Guild Wars 2

Wait, they just did another re-skin?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, oh wow, and people paid for it.

Such a cynical lack of creativity on display from the ArenaNet team here. They basically took an existing skin and applied a shader to it. It’s 10 minutes work at the most and requires the creative abilities of a trained monkey.

Kartel.2561:

I can’t help but wonder if these things were more an Anet decision, or NCSoft.

I know it’s tempting to blame shareholders and corporate controllers, but the reality is a little more subtle and nuanced.

Mike O’Brien, Patrick Wyatt and Jeff Strain founded ArenaNet.
Development of GW2 started when all of the founders were still around.

In 2009, Jeff Strain left ArenaNet to form Undead Labs, who went on to make the excellent and incredibly popular Xbox Live title “State of Decay”.

In 2010, Patrick Wyatt left ArenaNet to become Chief Operations Officer for En Masse Entertainment, who would later release “Tera”.

So that leaves Mike as the only founder still present.

And while there are certain names recognisable from the days of GW1 that still work for the company, like Gaile & Izzy (I have screenshots of Izzy setting off the Wurm invasion of LA in one of the Guild Wars betas ), one must assume that the rest of the company has similarly changed make-up.
Given the comments on various websites, ArenaNet seems to get through a lot of contractors and graduates, so I’d hazard a guess and say that less than a third of the original GW1 team still work at ArenaNet.

That being the case, it’s no wonder the company culture seems to have changed. And I’d also argue that employing more people new to the industry rather than veterans also results in people who are unsure of how to innovate, or not in a position with enough power to do so, so they stick with what’s tried and tested.

So while it’s tempting to blame NCSoft and Nexon for the radical shift in design philosophy, I think it’s better to acknowledge that ArenaNet simply isn’t the same company that started the Guild Wars franchise.

Heck, it’s not even the same as the company that released GW2.

Edit: Interesting development as of today: Patrick Wyatt now works for Undead Labs alongside Jeff Strain. That’s 2 out of the 3 founders of ArenaNet working for Undead Labs, probably on “Class 4”, the MMO version of Dead State.
My bet?
For innovation in the MMO space, watch those guys.

Henri Blanche.8276:

There are definitely certain facets of the game where the Warrior is way too OP. I have seven toons and none of them are Warriors. I refuse to play the game in tutorial mode.

Emphasis mine.
You’re hardly qualified to criticise a profession if you never play it.

I’d absolutely love to be able to make characters of all shapes and sizes in GW2.
The Saints Row games completely understand the value of giving their players complete creative control over their appearances, which is how I ended up with my lardy, cross-dressing Londoner:

The solution?
Get rid of achievements.
Maybe then people will realise they’re doing the same thing over and over again for no important reason and realise that the amount of quality content that gets released in these updates is laughably small.

Yup, even more reasons for never coming back. I really like the incredibly mobile form of play Deceptive Evasion encourages in its current state.

I’ve had an idea for an MMO for a while where players would actually start out at the highest power level, and as they levelled up, have typical MMO trappings and conveniences removed from them, replacing them with skill based mechanisms. For example, you’d start out pressing a hotbar icon to activate a skill, and at some point you’d have to learn how to reproduce that skill through a series of well timed button presses and combinations.
Then you’d look at high level characters who statistically would be the worst off in the game, but you would KNOW they’ve earned every last level.

Particularly in GW2, higher power gear makes content easier, meaning those who want better gear are admitting they can’t play the game without the crutch of increased stats.
Those who have top-end gear want to feel superior than those without it, even though technically they’re not playing at the same skill-level.

Yeah, it’s really just tongue-in-cheek commentary on gear tiers and how hypocritical they are.

The community and game seem obsessed with the idea that you should have to work hard to get your rewards.

Therefore, I propose that if you purposefully handicap yourself by playing in lower quality gear, you should get better rewards, as you’re having to play at a higher skill level.

Look, I usually find Vayne’s blind devotion to the game annoying, but on this point, you really can’t argue with him.
“Disappointing everyone” is a generalisation. You are stating that everybody playing the game is disappointed by it.
You really cannot prove this, and you cannot speak for others.

I have 2,450 hours on my account and 9,508AP. Zero hours played since the day before SAB2.

Yeah, Luigi’s Blue Coins. The added extra slippiness to Luigi’s movement made things just the little bit harder, but that was enough to drive me to distraction.

You should really revisit Doom as well. While it may seem that other games have surpassed it, something has definitely been lost over the years.
And that shotgun is STILL the best in gaming.

But I’ll shut up now, as I’m in danger of dragging the topic severely off.

Needless to say, vertical progression and grind? Don’t like ‘em, and they’re a big part of the reason I’m not playing GW2 any more.

I did 100% Mario Galaxy, and while it was frustrating at times, I never saw it than other than a test of my skill at playing the game.
One of those blue coin challenges in particular drove me to the brink, but I’d never say it was grind.

And I saw the ending of Doom for the umpteenth time quite recently thankyouverymuch (20 years old and still kicking phenomenal amounts of tail, especially with Brutal Doom).
The play through both that and Doom 2 were refreshing blasts from a past when levels were abstract because designers realised it was the gameplay that counted and not the slavish recreation of reality.
:D

Tobias, I usually agree with your posts, but I think your definition of “Grind” has become incredibly distorted.
Come on, really, quicksave/quickload is a grind?
And even then, if you’re quicksaving and quickloading too much, you’re probably playing at a level beyond your ability.

But even then I don’t think you can equate it to grinding.
Grinding is mindlessly repeating the same activity hundreds or thousands of times for minimal reward. More often than not, that activity will be identical to the previous time you did it.

In a quicksave / quickload scenario, if you’re anything like me, you’re doing it because you’re approaching the scenario in different ways in order to perfect it. You’re not doing the same thing every time, you’re honing your technique, gradually narrowing down on the best way you can achieve a certain goal in a certain game.

Take a recent game for example: Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance.
I’d played it on the PS3 before and gladly bought it when it came out on PC.
I played certain sections over and over again; not because it was making a progress bar go higher and pushing my power level higher. Because I wanted to master those sections, get through them without taking a hit. It wasn’t a grind, because I was learning the whole time, approaching things differently, experimenting, enjoying.
I didn’t find it a grind in the slightest.

But to refute your other attempted rebuttals (and I suspect you know you’re on shaky ground here):
Mario Galaxy and stars required to unlock levels.
Getting those stars involves a myriad of different activities. Indeed, you can’t get the same star twice, meaning every single one is different, therefore the very opposite of a grind.

RPGs with no grind:
I’ll go for the big one: Fallout.
Not Fallout 2, Tactics, Brotherhood, 3, or New Vegas.
The daddy: Fallout.
You grind in Fallout, you lose, as you have to achieve your objectives within a very tight time limit.

Or let’s go for Baldur’s Gate.
There’s really no opportunity to grind, as areas that you can revisit are rare and they don’t really re-populate with monsters. There are very few ways to grind in Baldur’s Gate, and your experience generally comes from fighting creatures in different places, exploring and talking to people.

Or how about Vampire Bloodlines?
Once a quest is completed, it’s gone, and usually the monsters, areas and NPCs associated with it. How do you grind there?

Deus Ex? Any of them? Tell me, where’s the grind?

Grind is running the champ train in Queensdale.
Running the ore veins in Orr.
World boss farming.
Invasion stopping.
Even repeating the same kitten jumping puzzle every day because you get a shiny at the end.

Anywhere where the variables and outcome are entirely predictable and easy allowing infinite repetition is where you’ll find grind.

I have a slightly different take on this. Recently, developers have gotten lazy with Day/Night cycles, with it just being a difference in how light or dark an area is.
However, there was a time when the time of day meant different dangers for the players to face.
I think it would be very refreshing for a lot of the zones south of LA if for example, the Risen only came out at night, with the day being populated by other dangers.

Raine.1394:

All games have grinds.

Sorry, going to be a pedant here, but it’s only because I see a lot off MMO gamers using the same quote.

MMOs are NOT “all games”.

Quake doesn’t have grind.
Doom doesn’t have grind.
Mario Galaxy doesn’t have grind.
Tetris doesn’t have grind.
Hell, there’s a lot of single-player RPGs out there that don’t even have grind.

Grind is a disease that’s particularly virulent in the MMO genre.
It really isn’t needed, but it’s one of the most basic tools in an MMO developer’s toolbox to ensure player retention. You know that eventually, players will exhaust all of your meaningful content, stop playing and therefore stop paying.

So you find artificial ways of extending the amount of time players are playing your game and therefore being exposed to your monetisation systems. Things like time-gated materials, equipment damage, achievement points, etc. All of these epitomise the idea of “grind”. Increasing a progress bar by repeating the same content continuously for a lengthy period of time. Thus ensuring that the developers have more time to sell you more crap.

How I feel at the moment?
It’s doing nothing to draw me back into playing.
It’s like watching a child get it wrong over and over again, failing to understand why it’s gradually losing all of its friends.

And having taken a step back from it to observe it at a distance, it’s disgusting exactly how much of the game is currently focussed on monetisation.
Out of curiosity, I went to GW2spidy the other day to confirm something I have long suspected.
Over time, the exchange rate between gems and gold has only climbed. It has never plateaued or declined.
What does this tell us?
That ArenaNet have designed the economy so that eventually it’ll be more attractive to spend real world money on gems in order to get gold than to get the things you want through gameplay.
On September the 10th, 2012, shortly after release, 100 gems would buy you 19S65C.
To buy a hundred gems would have cost you 27S47C.
Today, 100 gems buys you 5G34S34C, while 100 gems will cost you 7G39S85.
These figures will only increase over time.
I predict that in a couple of years, 100 gems will buy you a substantial amount of a cultural tier 3 armour set, if not all of it.

While in mechanical terms, you can’t call GW2 “Buy to Win” (cash won’t increase your power level), if you consider that much of the game focuses around cosmetic items being the main rewards for playing the game, then GW2 very much IS “Buy to Win”. Especially when most of the work on new cosmetic items seems to go into gem shop items.

Edit: Oh, and an interesting thing for everyone to consider if the economy continues its current trend: Eventually, one fine transmutation stone will cost more gold than an entire set of tier 3 cultural armour.

While items that can be gained through gameplay will continue to lose their value over time thanks to this broken, one-sided economic model, items in the cash shop will remain a constant, real-world price.

You know Cevlakohn, you reminded me of something.
Even though I was never a massive fan of fractals (playing them more than a few times simply got boring for me), when they released them I thought I understood what would happen next. The format’s ideal for adding a new fractal every month or so to mix things up, eventually allowing for an incredibly diverse selection of 3 every time. But nope, that didn’t happen.

1: Tying stats to gear. Always an incredibly bad decision, it’s a case of following the MMO herd.
It limits build flexibility massively and is probably the most bone-headed decision ArenaNet made when developing GW2.

2: Over-reliance on spiky, over-sized, glowing gear design. Subtlety is hard to find in GW2.

3: Achievement points and the rewards associated with them. I thought the title grind in GW1 was bad enough, but achievements as they are used in GW2 are an incredibly cynical piece of game design, keeping the players playing whilst investing the minimum development assets needed. It’s operant conditioning.

4: Blatant monetisation and the over-arching importance of “The Economy”.
All other design decisions take a back seat to “The Economy”. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: If a game focuses more on “The Economy” than the game, you’ve failed at making a game.

5: Time-gated materials. It’s really just a sub-problem of 3 of the previous ones, but it accentuates points 1, 3 and 4 dramatically, making what should be a fun pastime (playing the game), a grinding chore as you repeat the same old content day-in, day-out in order to meet your quota. It’s like having a job.

All this talk of vanquishing does give me an idea; sorry, not one related to the open world, but dungeons.
Currently, the standard way of playing dungeons seems to be to skip as many mobs as possible.
I reckon they should implement a vanquishing mode in dungeons that rewards killing every last thing. Just progress towards a title and some cash, nothing major.

The last thing this game needs is more checklists of monotonous, repetitive tasks to be completed.

Subdue.5479:

YOU CAN CHOOSE NOT TO MAKE ASCENDED ITEMS. NOT MAKING THE ASCENDED ITEMS DOES NOT LOCK YOU OUT OF ANY CONTENT.

I’m going to use your dirty little trick against you and lordkrall: Not having Ascended gear DOES lock you out of some game content: High-end Fractals.
No ifs, no buts.
No Ascended gear?
Your Fractal progression is locked to a certain level.

They can add you without your permission and track your activity Morrigan .
Let alone which, the only solution to it in the game at the moment, to change your status to “Invisible”, can’t be set as default and makes you invisible to everyone, not just those you don’t want following you.
That is, you have to set your status to invisible every time you log in. For a brief period after logging in, your status will be visible to anyone following you.
It’s pretty kitten awful from an online privacy point of view.

Yeah, this has been requested a lot since the game went live, but ArenaNet haven’t acted on it.
It allows people to stalk other players, which is really not on at all.

I often think about how they could make control work in PvE without players being able to exploit it or breaking it for PvP, and it’s a tough problem. And it’s something I think all MMO developers struggle with. I don’t think I’ve ever played a serious MMO that has solved this problem in a satisfying way.
I think we need to look at the roots of control as a mechanism to realise where developers have gone wrong.

Control is very much a staple of RPGs. And by RPG, I mean things like pen & paper D&D, and traditional single-player CRPGs such as Fallout and the like.
With these, there has never really been the necessity for “Fair” balance that an MMO developer has to aim for. When it comes down to it, all other types of RPG are about enabling players to live out power fantasies.
Everyone wants to be the hero in the game they’re playing, and the experience and gameplay systems present in these games allow players to live out these fantasies. Control is an incredibly large part of said fantasies (in more ways than one).

But this just doesn’t gel well with a competitive gaming environment or one where it’s in the developer’s best interest to prolong the amount of time a player is exposed to their game.
If players can stun-lock, that breaks PvP and makes PvE content trivial if there are enough players to maintain that stun-lock.

Given that problem, I can see the thought process behind Defiant. On paper, it must seem like an elegant solution; grant temporary immunity to control based on the number of players in the encounter.
In practise, it results in two major problems for the player.

1: If only one hit in every so many can be a control one, chances are that the optimal control skill won’t be the one to be used unless the group fighting the champion are incredibly well co-ordinated. Although to be honest, all of the control skills have pretty much the same end result, so it doesn’t really matter which control skill it is, but it’s still frustrating if you’re winding up your maxed out Earthshaker only to have a Ranger steal your thunder with Point-Blank Shot.
Whatever way you look at it, control is being stolen from a player.

2: If only one hit in every so many can be a control skill, then those skills are less useful than just another damage skill. While the cooldown might be quick, you’re limited when you can use it as a control skill by the stack of Defiant. And you have to use that skill in order to decrease the stack. Yet control skills traditionally do less damage than pure damage ones, so you’re actually being less helpful than the player using skills that focus purely on dishing out damage. This further cements the choice of DPS weapons in the metagame resulting in increased homogeneity.

It doesn’t matter if you enjoy playing with skills or weapons that focus on control; you are provably less useful to have around than just another greatsword warrior.

So how do you solve it?

Maybe make it so control skills do more damage to targets under the effect of Defiant. It’s not the most satisfying solution; when I use a control skill, I generally want to see my target physically affected by that skill.
But it does mean that skills and weapons that focus on control no longer take a back seat to those that focus purely on DPS.

To be honest, I think they would have been better off making a game with no control skills at all if they were just going to include a monster ability that completely negates them.

Was the same at launch. It’s one of those long-standing quality of life issues that ArenaNet never got round to fixing. They concentrated on the Living Story and Ascended gear instead of improving and fixing what was already in the game.

The description that GW2 is “Skill-based” is somewhat misleading.

For example, Quake 3 / Live? That’s entirely dependent on your skill level.
You can have played for a decade or a month; how successful you are depends very much on your ability to play the game. There is a quick learning curve for map familiarity, movement skills and how each weapon or item works, but after that it’s purely down to how good a player you are.

Guild Wars 2 marketing sneakily relies on the fact that the primary way you interact with the game is through interface bar icons that have been called “Skills”.
To that end, when they say the game’s skill-based, they mean that you play it by clicking these icons.

Think of it this way: try renaming the category of game elements currently referred to as “Skills” to something absurd.

For example, let’s try “Cheese”.

The way you play the game is by choosing a weapon, whereupon you get access to 5 Weapon Cheeses. You also have to choose one Healing Cheese, 3 Utility Cheeses and an Elite Cheese.
Traits can affect how potent your cheeses are.
Equipment also affects the potency of your cheeses.

So when ArenaNet talk about the game being “Skill-based”, they really mean it’s “Cheese-based”.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying there is no skill involved in playing GW2. Far from it. There are still tests of hand-eye coordination present in GW2 that define skill-based play. Some of the purest examples being jumping puzzles.
It’s just that skill means one thing to ArenaNet and another to players.

Sorry Izzy, but I just don’t agree with time-gating full-stop, and your lists of pros and cons are all very well from a developer’s point of view, but from a player’s point of view?
Yeah, that’s a different story.

Firstly, why don’t I agree with time-gating at all?

On release, it wasn’t even in the game.
Nothing at all was time-gated.
That’s the game I bought and enjoyed playing.

Now why your pros and cons are messed up:

- Time gates help players with less time (If I can only play an hour a day, my time is more rewarded.)

Less time might mean less days per week or per month. If you miss one day with the current time-gating systems, you’re falling behind.
If you miss a month or more, you stand no chance of catching up with those people who are able to log in every day.
For me, this has created the very real scenario that no matter how much interesting content is released, I am unlikely to ever play the game again as long as time-gating is in effect.
The longer I stay logged off, the wider the gap grows between my characters and those of others still logging in. This actively decreases the appeal of Guild Wars 2 to me as time goes on.
There is no quick way to catch up thanks to all the time-gates in place.
Actually, from what I’ve read, you can buy a lot of the materials for Ascended gear from the trading post which will help you catch up. I don’t know, I stopped playing just before SAB2. So if I want to start playing again I suppose I could dump a whole truckload of real-world cash into gems.
Yeah, a huge pay-gate’s probably even worse than a time-gate.

Thanks to the above, it puts this con of yours into an entirely new light:

- Time gates hurt players with more time (by this I mean players with more time run up against time gates more and their time becomes less rewarded over time.)

I would argue that people with more time on their hands, those able to log in every day of every month? These are the ONLY people time-gating benefits.

Let’s look at time-gating from a philosophical point of view.

When it comes down to it, MMO developers need to keep people interested in their games so that they keep playing and hopefully, paying. This is the way you earn your living and the way shareholder’s earn a profit.
I get that; you need to earn a buck as much as I do.
When it comes down to it, there are two ways you can try to retain the interest of your audience.

1. Regularly release more content that relies on creation of artistic assets, such as new armour & weapon models, new areas, new dungeons, new jumping puzzles and new story elements.

2. Artificially increase the amount of time a player stays logged in through adding activities that have to be completed on a regular basis.

Point 1 is more expensive for developers, and if it’s to be in any way meaningful and satisfying to the players, it has to be substantial.

Point 2 is all round cheaper and easier for developers, yet runs the risk of alienating players, especially more casual ones.

To ArenaNet’s credit, they’re actually trying to do both.
But I think they’d be better off ignoring point 2 completely.

Look, let’s face it, when it comes down to it, you’re hoping that by increasing the amount of time people play, you’re also maximising their exposure to your monetisation systems.
The thing is, I would argue that your current system alienates your most valuable customers; those with less time to play because they’re more financially stable, most likely because they have commitments outside of the game.

The people logging in every day and playing 5 or more hours?
They can buy gems with gold. They have found all the best ways to make money in game.
Anything desirable that becomes available through the gem store, they can buy with gold. They’re not generating any revenue for you.
They’re hitting their time-gates and staying ahead of those unable to log as much time as them.

The people with less time available want something more meaningful than a shopping list of activities they need to repeat on a daily basis. They want to log in and experience something new and fun. In all likelihood, they’ve just finished work. The last thing they want at the end of the working day is to be presented with more tasks they have to complete.
That’s the kind of pressure they play games to get away from.

If you shift focus to pure content creation, you end up making things that everyone can enjoy. And if it’s permanent, they can enjoy it at their leisure, with no pressure to complete it in a mad 2 week rush.

Xenon.4537:

I’d love to see it happen, but it’s unrealistic and highly impractical.

See, I don’t think it is.
What if the 2 week Living Story releases were changed to releasing new skins every 2 weeks?
And I think the whole idea of community artwork submissions has legs too. Guild Wars 1 had LOADS of weapons that were designed by the community.

Sirendor.1394:

Aha. I think I see where you are going. For example heavy armour can have ‘berserker’ inscription: reflects itself in heavy armour with a typical look for a berserker? A heavy helm with horn for example. Carrion could look a little gloomy. Cleric could have some glow or other, or a particularly ‘elegant’ look.

Exactly.
Also, I need to re-iterate why stat flexibility shouldn’t be limited to one tier of gear.
With gear being expensive to acquire and store, people focus on building around a few tried and tested stat combinations; namely Berserker for PvE and Soldier’s for WvW.

Because of this, the predominant balance feedback, both statistical and verbal, that the ArenaNet receives will be centred around these stat combinations.

Balancing decisions will be based around this feedback.

This will further result in strengthening these stat combinations and weakening others, making the game become predictable and stale.

With freedom to experiment with all stat combinations whenever players please, feedback that the development team receives will highlight strengths, weaknesses and bugs in other stat combinations. This will hopefully lead to a more balanced game that’s less predictable and more open to rewarding canny planning.

Sirendor.1394:

Mungrul.9358:

I just want to say that while I agree changeable stats on gear should be implemented (a la Legendaries), it should NOT be limited to Ascended gear. I think we’re in danger of letting it become another carrot when it should be a feature throughout the gear system.

Different materials should yield different cosmetic appearances.

What does this last addition mean? Different stat combinations > different cosmetic looks?

The idea is that the material you craft the gear with doesn’t affect stats at all; rather it determines what the gear looks like. It means more work for the art team, yes, but when it comes down to it, one of the biggest complaints about crafted gear is the restricted set of appearances.

I just want to say that while I agree changeable stats on gear should be implemented (a la Legendaries), it should NOT be limited to Ascended gear. I think we’re in danger of letting it become another carrot when it should be a feature throughout the gear system.
Different materials should yield different cosmetic appearances.

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Hi Mun,

Just wanted to let you know that I have read your posts and that I do stay on top of the thread. I read it as often as I am able. The reason there is no reply to the Vertical post you made is that I feel i have discussed those points in other responses. In regard to Horizontal I am focusing on Vertical currently so we can cap that conversation and move on.

Hope that makes sense?

Chris

Thanks for the response Chris.
Are you SURE you’ve addressed my VP thoughts though? They’re a little wild and radical compared to many of the other ideas in this thread.
Did you understand my point about weapon requirements for Engineers at the bottom of the pile and Warriors at the top?
I think that in particular highlights a very important flaw in GW2’s current system. Limiting build flexibility constrains balance feedback to that based on a very few stat builds. With a high percentage of feedback being based on few builds, the developers responsible for balance will naturally balance the game around those builds.

Egads, how many times can I say “balance” in one paragraph?!

I want to post this here while Chris is active. At least that way my posts might be seen.

Thoughts on Vertical Progression
Levels
Geared Stats

Thoughts on Horizontal Progression
Cosmetics
Achievements

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Here is a crazy brainstorm idea, not in anyway indicative of our direction.

What if there was vertical progression in the Fractals with gear that increased in stats but when outside of the fractals defaulted back to BiS numbers?

I am asking this because it is going to generate some left field conversation not because I think it is or isn’t a good idea.

Chris

If outside of Fractals it was the same as Exotic level stats, this would be a massive improvement and would stay more true to what I understood the original intent of Ascended gear was.

Achievements
I feel that over time, this has become the most poisonous form of progression in the game.
It funnels players into grindy activities.
It fosters a sloppy development process where it’s simpler and cheaper to release “content” that focusses around easily implemented numbers-oriented activities rather than content that relies on rich lore and artwork.

In addition, making a lot of these temporary through the two-week Living Story cycle ensures that if a player does burn out and leave the game, they’re less likely to return, as they’ll feel they’ve missed out on achievements they’ll never be able to acquire.

Giving rewards for achievement tiers simply reinforces bad behaviour in both players and developers.

Over time, the game has become almost entirely about chasing achievements instead of the gameplay itself. If you’re not logging in daily and doing the daily achievement list, you’re not getting your laurels or APs, which means you’re falling behind on Ascended gear and you’re not progressing towards the next achievement tier.
With the 2-week cycle of temporary achievement driven content, this only amplifies, potentially leading to burnout and resentment (as in my case). The game starts to dictate that you spend a certain amount of time playing every day, otherwise you don’t deserve its rewards.

My proposal is to lessen the focus on achievement points and attempt to untie rewards from them, with titles being the only reward.
In addition, allow us to turn off the display of titles on ALL players, so we don’t have to be reminded of the achievement point system if we’d rather not participate in it.
Completely remove the idea of achievements that require excessive amounts of repetitive and unfulfilling gameplay, such as smashing dragon piñatas.

I think this would all dramatically improve the game and allow me to consider playing again.

Cosmetics
I understand that this is probably the most expensive option for ArenaNet to fully implement, but at the same time, I feel that this is what would be the most rewarding system of progression. GW1 was far better than GW2 at this, and even then it wasn’t perfect.

First problem with GW2’s cosmetics:
There’s just not enough variety in the appearance of crafted gear.
I propose that instead of materials affecting stat combinations, they should affect the appearance of gear. Yes, this would mean a massive amount of work for the art team, but it would result in a much more satisfying experience for the players.
In addition, some profession-specific cosmetics would really help.

Second Problem:
Changing appearance is a destructive process. If you have a very rare look for your one set of gear and another becomes available that you like, either through gameplay or the gem store, you completely lose the old look if you apply the new one. To retain multiple appearances requires a massive investment of time and money.
This results in some appearances being rarely seen as they sink further down the perceived desirability scale and characters appearing increasingly homogenised.

GW2 needs a cosmetic system like the one in DCUO, the best one out there at the moment.
In DCUO, you unlock styles for each gear piece as you play. At any time, you can change the appearance of any given gear piece to one you’ve previously unlocked. This feature doesn’t cost a cent. The cost is in acquiring the cosmetic appearance in the first place.
I feel that if it was implemented this way, this would be the best form of progression in the game.

Geared Stats
I think this is the biggest mistake ArenaNet made when moving from GW1 to GW2.
In GW1, gear affected armour level, health and effectively, traits (minimally).
It did not limit a build as it didn’t affect the end result of skills massively. It was a nigh on perfect disconnect between gear and stats. A player was free to change build at will if they found their current build wasn’t suited to the current situation. They weren’t restricted by having to invest heavily in multiple sets of gear.

In GW2 this changed to be more in-line with other, more traditional MMOs.
Gear contributes massively to stat distribution. As there are so many potential distributions of traits, gearing for every last potential scenario becomes ridiculously expensive.
And this affects certain classes more than others.
For example, an Engineer only has 3 potential weapon combinations from a total of 4 weapons (rifle, pistol & shield, pistol & pistol)
A Warrior, at the other end of the scale, has 16 potential weapon combinations from a total of 11 weapons (2 swords, 2 axes, 2 maces, hammer, greatsword, rifle, longbow and shield)

There are currently 20 triple-stat combination listed on the wiki.
For every eventuality at Exotic gear level, this would require 80 weapons for the Engineer and 220 for the Warrior.
Armour and trinkets similarly would require 20 sets of each for full flexibility.
And I’m completely ignoring underwater gear and weapons.

So is it any wonder that people find the most effective stat combination and stick to that?
Gearing for every potential scenario would be prohibitively expensive, even at Exotic level (let alone impractical; you couldn’t buy enough bank space to outfit a single character for all potantial scenarios).
Don’t even consider thinking about Ascended.
As people settle in to playing with only one set of gear, the predominant balance feedback for the game will be centred around that gear combination, therefore over time, the game will tilt more and more towards being balanced around the most popular gear combination.
This is why only DPS counts and why the game is seen as being shallow.

I contend that at the very least, all levels of gear should allow you to choose your stat combination in the same way a Legendary weapon does. Ideally, gear shouldn’t affect stats outside of armour rating for armour and damage for weapons (with some special effects from runes and sigils).

Personally, a lot of the current “Progression” is what has driven me away from the game, and the continued addition of more only serves to keep reinforcing the likelihood that I won’t be returning to the game any time soon.

For me, current GW2 progression breaks down to:

Vertical Progression:
*Levels
*Geared Stats

Horizontal Progression
*Cosmetics
*Achievements

Levels
While I have one of every profession at 80, I increasingly found the levelling process more and more tedious. After I’d levelled my first 3 characters, I found I’d seen all of what the open world and personal story had to offer. My remaining characters increasingly relied on crafting to level.

I also found that the trait and skill system is far too reliant on having everything unlocked, and you really can’t get a proper feel for your character until you’ve reached level 80. Restricting skill slots and traits based on character level may have seemed like a good idea at the time, but instead, the player isn’t able to fully realise a profession’s potential until they’ve reached level 80. You can’t plan skill and trait synergy properly unless you’ve unlocked everything, and to that end, 80 levels with milestones every 5 after 10 is far too restrictive.

I think it would have been better to have a lower level cap in order for every level to feel like a milestone.
At the moment, a trait-line’s progression relies on trait points in increasing multiples of 5:
5 ,10, 15, 20, 25, 30
You don’t even start earning trait points until you’ve reached level 11.
The maximum trait points you can earn are 70, allowing for 2 trait-lines to be maxed out and one to reach a third (or any mix thereof). That means you only get a significant milestone every 5 levels, making those in between feel redundant.

I think it would have been better to make every level feel like a milestone, allowing a trait to be unlocked every level.
This would mean that maximum level should be 14, as this is the amount of traits available to a current level 80 character. Call it 15 and allow a character to start gaining trait points at level 2.
That cuts out a LOT of the unnecessary fluff. It would also allow for players to reach top level quicker, meaning more of the maps could be balanced for top level characters increasing dramatically the amount of “End Game” content.
At the moment, you have a high level simply for the sake of having a high number, and unfortunately this dissuades people from experimenting with other professions, as it takes too long for them to get a handle on how the profession feels. It also means that there are very few maps that feel balanced for end game.

Herr der Friedhoefe.2490:

Many small guilds simply never do these things because they don’t have the numbers for it.

This too. ArenaNet really screwed the pooch limiting accessibility to larger guilds only.

Paponzi.1637:

Anyone else thinking that many “problems” could be solved by simply enabling some sort of bodyblock feature while in combat?

You know, the first game had body blocking, and it was an incredibly useful, strategic feature. Warriors could block choke points to prevent monsters getting to the back line, minion master necros could very effectively blockade areas, it just added a huge extra element to the game.

Because with the focus on Living Story, the team haven’t got time to work on anything else. I get the feeling that guild missions were hurriedly forced into the game so ArenaNet could say there was at least SOME reason for being in a guild.

I think you need to consider splitting PvE into two categories to fully realise the potential of Rangers.
Let’s call them open-world and instanced.
Personally, I found Ranger to be the absolute best class for open-world PvE and exploration. They’re hardy and have a lot of options, and the pets can end up confusing enemy AI. When it comes down to it, in open-world, they’re one of, if not the best class at running away when things get hairy.
Guard was almost as good effectively as Ranger for open-world, but was a lot more boring with limited weapon options.

I didn’t play too many instances when I played (if you’re playing instanced content, I’d argue you’re not really playing an MMO), and one of my friends who is a die-hard Ranger would claim otherwise, but I felt Rangers just have too many flaws to be effective in instances.

Granted it’s more focussed on single player games, but I feel it’s still relevant to this topic…

Stop arguing with Smooth Penguin, you’ll never convince him otherwise, and his continual support of Ascended almost verges on trolling. Indeed, his blind devotion to support of it is what keeps these threads heated.

With every update they release now, I get further away from ever playing this game again.
Every update includes more grind, more pointless shiny baubles, and very little actual content, especially permanent.
Every release of goals that require a massive investment of time pushes me farther behind the curve hence lessening my desire to return as a second-class citizen of Tyria.

The longer I stay away, the less appealing the game becomes.

There is no initiative on ArenaNet’s behalf to tempt back relapsed players, and new players who do their research before buying will be confronted by a massively time-gated wall of “progression”.

Julenal.3907:

Colour coding shouldn’t be problem as there are over 400 dyes and if commanders get RBG slider amount of possible colours is bigger than screens can produce.

Sorry, I wasn’t clear with my idea. If there are too many colours, there is more chance of not being able to distinguish between certain ones at a glance. With limited colours, they can each be a distinct one that is impossible to confuse with others. It’s a user interface design issue.

Here’s what may be a controversial idea; how about limiting the number of commanders per team and per map?
From a programming point of view, it makes colour-coding different commanders easier as you can choose from a set number of distinctive colours.
And while people may object to a limitation, I can’t help but feel that it would promote more coherent teamplay. I would say that maybe 8 commanders maximum per map per team would be a good limit, maybe even less.
I think it would allow for more clearly defined goals.