeons etc.

I pretty much only do dungeons these days and I have never had a need for voice comm. I only PUG with the LFG tool. Pretty much everything can be communicated easily in party type chat. There are only 5 players involved and the dungeons give time to type in chat what people need to do in between encounters for those that don’t know.

Are we talking about the same game? Most people dont even read the chat- especially the new inexperienced players.

Why?

Probably because everyone is busy rushing through them without pausing for a breath.

rush rush rush zerk zerk zerk. Noob = kick

Aint nobody got time to type.

Its definitely the best of a bad bunch.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Mac.3872:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Thanks for the information.

I feel an in-game voice comm would be far more reliable than third-party software, not to mention more convenient for Ad-hock grouping.

Definitely something you guys should consider implementing , especially if you intend to develop more dungeons and fractals, or dare I say it? raids.

See below:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

I’ve used all three, and they work well. No need to spend money to reinvent the wheel, when you can get the wheel for free.

I have also used all 3 and in my experience they can go down for hours, usually at the worst possible time too.

It wouldnt be reinventing the wheel- it would be adding a beneficial feature to GW2 that already exists, or will exist, in many other games.

I would mention that I`ve seen countless pug group fail and quit simply because they arent able to communicate effectively in real time during combat, so they get frustrated and /rage quit. Its not a very realistic thing to suggest that people should alt tab out of the game and set up a channel on a third party programme each and every time they want to group up for dungeons etc.

The quality can actually be very good. I guess it depends on how much the company spend on the feature.

My idea of the voice comm would be that once you create a group of 2-5 players those players would then be able to push to talk to one another without having to download and run a ‘trustworthy’ third party programme.

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Thanks for the information.

I feel an in-game voice comm would be far more reliable than third-party software, not to mention more convenient for Ad-hock grouping.

Definitely something you guys should consider implementing , especially if you intend to develop more dungeons and fractals, or dare I say it? raids.

Your very valid reasons came with absolutely no supporting evidence. Your making assumptions.

As an in-game voice comm is a feature you would refuse to use for reasons you have recently mentioned, one has to wonder why you continue to post on the subject.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Scrambles.2604:

I saw this thread and wanted to make a satirical comment about how we shouldn’t have in game voice comms because it would lead to abuse. Trogdor beat me to it, haha.

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community. Thanks for acknowledging it would lead to abuse though. You are right, more tools that facilitate abuse is not necessarily a good thing for the community as a whole.

If you feel GW2 has such a positive community- one worth maintaining ,then does`nt that suggest that the risk of in-game voice comms leading to abuse is relatively low?

Quoting myself to give you a second read since you missed it the first time.

JustTrogdor.7892:

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community.

I get it, you want voice com. You don’t want to hear anything that is against your suggestion. Personally, I couldn’t care less if there was a GW2 voice channel. I’d keep it off because I don’t want to listen to a bunch of people yelling things like, “YOLO I’m so swag.” That doesn’t change the fact that with your idea there are problems Anet would have to dedicate resources to resolve.

Ah now I see- you have created a strawman due to your dislike of the GW2 community. nice, man.

also

Yes of course they would need to spend time and resources to implement it- I dont deny that, thats past of running a business.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Scrambles.2604:

I saw this thread and wanted to make a satirical comment about how we shouldn’t have in game voice comms because it would lead to abuse. Trogdor beat me to it, haha.

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community. Thanks for acknowledging it would lead to abuse though. You are right, more tools that facilitate abuse is not necessarily a good thing for the community as a whole.

If you feel GW2 has such a positive community- one worth maintaining ,then does`nt that suggest that the risk of in-game voice comms leading to abuse is relatively low?

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I don’t think they have the software built into the game. They have the markers another software application can use to determine location built into the game.

I believe, somewhere/sometime a Dev once responded on this matter, and stated the company would not be adding voice chat to the game.

That`s discouraging to read , but Im well aware that what a dev says on a Monday may not be what he says on a Tuesday xD

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

Possibly a Term of service agreement would need to be accepted.

I`m not sure how other game companies cover themselves from liability, but I`m sure Anet could do the same.

I imagine they would add a new option under the report function ./Voice abuse

Probably more trouble than it is worth since there are a number of 3rd party programs out there already. Also again, /voice abuse, what is Anet supposed to do, keep countless hours of voice chat logs and then spend who knows how many man hours listening to them to figure out if the abuse occurred and then figure out who did it?

I’m sorry, I know your suggestion had good intentions, I just don’t see it happening. The resources involved in implementing such a thing would be huge. The possible liability, probably not worth the effort.

It seems they already have the software built into the game, so cost should not be an issue.

So it comes down to liability- which a cleverly worded ToS should take care of, maybe.

(sorry to keep disagreeing with you , but its something I would love to see implemented)

They have audio monitoring built into the game already? You mean they already can record hundreds of hours of voice chat across NA and EU servers and then when they get a report of abuse go to the specific time frame of the abuse and review it? Then figure out who was the abuser? How do you know this?

I know it seems as easy as a ToS change, but it isn’t always that easy. I know it is something you want implemented, hence your OP. I just don’t think it is as easy as you think it is.

Perhaps all software required is not already built in but it can be implemented.
To answer your question: I know this because other- much smaller companies already do this.

I dont think it is as difficult as you think it is.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

Possibly a Term of service agreement would need to be accepted.

I`m not sure how other game companies cover themselves from liability, but I`m sure Anet could do the same.

I imagine they would add a new option under the report function ./Voice abuse

Probably more trouble than it is worth since there are a number of 3rd party programs out there already. Also again, /voice abuse, what is Anet supposed to do, keep countless hours of voice chat logs and then spend who knows how many man hours listening to them to figure out if the abuse occurred and then figure out who did it?

I’m sorry, I know your suggestion had good intentions, I just don’t see it happening. The resources involved in implementing such a thing would be huge. The possible liability, probably not worth the effort.

It seems they already have the software built into the game, so cost should not be an issue.

So it comes down to liability- which a cleverly worded ToS should take care of, maybe.

(sorry to keep disagreeing with you , but its something I would love to see implemented)

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

Possibly a Term of service agreement would need to be accepted.

I`m not sure how other game companies cover themselves from liability, but I`m sure Anet could do the same.

I imagine they would add a new option under the report function ./Voice abuse

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

This game seems like it would seriously benefit by having it’s own voice client so teammates could talk to each other in real time without the need for a 3rd party system each player may or may not have access to.

So I was just wondering, is there a plan to have an in-game voice communication client available? And if not currently, do you think this would be worth considering.

Why would we need a ‘Trinity’ to stack in a corner and spam 1?

I got the ascended boots and shoulders to drop in the space of 2 day from a level 11 fractal.

Go figure.

I dont age.. I level up!

Currently level 37 xD

This is not the best outfit EVER!

Its just a tribute.

Harper.4173:

I agree – Legendary Armor if implemented well could be a great success. What do i mean by that?

1.Build it off existing Ascended armor.
2.Give us decent skins – not like with Ascended.
3.Give us the option to turn off the flashy pew-pew effects that will most likely give us seizures.
4.Make the skins look good – I cannot stress this enough.
5.Make them have the same stats as ascended – we don’t need more power creep – i again cannot stress this enough. Changing stats is fine but it shouldn’t be numerically better.

I would love to see legendary armour implemented in this way.

How do I “casual?”

I play guild wars 2.

The seasons I dislike the effects the megaserver has had on world bosses is that now there are way to many people at the event, which means a lower frame-rate and more particle effects. Its becoming a slide-show of red, green, blue.

The events seem to scale really badly too. I think Anet have a real job to do to get the scaling right on these bosses.

I`m fairly confident, though, that the current situation is not the end product , and is still very much a work in progress for Anet. (at least, I really, really hope so.)

Megaserver has destroyed any enjoyment I had for running world bosses.

6 Characters.
5 level 80s.
0 world completion.

Natsu Dragneel.1625:

Gotta love being in Australia, I love my 3am updates!

What is it like to live in the future?

Are there hover-boards?

Zepidel.5349:

Neko.9021:

Recently in the dungeon subforum someone complained about the difficuluty of TA Aetherpath. The puzzles are distinct and the mechanics are strictly enforced. All the mobs must be fought and it’s pretty hard to just shrug off the mechanics of every enemy since they all hit fairly hard. The path itself is decently challenging.

Also, no one runs it.

The thing is, people hardly run dungeons at all. And the dungeons that do have uniquely hard mechanics or are challenging in any discernable way are just never run by the general community.

ANet has no incentive to create interestig enemies at a small-scale level because players have proven by their own play habits that by and large they prefer easy, grindy, mindless content, whether that is open world champ training or getting to fight in a huge zerg in WvW and run over people and call yourself a great PvPer. The entire system of GW2, for all of its great possibilities of small, precisely timed and skillfully played combat, truly encourages people to play at the lowest common denominator, and their attempts to make small content that is difficult has been spurned by the community in favor of more zerg farming and easy path farming if they actually DO dungeons. Sorrow’s Embrace might as well only have Path 1 and Path 3.

Anet can make unique and hard content like you said but why would they do that when most people would rather just do the easy and straightforward? Remember when AC2 used to be the most run path in the game. Now people hardly ever play it because the final boss actually requires a bit of effort, and people don’t want to put that in. ANet wants to make content people will play, not content that they won’t. There’s a reason they’ve abandoned dungeons.

It’s Anet’s fault.

TA aetherblade isn’t hard, you just need voice communication, or a group full or vets who know what to do. And the final boss is one of the easiest bosses in the game, its way too easy to res dead people in the fight due to the size of the room and how slow the boss moves.

The problem is why run that path when it takes 3x longer, and requires a good group when the rewards are exactly the same as F/U?

What we need is extremely hard dungeons/raid content that rewards ascended gear with it’s tokens.

I completely agree. Harder content NEEDS better rewards, or people will just take the path of least resistance.

I agree with the OP 100%.

All this game currently offers is farming and zergging, both of which get real boring real fast. I`ve only been playing 6 months and already I`m growing tired of farming and zergging the same kitten day after day.

When the best loot drop you can realistically expect is a basic t6 crafting mat, then yeah, the loot is pretty underwhelming.

This game needs a real kick up the backside.

The official MMO feedback form.

/snip* a long list of games offering unholy trinity game play, 99% of them are low class and unsuccessful and barely surviving. /snip*

Even if this was a fact, and not just your personal opinion, the holy trinity is not the reason for low quality , unsuccessful games.