That’s my point. For example, if the discontent about ascended gear expressed on the forums were proportional to its acceptance by players in general, Anet would have noticed an extreme drop in logins, ascended gear purchases, and fractal runs. After collecting data for several months it would be obvious that the new tier of gear was not welcome and they would have reversed or abandoned their treatment of it.
The result? Legendaries upgraded to ascended tier with the introduction of weapons and later ascended armor. If the majority of their players hated ascended gear and refused to use it, why would they introduce the rest of the gear? Because they want to lose their jobs after driving away the remaining players?
Of course not! They went forward with their plans because their data showed that the majority of their players accepted, if not welcomed, the new tier of gear. MMOs are long-term games and need long-term goals to retain players. Anet knows this and is introducing more long term goals for players to go after. Those who want everything handed to them right now are the minority, and most likely to drift away when there’s nothing left to work for and a new game comes along. Those players who are committed to obtaining a full set of gear and/or Legendaries are far more likely to stay with the game as competing products are released.
This is poor logic.
Historical data shows us that leading a large army into Russia in the winter is a recipe for disaster. Now, since the data shows this, you would think that everyone would learn their lesson from the data, yes? Well, explain to me why a certain German dictator decided to ignore the data from Napoleon’s failure and invade Russia in the winter.
Bottom line: People don’t always make sensible decisions with the information they have, and just because they’ve made a decision doesn’t mean that data exists to justify it.
I really don’t understand threads like this. Should be closed. It’s a post that should be a reply on a thread, not a thread itself. It offers no room for constructive criticism, absolutely pointless post, and all it does is try and make other peoples excitement fade. If you think that there is nothing coming and it’s all a load of bullkitten then just leave. Seriously. Obviously you want it to be good or else you wouldn’t post a pointless thread like this. Try and look at the glass half full, not half empty. And please don’t reply to this post with the “I’ve been playing this game this long, and Anet did this and that and this and that, and this is just going to be another one of those and so I have a right to post this” kinda reply because that’s all anyone ever says when someone makes a reply like mine. Try to have some optimism. Thanks.
Cush
Well the obvious solution to that would be for you to not make yet another post like this then, wouldn’t (silly word censor here) it. If you think this thread is all a load of ____ then just leave. Seriously. (saying seriously makes it more serious).
Could you imagine a world where no one ever complained about anything? Really think about that for a while. Seriously. Think how much more large corporations would extort us and how many less rights we would have today if no one ever complained or let the higher-ups know how we felt.
Not everyone has to live their lives with the same philosophical values as you do.
Thanks. (you can see my username on the left-hand side so I wont bother signing my post)
You’re argument doesn’t make sense because the content isn’t even out yet so you can’t even criticize it. Now if the content was out and you made a thread about what you didn’t like and about Anet disappointing you then it would completely make sense but the fact that he and you is saying that whatever they come out with is kitten when you don’t even know what it is makes no contribution at all and doesn’t affect anything but other people’s optimism which just isn’t good for anything. Make sense? Thanks.
Cush
(love seeing someone trying to critisize how someone types a post to help promote their argument, LOL) Thanks.
Cush….again OH, and my username is on the left of the screen too except it has some numbers after it
One of the criticisms is a recycled model. The content doesn’t have to be released yet for that to be a valid criticism. Your point isn’t meritorious.
If the purpose was to have fun, why aren’t those things fun?
(Preempting the “fun is subjective” argument)
They are to plenty of people.
If you keep playing a game you don’t have fun with that means you have a problem.
I don’t play. I stopped playing maybe 6-7 months ago. I desperately hope for improvements, so I follow patches closely. I read the forums to see what’s going on. I’ve posted maybe 4 times in as many months. I want to like the game, I really do; yet I just can’t.
That being said, if ANet’s purpose was to create actual fun content, you wouldn’t see the same gripes over and over about content being boring, shallow, and derivative.
Ascended weapons and armor may be here to stay, but I’m not. Once a game becomes a chore, I tend to stop playing it. I’d advise others to do the same and move on to entertainment that’s…well…entertaining.
Can guarantee laurel cost will be between 5 and 10 for ascended weapons/armor. Keep in mind, there will be a ridiculous amount of other hoops to jump through as well…hoops which many will find tedious.
You don’t see people running crap builds within the top 200 or so of the leaderboard. Both sides of this argument should take a minute to think about why that is.
It would create (or increase) the perception that ANet created a horribly faulty system just to make a few extra bucks. Not the PR I’d want as a company.
I’m curious how you know they were synced teams. I’ve played about 16 games (most containing the players on the first page of the leaderboard) so far and have yet to see this.
That’s funny, a rank 50 S/D thief today told me that, as a necro, I was everything wrong with PvP. This was after I won a 2v1 vs. him and his necro buddy.
Solo Q is Solo Q. It’s random. 1 match and after that the team breaks apart. it doesn’t matter if you group with same ranks or your rank discrepancy is huge. it’s like a one night stand. either you get some good kitten and you get some bad kitten
TeamQ———————-> if you complain
So your argument is if I complain I go TeamQ?
No thanks.
I am playing the game like you play the game, so I will stick in here and complain.
You basically want SoloQ to be TeamQ reading from the generic complaints. So as if nothing happened with the update.
SoloQ has elements that sets it apart from TeamQ. if you want soloq to be teamQ, there is still teamQ.,
You are completely wrong.
I want a good matchmaking system like it is with other games. I want people who don’t care about soloque to stay at a place for ever. I don’t come to WvW or to PvE and mess about.
Have you played other games?
Cause really if you are defending this you are either ignorant or being paid by Arenanet.
don’t think I’ve hardly seen anyone below r40 in the last 16 matches (bar one rank 8 lol)
Might be because you’re not playing prime time cruuk, at least on eu it’s the afternoon.
Tell that to the team I just had with ranks: 52, 39, 24, 15, 1
Listen, I’m really sorry that your self-esteem suffers because the legendary you thought would bring you love and admiration instead brought you only indifference, but trying to pass your misinterpretation of my words off as reality won’t bring you the respect you so desperately crave. Look around, in fact, it’s brought you lots of posters that probably disdain you now, due to your immature attitude.
Im right, cause u bad? Well. Expected attitude.
Looks like I hit the nail on the head there.
I hope it weal heal sometime. This nail doesnt help u to think reasonably. ^^
What a surprise, another total failure to understand the post.
I honestly don’t try to put myself into the heads of video game developers. It’s a scary place I have desire to visit…like Mississippi.
Sadly I know some really good developers, at least one of whom is rather up front and the few times I talked we had interesting discussions. Another who gave me some pointers on how to look at games from a metagame angle . . .
And not all the developers are for MMOs or video games, mind. Want to see a scary place? Try M:TG developers’ minds.
No doubt. I would just really hate to be living in a state where I had to make sure my artistic vision suited a publisher’s business expectations, rabid fans’ complaints, other developers’ visions, and math.
Listen, I’m really sorry that your self-esteem suffers because the legendary you thought would bring you love and admiration instead brought you only indifference, but trying to pass your misinterpretation of my words off as reality won’t bring you the respect you so desperately crave. Look around, in fact, it’s brought you lots of posters that probably disdain you now, due to your immature attitude.
I honestly don’t try to put myself into the heads of video game developers. It’s a scary place I have no desire to visit…like Mississippi.
But no, I see what you’re saying. My point is simply this: if the absolute value of an ascended item is 15 days, they would not be obtainable through RNG fractal chests. We can say the value is close to 15 days, but even that becomes muddy. How are we defining days? I get my laurels entirely through PvP. 3 matches a day and I’m done. That’s less than 30 mins. Are we then defining days as 30 min play sessions? See how trying to establish the absolute value of an item is problematic?
So then, for the purposes of analogies, using 15 days as the measure of an ascended item’s absolute value is flawed, yes?
All analogies are flawed. It’s like trying to create a perfect sphere from a block of wood with sandpaper and bare hands only.
Yes, but to use your imperfect analogy as an imperfect analogy, using 15 days as the measure of value is like using a football as a measure of a perfect sphere…for the wood-sanding guy.
Why are we ensuring an arbitrary 15 days minimum? I must have missed that part of the conversation.
Because a single ascended piece is set at 20 laurels. you can get a maximum of 40 laurels per month thus 20 laurels take 15 days to get on average.
The 20 laurels price is specific. They could have priced each part to any amount of laurel they choose. They priced it at 20 because they want a 1 per 15 day acquisition rate.
That’s how I thought you’d answer.
Question: If any given piece of ascended gear is worth 15 days, then how is it possible to get a ring from one level 10 fractal run? If Anet truly wanted the price of a piece of ascended gear to be 15 days, they wouldn’t have included this.
I can answer that:
They wanted it to be RNG or 15 days, from the assumptions of the timeframe. Therefore anyone really wanting it could farm for it from the Fractals or wait it out. Similarly, the Accessories and Guild Commendations.
. . . and no, I’m not saying the values are good, but that’s the theory I’ve determined is behind it.
So then, for the purposes of analogies, using 15 days as the measure of an ascended item’s absolute value is flawed, yes?
Why are we ensuring an arbitrary 15 days minimum? I must have missed that part of the conversation.
Because a single ascended piece is set at 20 laurels. you can get a maximum of 40 laurels per month thus 20 laurels take 15 days to get on average.
The 20 laurels price is specific. They could have priced each part to any amount of laurel they choose. They priced it at 20 because they want a 1 per 15 day acquisition rate.
That’s how I thought you’d answer.
Question: If any given piece of ascended gear is worth 15 days, then how is it possible to get a ring from one level 10 fractal run? If Anet truly wanted the price of a piece of ascended gear to be 15 days, they wouldn’t have included this.
Sure. And humans are blobs of flesh. But for some reason we dont call em that. We call them humans. So…Again. Why did u use word “pixels” there?
Because humans are not just blobs of flesh. They’re far more complex. However an image on a screen is not. It’s pixels. There’s no musculature. No skeletal system. No neural pathways. It’s just a collection of pixels.
Same as humans, legendarys are not just collection of pixels. Its accumulated efforts of designers, programmers and players, that bring them to life. Same as diplom not just a paper. It has words on it, u know. Same goes for car or any object. Thats why calling em “collection of pixels”, “paper” “blob of junk” is belittling. And u know it. U just act innocent and trying to convince me, that u just so stupid and dont understand it. But I know the truth. And any sane man, that read it, would understand it too.
Listen, I’m really sorry that your self-esteem suffers because the legendary you thought would bring you love and admiration instead brought you only indifference, but trying to pass your misinterpretation of my words off as reality won’t bring you the respect you so desperately crave. Look around, in fact, it’s brought you lots of posters that probably disdain you now, due to your immature attitude.
The P2W argument is actually quite valid. If they switch on to gold / mats they’ll have to make it really steep to ensure it takes 15 days minimum to everyone. Then people will feel this is just a ploy to get them to buy gems and convert them to gold. That will surely lead to a p2w feelings by people who will then feel its not feasible to get ascended armor without taking out your credit card.
One more reason why I feel the current system is a better idea.
Why are we ensuring an arbitrary 15 days minimum? I must have missed that part of the conversation.
It all depends if you believe they are significantly better or not.
If you don’t think the items are significantly better, you simply don’t care. Gate it, don’t gate it, it doesn’t affect me directly other than how it affects the general population in the game. This group doesn’t understand what the big deal is.
If you think they are significantly better, then you care about frequency of play time. If you can play frequently but not a lot of hours, then time gating favors you. If you can play a lot but not frequently you hate time gating (along with the WANT NOW crowd).
It’s my contention that the “can play frequently but not many hours” are the majority of players in an MMO. These players stay around for longer in a game than those who can play a lot of hours, “beat the game” in their mind and then move on to the next MMO, only coming back when new content is added for the day or two it takes them to finish and then they are gone again. Of those two groups, which group as a whole will spend more cash in the shop? Which group makes the world seem more alive? That ultimately determines who the devs believe should be catered to if a choice has to be made.
My point was simply that some defenders of the current system believe both to be true, when that’s not possible.
Context:
Being able to purchase Laurels with Gems.
Regardless of being able to purchase Gems with Gold, this is still a Pay-to-Win method of attaining Laurels, due to the fact that paying real money is paying for convenience.
I think we have very different definitions of win. To me convenience does not equate to winning. Heck, I’d jest that someone using real money to buy laurels is actually losing.
To be honest, I’m not concerned with the other games you listed, because we’re not discussing them. We’re discussing GW2.
And my point was that GW2 isn’t P2W. My point was that the closest you’ll get to calling GW2 P2W is the soft-boosts which don’t give you a notable boost in the first place.
P2W doesn’t necessarily mean: “I pay $10, I’m stronger than you.”, but there is no real clear-cut definition. If you go ahead and google Pay to Win then you’ll receive numerous responses that get summed up with something along the lines of:
Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying.
And while that quote was taken from urbandictionary, it summed up the P2W experience far better (in a single statement) than all the other posts I had quickly browsed through.
Allowing players to purchase Laurels with real money would, in fact, let players buy better gear and allow them to make better items than everyone else at a faster rate.
However, on the flip side, it wouldn’t necessarily make the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying, but that’s not to say that it would create a lot of complaint and drive a lot of people from the game, which is what developers do not want. (A lot of players, especially players from GW1, play GW2 because it’s ridiculously hard and inefficient to try and be P2W. Why pay $50 to hit level 80 when you can just work for it? Plus, if you level up normally, you get experience with your profession as opposed to just having an 80 of that profession and sucking majorly.)
That’s all well and good, and we’re in agreement, but it’s pretty far off topic now isn’t it?
We were discussing the acquisition of ascended gear through time-gated laurels. You implied that ascended gear wasn’t the chief cause of complaints against time-gated laurels. I asked you to find me some posts showing this. I’m still waiting on that.
Context:
Being able to purchase Laurels with Gems.
Regardless of being able to purchase Gems with Gold, this is still a Pay-to-Win method of attaining Laurels, due to the fact that paying real money is paying for convenience.
I think we have very different definitions of win. To me convenience does not equate to winning. Heck, I’d jest that someone using real money to buy laurels is actually losing.
To be honest, I’m not concerned with the other games you listed, because we’re not discussing them. We’re discussing GW2.
Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd so your point being? The very first quote is taken out of context and the rest is unflattering with the first out of context.
Explain how the first quote is out of context. Someone had thrown out the idea of ascended items being purchasable with gems and what’s quoted above was your response in its entirety.
Furthermore, how does chopping my quote up further this discussion at all? It certainly doesn’t help whatever point you were trying to make.
My point was to do exactly what you asked of me. Provide you with your own words. If you’d please, maybe verify the claim that it’s not ascended items that are causing the laurel complaints, but the other items that can be purchased.
Also making the game become a pay-to-win game instead of a buy-to-play game.
it isn’t already?
In what ways is it a P2W game?
That’s not my quote. I never claimed it was a P2W game.
And neither was my quote about players complaining about laurels. I never complained about laurels.
I think you’re confusing yourself.
Really? Then when and where did I complain about laurels?
Where did I say you complained about them?
Then explain how I’m confusing myself. Because that’s the only context I got out of “you’re confusing yourself.”
You said you would verify a specious claim you made earlier if I answered a question you asked of another poster. I pointed out that I was not that poster and didn’t hold true his claims. You responded with an assertion that I do not question, but does not relate to the specious claim I asked you to verify.
Quotes please? I’m too tired right now to go back and search through my own posts to verify a claim you’re making.
Sigh. I didn’t make the claim. You did. I asked you to verify it.
In essence, you tried to state that if ascended gear was not purchasable through laurels, people would still complain about laurels as currency. I asked if you would provide some posts the show complaints about laurels stemming from the other purchasable items, not ascended gear.
And one more time:
What claim did I make?
Give me MY WORDS (aka a quote).
Why am I asking this? Because I don’t post in just one thread in the existence of the forum, I don’t remember everything I’ve posted (but I do know the gist of what I post, as I do know enough about myself). If you are claiming that I have claimed something which seems off, you’re either missing the point (or context) or you’re imagining things.
So please, give me a quote.
Here is the conversation in context. Afterwards is when you started saying how you were not the one complaining.
I feel like people forget how useful Ascended actually are… not really that useful at all. The difference in stats is so negligible that food provide more stats.
How could it be P2W if what you’re buying is…in your words…“not really that useful at all”?
Laurels can get you more than just Ascended gear. It can get you crafting materials, boosters (that aren’t all available in the gem store), dyes, and more.
Don’t tell me you’re naive enough to believe that the complaints about dailies revolve around the acquisition of “…crafting materials, boosters (that aren’t all available in the gem store), dyes…”
Sure. And humans are blobs of flesh. But for some reason we dont call em that. We call them humans. So…Again. Why did u use word “pixels” there?
Because humans are not just blobs of flesh. They’re far more complex. However an image on a screen is not. It’s pixels. There’s no musculature. No skeletal system. No neural pathways. It’s just a collection of pixels.
Also making the game become a pay-to-win game instead of a buy-to-play game.
it isn’t already?
In what ways is it a P2W game?
That’s not my quote. I never claimed it was a P2W game.
And neither was my quote about players complaining about laurels. I never complained about laurels.
I think you’re confusing yourself.
Really? Then when and where did I complain about laurels?
Where did I say you complained about them?
Then explain how I’m confusing myself. Because that’s the only context I got out of “you’re confusing yourself.”
You said you would verify a specious claim you made earlier if I answered a question you asked of another poster. I pointed out that I was not that poster and didn’t hold true his claims. You responded with an assertion that I do not question, but does not relate to the specious claim I asked you to verify.
Quotes please? I’m too tired right now to go back and search through my own posts to verify a claim you’re making.
Sigh. I didn’t make the claim. You did. I asked you to verify it.
In essence, you tried to state that if ascended gear was not purchasable through laurels, people would still complain about laurels as currency. I asked if you would provide some posts the show complaints about laurels stemming from the other purchasable items, not ascended gear.
Ahem. " I respect people for: this this and this."
“There is nothing to respect in collection of pixels”
Still no ring?
You don’t help your case by inventing things I never said.
A) I never mentioned respect. I mentioned things that impressed me. World of difference. Not being impressed is not the same as disrespect. Being impressed is not the same as respecting.
B) I never said “There is nothing to respect in collection of pixels”. My exact quote was “having access to a collection of pixels in a video game does not (impress me)”. Making things up, even though it’s a common tactic of yours, will never win arguments.
So yeah, still no ring.
I’ll ask now for the sixth time: Find me a quote where I belittle the owners of legendaries.
Also making the game become a pay-to-win game instead of a buy-to-play game.
it isn’t already?
In what ways is it a P2W game?
That’s not my quote. I never claimed it was a P2W game.
And neither was my quote about players complaining about laurels. I never complained about laurels.
I think you’re confusing yourself.
Really? Then when and where did I complain about laurels?
Where did I say you complained about them?
Then explain how I’m confusing myself. Because that’s the only context I got out of “you’re confusing yourself.”
You said you would verify a specious claim you made earlier if I answered a question you asked of another poster. I pointed out that I was not that poster and didn’t hold true his claims. You responded with an assertion that I do not question, but does not relate to the specious claim I asked you to verify.
I dont. I already showed u a pattern. Its a pattern of belittling smth by calling it materials its made with. If materials isnt important – then item is not important either. Thats how this pattern works. And u used it.
I already disproved your so-called “pattern”. I’ll even disprove it further; find where I said pixels were unimportant. Starting to see how horribly incorrect your interpretation was?
So now I’ll ask for…what…the fifth time? Find me a quote where I belittle the owners of legendaries.
Try again bro. It was in a quote, where u said, what you would respect people for. So, that quote was about people. Not about item. So, basicaly, u said, that all their efforts was for some random pixels. Not for legendary, but for pixels. U belittled people achivements. And this is what I was talking about.
That’s a horribly incorrect interpretation. Furthermore, you have yet to demonstrate a legendary is not a collection of pixels.
U could as well had said, Humans? pfff Just some blobs of flesh. Nothing important.
But I didn’t. I didn’t say “whatever”. I didn’t say “pfff”. I didn’t say “nothing important”. These are all additions you are making to try and make your analogies sound belittling. I, however, didn’t use those words at all.
OH, and my username is on the left of the screen too except it has some numbers after it
