What I know is, you don’t understand that Legendary development is causing the content drought that you think Legendary weapons are necessary to fill. You’re just grasping at any straw at this point to justify keeping Legendary development; even the ones that go against your position.
A content drought caused by 6 people being “missing” out of a 120-dev live game team? That’s quite a stretch.
If anything is low impact, it’s augmenting a 120-strong team with an extra 6 people.
Really? 5% Isn’t a big deal to you? I guess the difference between a few legendaries shouldn’t either.
How much does Anet pay you? Just curious.
You wouldn’t believe it if I told you. Ever hear of the Kind of Saudi Arabia? He’s my Chauffeur. I’m actually the reason Anet has to cancel Leg. Weapon development. My fees are huge.
Which brings us to the original issue: Customers paid, ANET didn’t provide.
OK, which brings me back to the same statement I made before; Anet attempted to deliver that content in good faith. there isn’t some conspiracy to steal from people or cheat them. Anet sincerely wanted to get that content to people; they realize they can’t do it. This is just a reality of their current business situation. There was never a plan to cancel Legendary development 6 months after HoT.
There isn’t any right or wrong here. If it wasn’t Leg. Weapons, it would be something else. Anet expect people to be angry; hence this thread. I mean, the whole POINT of this thread is to allow players to make the decisions and take the options they have available to them for playing the game or not. People paint Anet as villians and cowards when in fact, this thread was a very up front and responsible approach for them as a company to treat us as customers.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
What I know is, you don’t understand that Legendary development is causing the content drought that you think Legendary weapons are necessary to fill. You’re just grasping at any straw at this point to justify keeping Legendary development; even the ones that go against your position.
A content drought caused by 6 people being “missing” out of a 120-dev live game team? That’s quite a stretch.
If anything is low impact, it’s augmenting a 120-strong team with an extra 6 people.
Really? 5% Isn’t a big deal to you? I guess the difference between a few legendaries shouldn’t either.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
You don’t work at Anet, so whatever you’re facts are, I doubt they have the proper context to frame them properly. What I know is, you don’t understand that Legendary development is causing the content drought that you think Legendary weapons are necessary to fill. You’re just grasping at any straw at this point to justify keeping Legendary development; even the ones that go against your position.
Well at least what i’m saying is based on actual facts.
What you are saying are ideas and theories based literally only on their latest action.
You disprove any other fact (even those that came directly from ANET) and keep talking.Telling others they are wrong when they provided facts, while trying to convince everyone else that you are right based on your fabricated theory.. I mean…
And then you go and say that I’m the one grasping the straw.I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion that Legendary development fills the content drought … do you work at Anet? Do you know how many man hours it takes to implement other aspects of the game compared to Legendaries? I get you have some facts, you just don’t have any context to make conclusions from them that tells you those devs on that content is the best way to alleviate content drought.
Actually, I know what they said about it. They said that adding armor pieces is extremely hard and therefore will be used only for rewards.
That’s nice … you still haven’t answered the questions I asked. That’s just ONE of the things you need to know if you’re going to claim what content is most relevant to alleviate content drought. I’m willing to bet … Anet knows this better than you or I.
They most certanely have the matrices for it, yes. I’m not sure if they KNOW this tho, or if they even used this info to take the decision (since MO didn’t say anything about it).
The thing is – based on everything that is available to us (and there’s a lot), it’s safe to say that ANET didn’t decide on this action because it was taking too long to do the journeys and certanely not because it was the least approached content.
There are very likely things not available to us that paint a very different picture; MANY more things. We aren’t privy to everything. I don’t think we are privy to much of anything to be honest. It’s pretty easy to not understand the dimensions you don’t live in and make bad conclusions based on the small fraction that you do see.
You don’t work at Anet, so whatever you’re facts are, I doubt they have the proper context to frame them properly. What I know is, you don’t understand that Legendary development is causing the content drought that you think Legendary weapons are necessary to fill. You’re just grasping at any straw at this point to justify keeping Legendary development; even the ones that go against your position.
Well at least what i’m saying is based on actual facts.
What you are saying are ideas and theories based literally only on their latest action.
You disprove any other fact (even those that came directly from ANET) and keep talking.Telling others they are wrong when they provided facts, while trying to convince everyone else that you are right based on your fabricated theory.. I mean…
And then you go and say that I’m the one grasping the straw.I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion that Legendary development fills the content drought … do you work at Anet? Do you know how many man hours it takes to implement other aspects of the game compared to Legendaries? I get you have some facts, you just don’t have any context to make conclusions from them that tells you those devs on that content is the best way to alleviate content drought.
Actually, I know what they said about it. They said that adding armor pieces is extremely hard and therefore will be used only for rewards.
That’s nice … you still haven’t answered the questions I asked. That’s just ONE of the things you need to know if you’re going to claim what content is most relevant to alleviate content drought. I’m willing to bet … Anet knows this better than you or I.
Sorry, I just don’t get whatever point you’re trying to make. You’re saying that Legendary weapons development is a good way to alleviate content drought because Legendary armor is harder to make? That’s a pretty cherrypicked argument that ignores lots of factors that went into the decision. Again, you and I don’t work at Anet.
Frankly, I think Legendary weapons and armor are both crap content, remove them both. Put those people to work on whatever the majority of your paying customers want.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Most players don’t even know about this change.
Because it’s such low impact content for most people that it doesn’t affect them.
You keep referring to it as low impact, which in addition to being somewhat vague, is something none of us have the data to determine. Only Anet has the information relevant to determine that, and we have no idea what was actually factored into their decision. For all we know, it could have absolutely nothing to do how much “impact” legendary weapons have.
You’re right … I’m making an educated guess on that. I’m assuming Anet isn’t stupid enough to cancel high impact content that has a low cost to implement that they can deliver vs. low impact content that is more costly that they can’t deliver. You know, business decision stuff based on ROI, etc … much better metrics than what any of us have access to.
let’s not get back into the premise that Anet is clueless about what they are doing, so we can assume anything they do is stupid and therefore, reinstate Legendary development. That goes nowhere.
So why are they still working on legendary armor?
best answer .. Because we don’t have Legendary armor and it’s a specific reward to a high end raid?
This doesn’t make it any more high impact to players. The nature of its acquisition will probably see it being a goal for even fewer players.
OK … maybe that’s Anet’s next target if they need more resources to deliver more significant content to players faster.
You don’t work at Anet, so whatever you’re facts are, I doubt they have the proper context to frame them properly. What I know is, you don’t understand that Legendary development is causing the content drought that you think Legendary weapons are necessary to fill. You’re just grasping at any straw at this point to justify keeping Legendary development; even the ones that go against your position.
Well at least what i’m saying is based on actual facts.
What you are saying are ideas and theories based literally only on their latest action.
You disprove any other fact (even those that came directly from ANET) and keep talking.Telling others they are wrong when they provided facts, while trying to convince everyone else that you are right based on your fabricated theory.. I mean…
And then you go and say that I’m the one grasping the straw.
I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion that Legendary development fills the content drought … do you work at Anet? Do you know how many man hours it takes to implement other aspects of the game compared to Legendaries? I get you have some facts, you just don’t have any context to make conclusions from them that tells you those devs on that content is the best way to alleviate content drought.
Most players don’t even know about this change.
Because it’s such low impact content for most people that it doesn’t affect them.
You keep referring to it as low impact, which in addition to being somewhat vague, is something none of us have the data to determine. Only Anet has the information relevant to determine that, and we have no idea what was actually factored into their decision. For all we know, it could have absolutely nothing to do how much “impact” legendary weapons have.
You’re right … I’m making an educated guess on that. I’m assuming Anet isn’t stupid enough to cancel high impact content that has a low cost to implement that they can deliver vs. low impact content that is more costly that they can’t deliver. You know, business decision stuff based on ROI, etc … much better metrics than what any of us have access to.
let’s not get back into the premise that Anet is clueless about what they are doing, so we can assume anything they do is stupid and therefore, reinstate Legendary development. That goes nowhere.
So why are they still working on legendary armor?
best answer .. Because we don’t have Legendary armor and it’s a specific reward to a high end raid?
But its aquisition is harder – and therefore an even smaller amount of players will go after it. (targeting less players)
Not to mention that they have create 50+ armor parts which will take far more resources than 12 weapon skins.
Talking from the companies perspective, which is supposedly trying to stabilize their profit, what they did is not logical.
You’re right, if those are the only factors that go into these decisions, then I think Legendary armor is illogical to develop as well. /shrug. Maybe that’s next week.
]
I was talking about general content drought. You can’t complain about the content drought until you have a single unfinished Achievement.That’s a matter of opinion. Again, it’s unreasonable for Anet to simply deliver ANY kind of content, no matter how costly it is just because of ‘content drought’.
As a matter of fact, I suspect those devs they took off Legendary development are being put onto content that will deal with whatever lack of it you think exists to get it to us faster.
So the content drought argument for keeping Legendary development … is nonsense.
lol okay, I get it – you’re a hypocrite.
You’re telling us: “You can’t demand more content if you didn’t complete everything yet”
While saying: “That’s a matter of opinion” when I used your own logic against your argument.Also, I guess you’re the one who came up with the theory that ANET canceled the legendary team because it’s targeted by a small group of players and because it’s taking too many resources.
I stated a few facts on the previous page which counter this theory. Facts, not opinions and theories.
You don’t work at Anet, so whatever you’re facts are, I doubt they have the proper context to frame them properly. What I know is, you don’t understand that Legendary development is causing the content drought that you think Legendary weapons are necessary to fill. You’re just grasping at any straw at this point to justify keeping Legendary development; even the ones that go against your position.
Most players don’t even know about this change.
Because it’s such low impact content for most people that it doesn’t affect them.
You keep referring to it as low impact, which in addition to being somewhat vague, is something none of us have the data to determine. Only Anet has the information relevant to determine that, and we have no idea what was actually factored into their decision. For all we know, it could have absolutely nothing to do how much “impact” legendary weapons have.
You’re right … I’m making an educated guess on that. I’m assuming Anet isn’t stupid enough to cancel high impact content that has a low cost to implement that they can deliver vs. low impact content that is more costly that they can’t deliver. You know, business decision stuff based on ROI, etc … much better metrics than what any of us have access to.
let’s not get back into the premise that Anet is clueless about what they are doing, so we can assume anything they do is stupid and therefore, reinstate Legendary development. That goes nowhere.
So why are they still working on legendary armor?
best answer .. Because we don’t have Legendary armor and it’s a specific reward to a high end raid?
]
I was talking about general content drought. You can’t complain about the content drought until you have a single unfinished Achievement.
That’s a matter of opinion. Again, it’s unreasonable for Anet to simply deliver ANY kind of content, no matter how costly it is just because of ‘content drought’.
As a matter of fact, I suspect those devs they took off Legendary development are being put onto content that will deal with whatever lack of it you think exists to get it to us faster.
So the content drought argument for keeping Legendary development … is nonsense. The legendary development cancellation is to address content drought, it doesn’t cause it. You haven’t seen a new legendary since release until now, and it’s just one …. THAT’S content drought. Legendary development CAUSES content drought; having handfuls of devs making content you see a small fraction of every 6 months. That’s just ridiculous and Anet made the right decision to stop it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Most players don’t even know about this change.
Because it’s such low impact content for most people that it doesn’t affect them.
You keep referring to it as low impact, which in addition to being somewhat vague, is something none of us have the data to determine. Only Anet has the information relevant to determine that, and we have no idea what was actually factored into their decision. For all we know, it could have absolutely nothing to do how much “impact” legendary weapons have.
You’re right … I’m making an educated guess on that. I’m assuming Anet isn’t stupid enough to cancel high impact content that has a low cost to implement that they can deliver vs. low impact content that is more costly that they can’t deliver. You know, business decision stuff based on ROI, etc … much better metrics than what any of us have access to.
let’s not get back into the premise that Anet is clueless about what they are doing, so we can assume anything they do is stupid and therefore, reinstate Legendary development. That goes nowhere.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Most players don’t even know about this change.
Because it’s such low impact content for most people that it doesn’t affect them.
Some of them own at least 1 legendary weapon.
They simply don’t read the news.
As I said, they were disapointed – so it affected them.They shouldn’t be … they have 20+ more Legendaries to craft. More content than they could possible handle if they have only managed one so far. I can see being disappointed if you have ALL the legendaries, but just one? That’s makes no sense. If I have just one, and there are 20 more to go, I’m not disappointed … I can’t even keep up with the old ones, let alone any new ones they make.
Or only just one or two legendaries to craft. How many people want Champawat, yet have no desire for The Dreamer? Or any non-shortbow?
I’m still working on my first legendary (Sunrise), but I was eager to see what the new sword and shield would look like.
Again, if you are down to one or two Legendaries to craft, then that’s exactly the kind of customer that Anet can’t deliver content to with legendary development. Those people are the extreme cases and wouldn’t be able to be satisfied with Anet’s devliery schedule anyways, so it’s no matter to them. Also, Anet should NOT strive to appeal to every extreme type of player at the expense of the significant remainder.
You can be eager on other skins if that’s you interest … It’s not like Legendaries were the only new sword and shield skins that Anet ever released. In fact, skins that are legendaries are the most infrequent. Desiring Legendaries because of a skin doesn’t make sense.
Most players don’t even know about this change.
Because it’s such low impact content for most people that it doesn’t affect them.
Some of them own at least 1 legendary weapon.
They simply don’t read the news.
As I said, they were disapointed – so it affected them.They shouldn’t be … they have 20+ more Legendaries to craft. More content than they could possible handle if they have only managed one so far. I can see being disappointed if you have ALL the legendaries, but just one? That’s makes no sense. If I have just one, and there are 20 more to go, I’m not disappointed … I can’t even keep up with the old ones, let alone any new ones they make.
You usually craft the weapon you find suatable for you and don’t craft them just because you can.
It’s like saying “Hey, you have a lot of content in game. You can’t complain there’s a content drought, before finishing every unfinished achievement”
Yeah, exactly … so how can you complain about weapons that aren’t being delivered that might not be suitable to you? That doesn’t make sense. It’s also silly to say there is a content drought for legendaries if there is lots of legendaries to craft. It’s not a drought if the water is there and you aren’t willing to drink it.
Most players don’t even know about this change.
Because it’s such low impact content for most people that it doesn’t affect them.
Some of them own at least 1 legendary weapon.
They simply don’t read the news.
As I said, they were disapointed – so it affected them.
They shouldn’t be … they have 20+ more Legendaries to craft. More content than they could possible handle if they have only managed one so far. I can see being disappointed if you have ALL the legendaries, but just one? That’s makes no sense. If I have just one, and there are 20 more to go, I’m not disappointed … I can’t even keep up with the old ones, let alone any new ones they make.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Most players don’t even know about this change.
Because it’s such low impact content for most people that it doesn’t affect them.
Right … making a mistake, recognizing a bad business decision and stopping low-value development now equates to immaturity.
The bad business decision was taking people’s money and then deciding not to give them what they paid for. Whether or not it’s immature is irrelevant; it most certainly is unethical.
Do you not agree? Will you give them money in the future, knowing that you might not get what you paid for?
I don’t see how it’s unethical at all and I don’t agree. Anet intended to deliver that content and even attempted to do so in good faith. It’s just not working out for them.
Will you give them money in the future, knowing, as you do, that if whatever you’ve paid for ‘just isn’t working out for them’ to deliver, not only will you not get whatever it is, but they will also keep your money?
I will because I understand what my money pays for, how much entertainment value I get from it and think the game is worth supporting. I don’t ‘act out’ and demand a full refund if a single feature is only partially delivered because I’m just not that selfish.
Even if I was due a refund, it would only be reasonable for it to be the part of the expansion that pertained to the partially delivered feature, not the whole thing, since I have been satisfied with other aspects AND got entertainment value from it. I just don’t have the audacity to eat a whole buffet and ask for a refund because they didn’t deliver chocolate ice cream that day.
So people are ok to get a partial refund now so how much is that 10-15-20-25-30-35 bucks?
considering the legendarys provided longer lasting content then the other features it should be around 50% refund imo, I still have only got 2 precursors since I refuse to buy of the tp I want to find and craft my legendarys myself. ( and thats 2 of the old ones in 3 years. )I don’t know are they? That’s not my call. I was just saying hypothetically if a refund were to happen, it certainly wouldn’t be a fully refund for HoT. You can justify whatever percentage you want with whatever argument you’ve convinced yourself with. It’s just an academic exercise because frankly, I don’t think you will see a dime of refund.
How does crafting a legendary use more content? Some people can make legendaries in a day and then its done. If you grind enough and play like a monster with no sleep or day job you could prob make a legendary really quickly. Each piece of content is equally valuable. Im sure it would take longer to get to level 100 fractals and all achievmeents in game than it would to make a new legendary….
I don’t even get what you’re question is about; I don’t know how crafting a legendary uses more content. It’s that kind of ambiguity around what wasn’t delivered as content that makes the whole question about a refund very difficult to answer. Frankly, the only thing I see Anet not delivering is more Legendary weapons. I don’t know how many, I don’t know over what period of time. The whole notion we get compensated for content that was never specified is actually ridiculous to me. Anet could just sit back and say they never specified exactly what they were going to deliver, so no compensation is deserved. For all we know, their intent was one new Legendary skin every 2 years … and they would currently be AHEAD of schedule. They never said … and like smart game devs, they never do. I’ve seen that so many times. This isn’t new because they know that their efforts depend on … revenues!
Right … making a mistake, recognizing a bad business decision and stopping low-value development now equates to immaturity.
The bad business decision was taking people’s money and then deciding not to give them what they paid for. Whether or not it’s immature is irrelevant; it most certainly is unethical.
Do you not agree? Will you give them money in the future, knowing that you might not get what you paid for?
I don’t see how it’s unethical at all and I don’t agree. Anet intended to deliver that content and even attempted to do so in good faith. It’s just not working out for them.
Will you give them money in the future, knowing, as you do, that if whatever you’ve paid for ‘just isn’t working out for them’ to deliver, not only will you not get whatever it is, but they will also keep your money?
I will because I understand what my money pays for, how much entertainment value I get from it and think the game is worth supporting. I don’t ‘act out’ and demand a full refund if a single feature is only partially delivered because I’m just not that selfish.
Even if I was due a refund, it would only be reasonable for it to be the part of the expansion that pertained to the partially delivered feature, not the whole thing, since I have been satisfied with other aspects AND got entertainment value from it. I just don’t have the audacity to eat a whole buffet and ask for a refund because they didn’t deliver chocolate ice cream that day.
So people are ok to get a partial refund now so how much is that 10-15-20-25-30-35 bucks?
considering the legendarys provided longer lasting content then the other features it should be around 50% refund imo, I still have only got 2 precursors since I refuse to buy of the tp I want to find and craft my legendarys myself. ( and thats 2 of the old ones in 3 years. )
I don’t know how much, that’s not my call. I was just saying hypothetically if a refund were to happen, it certainly wouldn’t be a fully refund for HoT; that would just be stupid. You can justify whatever percentage you want with whatever argument you’ve convinced yourself with. It’s just an academic exercise because frankly, I don’t think you will see a dime of refund.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
MM is more suited for ranged I think but I don’t see why you couldn’t use reaper with it. It is annoying at times chasing your mob down with melee if your minions aggro first. Minions are a little to tanky and hold aggro too well to make it hard to fail using them for PVE, even in HoT.
Seems to me you can marry your desire to play Minions with Condi … I do and the strategy is quite good.
HoT was not "half done" and my 3 reasons why
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: Obtena.7952
No one should have bought HoT thinking it was ‘done’. That’s not even the nature of most MMO expansions. They get tweaked, bugfixed, adjusted, added to … lots of time.
It’s pretty hard to compare almost anything Anet does to other MMO’s because GW2 does quite a few things off the beaten path. I get the feeling that Anet goes out of their way to deliver not-typical game mechanics and features.
It’s not burning that is the problem, it’s how professions get access to it by stacking skills that give burning. It’s the same for any condition.
Frankly, I think there should be some clever thinking to how stacking conditions shouldn’t result in linear increases in damage. This would allow more intelligent approach to choosing when to apply conditions and not and it could fix this access problem with Burning, or minor access to other conditions for other professions.
In addition to what reikken said, most builds using burning capitalize on the high intensity as a spike condition, rather than a timed condition.
And Wallaby, I used to run a burn guardian in sinister gear. I had maxed burning duration, and with the right environment in the fight, I could get 7-8k burns easily. It did lean heavily on rotations rather than other things.
I think his point isn’t that you can’t make a burning condi Guardian … I have done the same. I believe the point here is that even with maximum burning on a Guardian, burning still isn’t a broken skill. You might get some 5-7 seconds of high intensity stacked burning .. .then you got nothing. So yes you did burst at 7-8K … but you didn’t sustain it like other classes can sustain their conditions.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Right … making a mistake, recognizing a bad business decision and stopping low-value development now equates to immaturity.
The bad business decision was taking people’s money and then deciding not to give them what they paid for. Whether or not it’s immature is irrelevant; it most certainly is unethical.
Do you not agree? Will you give them money in the future, knowing that you might not get what you paid for?
I don’t see how it’s unethical at all and I don’t agree. Anet intended to deliver that content and even attempted to do so in good faith. It’s just not working out for them.
Will you give them money in the future, knowing, as you do, that if whatever you’ve paid for ‘just isn’t working out for them’ to deliver, not only will you not get whatever it is, but they will also keep your money?
I will because I understand what my money pays for, how much entertainment value I get from it and think the game is worth supporting. I don’t ‘act out’ and demand a full refund if a single feature is only partially delivered because I’m just not that selfish.
Even if I was due a refund, it would only be reasonable for it to be the part of the expansion that pertained to the partially delivered feature, not the whole thing, since I have been satisfied with other aspects AND got entertainment value from it. I just don’t have the audacity to eat a whole buffet and ask for a refund because they didn’t deliver chocolate ice cream that day.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Right … making a mistake, recognizing a bad business decision and stopping low-value development now equates to immaturity.
The bad business decision was taking people’s money and then deciding not to give them what they paid for. Whether or not it’s immature is irrelevant; it most certainly is unethical.
Do you not agree? Will you give them money in the future, knowing that you might not get what you paid for?
I don’t see how it’s unethical at all and I don’t agree. Anet intended to deliver that content and even attempted to do so in good faith. It’s just not working out for them. Anyone complaining about this is very shortsighted and appears clueless about business decisions.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
As other people have said ditch the journeys, and release the weapons as standalone weapons.
Don’t even do weapons … we got those in spades. Just want a way to get cool effects like footfalls, etc…
I mean, do all the years and hours you’ve enjoyed the game up until that theoretical point account for nothing?
Some emotional attachment one might have for the account VS some kind of financial return on your investment?
If it’s purely a money thing, something or nothing is still an easy choice to make and were I to feel so strongly about the issue as some seem too, it makes a point to the company.
How long something has been owned and someone feeling that they had “gotten their money’s worth out of it” don’t really matter. It is paid for, owned, and should not have to be given up. Especially not when the item at issue is only a smaller, separately sold, portion of that whole.
The problem isn’t with the customer not wanting to make some self-damaging noble sacrifice to prove a point to the company, it’s with the company failing to offer a reasonable option for compensation.
I don’t find any of this particularly noble.
It certainly isn’t self-damaging to the vast majority of people who have been with the game pre-HoT and invested hundreds or thousands of hours into the game.
$50 well spent.
If one is so very bitter and hung up over the recent decision to put a hold on new legendary weapons for the sake of the game as a whole, you can ultimately end your customer relationship with Anet and pocket the $$$ spent on HoT.
I don’t feel that way myself. I’m willing to see where this goes. Bitter and empty the words of some of the more excitable lot here, most of them are not going to get a refund.
They’re going to wait and see what happens. I think that’s the best course. You don’t have to agree with me to be counted with me in that regard.
So if you buy a new car same brand as the car you had prevoiusly for 10 years.
But when the car comes you only get engine tiers and the seats the rest are on the way.
Then 6 months later Im sorry we werent able to make the frame, you can install the other parts into the car you got now.
Being you your still happy right?
That comparison makes no sense. I will leave you to figure out why.
Maybe if Anet INTENDED to not fulfill their responsibilities, honor their obligations, or keep their word, you might have a claim to call them immature, but they didn’t not intent that. It’s simply a consequence of their business. I’m certain that’s how it looks if you take it out of the context of GW2 being a business. I mean, sure, let’s demand Anet continue legendaries development regardless of the impact on the business. I can’t wait to see what more significant content they would have have to cancel next just to fund it.
It’s pretty easy to ignore the reality of how GW2 works as a business when your on the player side of the keyboard. I would be interesting to see the QQing if Anet shuts down GW2 … will we get the same people demanding refunds for all the money they paid into the game. I wouldn’t be surprised.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Right … making a mistake, recognizing a bad business decision and stopping low-value development now equates to immaturity. I suspect posts only get better from here.
OR … you’re just not giving a team of experienced, educated people who have significant interest in making GW2 successful the benefit of the doubt that they just MIGHT have a clue what they are doing!
I have a clue of what they’re doing. They are walking away with my money in their pockets, without delivering fully on what that money was supposed to give me. Their motivations for that are completely irrelevant for me.
Especially if at the same time they are working on the next thing they think they will be able to sell to me without actually delivering it.
Yes, that’s how Anet works … they lie to you to get your money! They have no honest way to make revenue, so they hatched this scheme to release and expansion, dupe you into paying $50 for it and not fully deliver one of it’s features. So clever. They are rubbing their hands in greed all the way to the bank on this one!
I don’t think there is any value in discussing what seems to be, just like arguments based on human fallibility. Making guesses isn’t compelling discussion. I don’t think it’s honest to justify ‘making a ruckus’ to get something you want; I would like to think we are dealing with a higher level maturity here.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
If valuable loot were to drop more frequently for you, it would in all likelihood have to drop more frequently in general. Such drops would then stop being quite so valuable.
We should remove loot all together, because it’ll eventually lose value.
0.o.
It’s a pretty lame criticism, because other more loot RPGs manage to achieve a higher balance between making the character feel rewarded from loot drops with the inevitability of characters grinding out the system.
But, that balance doesn’t even come close to existing in GW2. They have had the right item at some points with the introduction of standalone armor and weapons.
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/List_of_named_weapons
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/List_of_standalone_armor
But the items on this list are mostly acquired via…
- Gem Store (biggest culprit of them all)
- Previous Living World Seasons (N/A)
- Festival Events (N/A)
- Material Intense Crafting Recipes
- Mystic Forge Recipes (Either Material Intensive or Mystic Coin Intensive)
The remainder that do actually drop are isolated to specific areas and with a very, very very low drop chance. They aren’t part of the universal loot tables.
Just because the game has horizontal progression doesn’t mean that it can’t have rewarding loot. Unique named items and armor with an unique skin can be perceived as valuable for applying an unique look to your character. The cosmetic aspect of the game has always been cited as GW2’s reward system.
However, the aspect that they base their rewards on is also the aspect that they make money on, which is why the ratio of cosmetic skins being produced for the gem store exceeds what is produced in the game.
And loot is in a current state where it’s a bunch of garbage that piles up in your bags to salvage for crafting materials. Crafting materials, mind you, that now lack a lot of value, since they are no longer supporting legendary weapons.
The sad thing is they don’t have to make a ton of new skins if they wanted to overhaul the loot system. They already have a ton of available options in the lists in the two links I have provided that players just don’t get, because of how they have to be acquired.
If you took all the current named weapons and all the old unique armor items from the old Living Season rewards, repurposed them to drop universally, made them account bound so the skins cant be acquired off the trading post and altered their drop rates so it was probable for a player with average magic find to get one once every 3-4 days, you would add an element of looting of “Ahh, that’s cool” that wouldn’t be exhausted quickly just due to the volume of items that already exist.
So many cool weapon skins on that list that either have incredibly low drop rates and are targeted to very specific chests or bags or cost something like 50 mystic coins and 250 of a T6 material to make (which they aren’t that cool to spend that amount on).
Wasted potential.
^
THIS
SO MUCH THIS!
This poster above nailed it.
Loot has to be rewarding! I don’t feel rewarded grinding a few thousand hours for items that I break and sell the mats worth a few bronze or silver coins.
I feel rewarded when I find drops worth 100s or 1000s of gold!This is where GW2 really disappointed me.
The rewarding loots drop so rarely!
That’s where people’s perception of loot needs to change if they play this game. Everytime loot drops, I know EXACTLY how much it rewards me by the value people are willing to pay for it, or it’s salvaged components … and if they aren’t, there is a base value in any NPC merchant. Reward loot don’t drop rarely, they drop always, it’s just a question of how much of a reward it is.
4 mesmers killed a map blob and the entire time the commentary just highlights how absurd it all is
Yeah, cause the map blob decided to run back and forth through a bunch of glamours while spamming skills and never use a single group cleanse.
I’m not entirely sure what’s difficult to understand about this. 4 mesmers killed a bunch of garbage players with an easy to avoid mechanic because all of those players were absolute garbage. It wasn’t overpowered, it was just strong against stupid people.
Oh, there’s that “skilled players win games” thing again. I’m so glad some people substitute calls for nerfing with recognizing that being good at something matters.
I’m fascinated by how many post the same half dozen people have made complaining about this the past 30 pages.
Well turns out not all of us are just willing to bend over and take it from Anet.
You actually don’t have a choice. Let’s be realistic about what your options are.
Raising a ruckus on the forums in the hope that it gets picked up by the gaming media has seemingly impacted Anet’s decision making in the past.
That’s just speculation.
Open world farming, even in HoT and specific to this build … farming with the zerg … you should just be aiming for pure damage output. I’m not of the same opinion as the OP, but I get what he’s trying to do with his build. For tagging, I think the staff combo’ed with VoJ traits isn’t necessary. One, or the other, not both. In fact, I would camp LB with VoJ … I think better range, better damage, better function for ranged tagging.
Why? because staff really suffers bad when you fight single targets. Remember, you’re just tagging and the bow does that quite well with it’s AOE attack and the puncture shoot too. That’s my preference anyways.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’m fascinated by how many post the same half dozen people have made complaining about this the past 30 pages.
Well turns out not all of us are just willing to bend over and take it from Anet.
You actually don’t have a choice. Let’s be realistic about what your options are.
That’s a really interesting point. So are you saying that some players posting here have demonstrated that the decision isn’t a good one because there might be some data Anet doesn’t have that would possibly change their decision and it comes from the very players that are arguing to keep Legendary development? I would love to see what this data is! I’m all for getting more Legendary weapons if Anet is so incompetent that average players have some data they have missed that is so pivotal to their decision.
The data is people that are voicing that they aren’t going to spend money on the game because of the decision.
So you’re saying … that Anet didn’t know or consider that this would make people upset and those people might stop spending money on the game, so it’s a bad decision to stop Legendary development? See, I think you’re wrong about that. I know Anet understands people would not like this decision. The first post from MO tells me so.
That’s a really interesting point. So are you saying that some players posting here have demonstrated that the decision isn’t a good one because there might be some data Anet doesn’t have that would possibly change their decision and it comes from the very players that are arguing to keep Legendary development? I’m all for getting more Legendary weapons so if Anet is so incompetent that average players have some data they have missed that is so pivotal to their decision … what is it? Let’s see it.
No, you have options … you can either accept that Legendary crafting was unsustainable content, forget it and enjoy the other aspects of the game or decide that it’s such a big deal to you that you quit the game.
If anything were to be labeled as unsustainable content, it’s living world/story content that we’ve seen for the past two seasons. A couple hours of content that takes weeks to months to develop, followed by weeks or months of nothing new to do. It’s just not possible to make content at the rate players are able to go through it.
But I’m not going to argue for the suspension of that type of content. Even though I was far from impressed with the majority of Anet’s installments, I understand the value of such content. It offers change and growth to the world, and the ability to progress the game’s narrative. It keeps players interested and involved with the game’s world.
I’d prefer spend my time on long-term reward goals over more episodic story but I do not want to see living world content sacrificed for it. I don’t have the right to tell players that content that is important to them shouldn’t be made because I think the content that matters to me is more important.
Also, it’s pretty absurd and irrelevant to call legendary collections unsustainable. They have a set number they announced. They don’t really have to sustain anything once that’s delivered., other than maybe unforseen bugfixes.
And it’s already been proven that they can both, a) successfully make an arbitrary collection b) Create 16 legendarys(they already created 20 before the game launched)
Is it really? I don’t think Anet would agree with you when it’s taken them 6 months with a team of devs to deliver … ONE.
Arguments about financials from players that have none of them is pretty presumptuous. Frankly, I think it’s ridiculous that people are suggesting that Anet has not first and foremost considered this factor; it’s a business, it impacts employees in significant ways and obviously affects us as players. The suggestions here people make indicate Anet have taken this decision lightly. I can assure you they have not.
I’m confident they factored it. That doesn’t necessarily mean they correctly estimated the value of the factor.
Really? Based on what? Complete lack of data?
Based on the fact that human beings are fallible. Just because someone considered a factor does not mean that they are correct in whatever conclusion they came to.
The real question is, based on what data would one conclude that Anet is infallible and that the fact that they put consideration into these factors indicates that they are inherently correct in their conclusions? Can you provide a single bit of data to demonstrate that Anet is nto capable of making a mistake?
So you’re suggesting that just because Humans are fallable, that Anet is wrong? That’s a beautiful argument … I’m going to use it too. Are you Human? That means your fallable too … you’re wrong, everyone is wrong, we are all Human.
Where does that leave you … Even if Anet and everyone is wrong, Anet STILL has more data to make that decision than you or any of us. Besides even if we had that data, we are human, we would screw it up! It’s amazing how such a bunch of humans are possible to do anything!
OR … you’re just not giving a team of experienced, educated people who have significant interest in making GW2 successful the benefit of the doubt that they just MIGHT have a clue what they are doing!
(edited by Obtena.7952)
They are a key part of the endgame because the system of goals set by Anet is based on style and cosmetics, instead of the unending power treadmill most other MMOs use.
Then you could say that about ANY piece of gear … they are all a system of goals set by Anet based on style and cosmetics. Such a broadly defined think can hardly be considered ‘key’.
Legendary weapons are the centerpiece of that system. Designed to be the flashiest and most impressive looking items in the game, to make players want to work toward obtaining them. In a game where skins and fashion are the a big part of the goals set for players to achieve, the shiniest weapons available will be a major endgame goal. They were put in the game for the purpose of being the ultimate endgame goal.
They are STILL the centerpiece of that system; Anet is not removing them. They just aren’t adding more at the expected frequency. Developing more Legendaries is not necessary to maintain whatever status you attribute to their existence; key part of that endgame experience or not.
A single set of them can’t be expected to be a goal to occupy players forever.
I’ve already addressed this … MULTIPLE times now. If building Legendaries is the only content someone is interested in, it’s not unreasonable that they might run out of things to do because they are limiting their own interests in the game.
My interests in the game go well beyond legendary weapons, and I’m at a point where isn’t really much to do. No matter what you might think, not everyone fits your idea of what we should or shouldn’t have left to do in the game, and player interests vary wildy from a singular aspect of the game all the way up to enjoying every aspect of it. And I, as a player in the middle of that gamut, have a dwindling set of things to do. An additional set of legendary weapons as a pretty good chance of bolstering that for a considerable time.
It’s not about what I THINK, it’s about what Anet thinks. I know about varying interests and this is simply a case where players think the game caters to their wildly varying interests when that’s not always possible or sensible thing to do.
YES, an additional set of Legendary weapons is a good chance to booster end game things to do. That’s not actually relevant to the discussion if you ask me … there are LOTS of additional things Anet could do to booster end game content. Obviously, Anet thinks that it’s not the best way to booster end game content; it uses a handful of devs, take a long time and caters to a very small audience of people who have managed to craft EVERY existing Legendary. It’s VERY Low impact content.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
They are a key part of the endgame because the system of goals set by Anet is based on style and cosmetics, instead of the unending power treadmill most other MMOs use.
Then you could say that about ANY piece of gear … they are all a system of goals set by Anet based on style and cosmetics. Such a broadly defined think can hardly be considered ‘key’.
Legendary weapons are the centerpiece of that system. Designed to be the flashiest and most impressive looking items in the game, to make players want to work toward obtaining them. In a game where skins and fashion are the a big part of the goals set for players to achieve, the shiniest weapons available will be a major endgame goal. They were put in the game for the purpose of being the ultimate endgame goal.
They are STILL the centerpiece of that system; Anet is not removing them. They just aren’t adding more at the expected frequency. Developing more Legendaries is not necessary to maintain whatever status you attribute to their existence; key part of that endgame experience or not.
A single set of them can’t be expected to be a goal to occupy players forever.
I’ve already addressed this … MULTIPLE times now. If building Legendaries is the only content someone is interested in, it’s not unreasonable that they might run out of things to do because they are limiting their own interests in the game.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
No, you have options … you can either accept that Legendary crafting was unsustainable content, forget it and enjoy the other aspects of the game or decide that it’s such a big deal to you that you quit the game.
If anything were to be labeled as unsustainable content, it’s living world/story content that we’ve seen for the past two seasons. A couple hours of content that takes weeks to months to develop, followed by weeks or months of nothing new to do. It’s just not possible to make content at the rate players are able to go through it.
But I’m not going to argue for the suspension of that type of content. Even though I was far from impressed with the majority of Anet’s installments, I understand the value of such content. It offers change and growth to the world, and the ability to progress the game’s narrative. It keeps players interested and involved with the game’s world.
I’d prefer spend my time on long-term reward goals over more episodic story but I do not want to see living world content sacrificed for it. I don’t have the right to tell players that content that is important to them shouldn’t be made because I think the content that matters to me is more important.
Also, it’s pretty absurd and irrelevant to call legendary collections unsustainable. They have a set number they announced. They don’t really have to sustain anything once that’s delivered., other than maybe unforseen bugfixes.
And it’s already been proven that they can both, a) successfully make an arbitrary collection b) Create 16 legendarys(they already created 20 before the game launched)
Is it really? I don’t think Anet would agree with you when it’s taken them 6 months with a team of devs to deliver … ONE.
Arguments about financials from players that have none of them is pretty presumptuous. Frankly, I think it’s ridiculous that people are suggesting that Anet has not first and foremost considered this factor; it’s a business, it impacts employees in significant ways and obviously affects us as players. The suggestions here people make indicate Anet have taken this decision lightly. I can assure you they have not.
I’m confident they factored it. That doesn’t necessarily mean they correctly estimated the value of the factor.
Really? Based on what? Complete lack of data?
(edited by Obtena.7952)
They are a key part of the endgame because the system of goals set by Anet is based on style and cosmetics, instead of the unending power treadmill most other MMOs use.
Then you could say that about ANY piece of gear … they are all a system of goals set by Anet based on style and cosmetics. Such a broadly defined think can hardly be considered ‘key’.
Legendary weapons are the centerpiece of that system. Designed to be the flashiest and most impressive looking items in the game, to make players want to work toward obtaining them. In a game where skins and fashion are the a big part of the goals set for players to achieve, the shiniest weapons available will be a major endgame goal. They were put in the game for the purpose of being the ultimate endgame goal.
They are STILL the centerpiece of that system; Anet is not removing them. They just aren’t adding more at the expected frequency. Developing more Legendaries is not necessary to maintain whatever status you attribute to their existence; key part of that endgame experience or not.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Again, you seem to be limiting what you consider endgame content to make your argument that very specific endgame content is necessary or that it’s bad to stop development of very specific endgame content. Legendary crafting and non-repetitive story-driven content are not the only things you can do at end game. If a person CHOOSES to limit themselves to very specific things, they have very little reasonable ground to argue that other bits of content aren’t being made or given the level of attention they desire.
Anet thought they could make Legendary content and they couldn’t; it’s not that they cancelled it, it’s that it took so long to produce anything with it that they couldn’t deliver the Legendary weapon content anyways.
I’m not limiting what I consider to be endgame content to anything so specific.
If that’s the case, then why do we keep seeing arguments for continued development of Legendaries based on keeping players occupied at the endgame?
As a matter of fact … if we are so concerned for content to keep people occupied endgame, then that’s an argument FOR stopping Legendary development because those devs could be placed on more pertinent and sustainable content development.
Because legendary weapons are a key part of the game’s endgame content. Their importance isn’t a concept constructed by myself or other players to support their continued development. It’s an idea established and continually reinforced by Anet since well before GW2 launched. An idea that they kept pushing until development was unceremoniously dropped a week ago.
That’s debateable. What exactly makes them a key part of the endgame content? They don’t unlock anything. They aren’t a step up in performance over Ascended weapons. The stat swapping function isn’t useful. They aren’t tied to a story or an event in the game. There isn’t even too much achievement associated with them.
On the other hand, there are several indicators to suggest they AREN’T key to the game; Anet has only been able to release 4 of them in those 6 months, If legendaries didn’t exist at all, very little would be different in this game. They are a distraction for the dev team with big cost and small returns and a very limited audience. Even now that they are associated with a series of activities, those activities are just random events. This is hardly key content.
Nothing personal dude but what the kitten makes you think you can determine what content I should receive after I paid for it. I’m glad your happy, go play and stop telling me what I should want for my money.
Nothing makes me think that, other than the fact that Anet has done that for you. I just understand why they did it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Arguments about financials from players that have none of them is pretty presumptuous. Frankly, I think it’s ridiculous that people are suggesting that Anet has not first and foremost considered this factor; it’s a business, it impacts employees in significant ways and obviously affects us as players. The suggestions here people make indicate Anet have taken this decision lightly. I can assure you they have not.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
They are a key part of the endgame because the system of goals set by Anet is based on style and cosmetics, instead of the unending power treadmill most other MMOs use.
Then you could say that about ANY piece of gear … they are all a system of goals set by Anet based on style and cosmetics. Such a broadly defined think can hardly be considered ‘key’.
How many MMOs have good loot dropping alot?
I’m in no way saying the loot rates here are good, but honestly the white/blue/green junk you pick up can be salvaged for mats. It isn’t a great source of income but it’s better then junk items.
If I understand right, I think the OP is saying he wants valuable drops that are relevant to equipping the character he’s playing … without saying directly.
Again, you seem to be limiting what you consider endgame content to make your argument that very specific endgame content is necessary or that it’s bad to stop development of very specific endgame content. Legendary crafting and non-repetitive story-driven content are not the only things you can do at end game. If a person CHOOSES to limit themselves to very specific things, they have very little reasonable ground to argue that other bits of content aren’t being made or given the level of attention they desire.
Anet thought they could make Legendary content and they couldn’t; it’s not that they cancelled it, it’s that it took so long to produce anything with it that they couldn’t deliver the Legendary weapon content anyways.
I’m not limiting what I consider to be endgame content to anything so specific.
If that’s the case, then why do we keep seeing arguments for continued development of Legendaries based on keeping players occupied at the endgame?
As a matter of fact … if we are so concerned for content to keep people occupied endgame, then that’s an argument FOR stopping Legendary development because those devs could be placed on more pertinent and sustainable content development.
Because legendary weapons are a key part of the game’s endgame content. Their importance isn’t a concept constructed by myself or other players to support their continued development. It’s an idea established and continually reinforced by Anet since well before GW2 launched. An idea that they kept pushing until development was unceremoniously dropped a week ago.
That’s debateable. What exactly makes them a key part of the endgame content? They don’t unlock anything. They aren’t a step up in performance over Ascended weapons. The stat swapping function isn’t useful. They aren’t tied to a story or an event in the game. There isn’t even too much achievement associated with them.
On the other hand, there are several indicators to suggest they AREN’T key to the game; Anet has only been able to release 4 of them in those 6 months, If legendaries didn’t exist at all, very little would be different in this game. They are a distraction for the dev team with big cost and small returns and a very limited audience. Even now that they are associated with a series of activities, those activities are just random events. This is hardly key content.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Again, you seem to be limiting what you consider endgame content to make your argument that very specific endgame content is necessary or that it’s bad to stop development of very specific endgame content. Legendary crafting and non-repetitive story-driven content are not the only things you can do at end game. If a person CHOOSES to limit themselves to very specific things, they have very little reasonable ground to argue that other bits of content aren’t being made or given the level of attention they desire.
Anet thought they could make Legendary content and they couldn’t; it’s not that they cancelled it, it’s that it took so long to produce anything with it that they couldn’t deliver the Legendary weapon content anyways.
I’m not limiting what I consider to be endgame content to anything so specific.
If that’s the case, then why do we keep seeing arguments for continued development of Legendaries based on keeping players occupied at the endgame?
As a matter of fact … if we are so concerned for content to keep people occupied endgame, then that’s an argument FOR stopping Legendary development because those devs could be placed on more pertinent and sustainable content development.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
GW2 isn’t the game for you if you want traditional approach to getting loot.
No, you have options … you can either accept that Legendary crafting was unsustainable content, forget it and enjoy the other aspects of the game or decide that it’s such a big deal to you that you quit the game.
If anything were to be labeled as unsustainable content, it’s living world/story content that we’ve seen for the past two seasons. A couple hours of content that takes weeks to months to develop, followed by weeks or months of nothing new to do. It’s just not possible to make content at the rate players are able to go through it.
But I’m not going to argue for the suspension of that type of content. Even though I was far from impressed with the majority of Anet’s installments, I understand the value of such content. It offers change and growth to the world, and the ability to progress the game’s narrative. It keeps players interested and involved with the game’s world.
I’d prefer spend my time on long-term reward goals over more episodic story but I do not want to see living world content sacrificed for it. I don’t have the right to tell players that content that is important to them shouldn’t be made because I think the content that matters to me is more important.
I guess that’s a matter of opinion. Anet has the data to make these decisions, we don’t.
Which type of content we like is and feel is more important to us is indeed our personal opinion. But story-driven non-repetitive content being unable keep players occupied is a fact of game development.
Again, you seem to be limiting what you consider endgame content to make your argument that very specific endgame content is necessary or that it’s bad to stop development of very specific endgame content. Legendary crafting and non-repetitive story-driven content are not the only things you can do at end game. If a person CHOOSES to limit themselves to very specific things, they have very little reasonable ground to argue that other bits of content aren’t being made or given the level of attention they desire.
Anet thought they could make Legendary content and they couldn’t; it’s not that they cancelled it, it’s that it took so long to produce anything with it that they couldn’t deliver the Legendary weapon content anyways. It’s a waste of resources and the decision to put those resources to better use is a good one.
(edited by Obtena.7952)