You don’t seem to understand what you are actually paying for when you purchased HoT
And you seem to think that apparently i should just accept that what i actually paid for were empty promises, and i shouldn’t have expected any of them to be fulfilled at all. And like that, for some reason.
No, sorry. A major part of expansion is a major part of expansion. if i have paid for it, i expect all the major parts to actually be delivered. Or i won’t be prepurchasing anything from Anet again.Because if i accept the premise that Anet can (and will) change the deal after getting the money, and is not actually expected to deliver any major features, then i’d be stupid to give them any money before actually confirming that everything they advertised have already made it into the game.
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.
Despite what people think … QQing on the forums is not an effective avenue for changes, especially ones that are business related. While I do think Anet listens to players, I think decisions that affect the bottom line are communicated to us as a courtesy in the interest of open communication, not to open a debate with players to compel them to rethink the decision.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Which is none of your business. Everyone sets their own goals and everyone has different likes and dislikes.
Actually, it’s very much our business since you’re willingly and openly discussing in on a public forum. … so no, if people aren’t ready to talk about the goals they set for the endgame and how it relates to Legendary development, they shouldn’t use that as point for discussion and probably exclude themselves from the whole discussion in the first place.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
But, again, all of this isn’t even on track of the point. Anet did decide that more legendary weapons were needed, and sold us an expansion that promised to deliver that. Their decision to abandon it because it was too hard doesn’t change the fact that they saw the need, and accepted our money on the promise of fulfilling it.
You don’t seem to understand what you are actually paying for when you purchased HoT but I doubt I’m going to convince you otherwise. It’s the whole reason these arguments are flawed to begin with. Just to keep it simple .. you bought access to a service that has ongoing developing features; their priority was not specified, nor the timeline. I get that no one expected delays, indefinite or not. Well, it’s happening. You need to be more realistic about what that means for you. Finish your legendaries and quit or decide there is more to the game than that.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Less or not, there are still end game goals that are not making Legendary stuffs.
I think my point is pretty clear so I won’t continue to argue with you about who said what or useless things like that. With the current state of Legendaries, there isn’t any reason either of the two kinds of players I described can’t be satisfied with what we presently have.
I think it was described pretty clearly by several people that it’s quite possible to not be satisfied with what we currently have.
Well, I guess that goes to prove that in a game of millions of players, it’s hard to satisfy everyone which is sort of the point in the first place; some people just never satisfied, regardless of the effort and it would be folly for Anet to try … I think they are learning that now as are we. If there are players that exist where this decision significantly impacts their gameplay and enjoyment, they will leave and Anet understands that consequence.
I don’t think what I said changes; I described two kinds of players and a reasoning why the change shouldn’t really impact them. If you think there exists some other class of player that exists, go ahead and describe them and say why this is a major impact on them. You describe making 5-6 legendaries a year … if making legendaries is your WHOLE purpose in the game, I guess you will be done playing in a year or so. I don’t see a problem with that actually. You’re limiting your end game goals because there are lots of other things to do other than make Legendaries.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Who said anything about continuous development of legendaries?
Who? It’s the topic of the whole thread.
I think my point is pretty clear so I won’t continue to argue with you about who said what or useless things like that. With the current state of Legendaries, there isn’t any reason either of the two kinds of players I described can’t be satisfied with what we presently have.
People need to get over it; No, Anet did not deliver Legendaries .. and at least they were smart enough to know to stop wasting their time on them.
I think SAB will just be a momentary distraction. After the initial hype settles, and especially after SAB has gone away for another indefinite period of time, the community is not going to let go of the fact that the most prominent items on the already short list of endgame goals just got canned.
Except you can still make creating a Legendary an endgame goal so whatever the fact is that the community isn’t letting go of, it’s not that one.
Yeah, we can still make legendary weapons that have already been available for over 3 years. Weapons we’ve had 3 years to work toward, and have been acquiring for 3 years. For a lot of players, those aren’t goals anymore because we have everything we want out of the old set of legendaries.
An MMO isn’t going to last forever on a small set of endgame goals. As time goes by, people will accomplish those goals and new ones need to be added. HoT was sold to us under the premise that it was going to do that.
I don’t know about you but I think making 20ish Legendary weapons is a large goal itself, and not the only endgame goal that exists … so the idea that GW2 is going to come crashing down on people because ‘nothing to do endgame" isn’t really a sensible one.
first 3 years there wasn’t an end game. year 4, Collections are the end game and the game is still going semi-strong.
So you just might be right :-)
Honestly I think the user base should be complaining about the content release schedule instead of one offs like Legendary weapons. We knew going in that HoT was a hacked together expansion due to how they released previews about it. I am not surprised stuff that was to be included was dropped.
What I AM surprised about is the lack of fresh content. we waited from Jan3rd 2015 until Oct 2015 for what HoT brought to the table. We played it and got what we wanted out of it. Many were disappointed (myself included) so now we are waiting on the next release (LS3?!). Are we going to be waiting until Oct 2016 for the next batch release like we did in 2015?
That is what everyone should be focusing on here.
I think there is some truth to what you say, though we have to remember, endgame here isn’t typical for an MMO, it’s a wardrobe of skins. There is much misguided complaining in this thread. Why anyone would advocate continuing to develop what amounts to a skin with an effect over anything else … just wow.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
More teams ran mesmer than teams that did not. The best teams ran mesmer, and i’m willing to bet week 2 will see most teams copying the composition that the last NA game ran.
As a mesmer main I can honestly say Anet did a great job with my class in terms of nerfing/balancing. We remain in the meta and not super OP. We can contribute in all aspects of a match. We as a class are FINE and need nothing.
If you can’t see this then you should look at the 3 classes that are actually hurting at this time.
Yes sure, we are not in the worst place, like guardian, thief or warrior. But saying mesmer is fine and needs nothing is just a joke.
I wouldn’t put too much merit into the OP’s position on this. He used the exact same “How many of this class in PVP teams during tournament?” premise for nerfing Revenants.
Yet I’m right beyond a shadow of doubt.
It’s ok to not like the truth and you’re welcome to your opinion. Yet when facts are facts it’s time to listen.
Thanks
If Rev’s are so OP’ed like you claim because they were stacked in PVP tournaments … where are all the OP’ed Rev teams? Why did some teams defeat Mesmer moa combos?
No, I think what you do is make bad correlations. Just like the Rev isn’t OP’ed because it was stacked in PVP, neither is the Mesmer meta. People win because of skill and knowledge of themselves and their enemies, not because they play meta or stack classes.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I think SAB will just be a momentary distraction. After the initial hype settles, and especially after SAB has gone away for another indefinite period of time, the community is not going to let go of the fact that the most prominent items on the already short list of endgame goals just got canned.
Except you can still make creating a Legendary an endgame goal so whatever the fact is that the community isn’t letting go of, it’s not that one.
Yeah, we can still make legendary weapons that have already been available for over 3 years. Weapons we’ve had 3 years to work toward, and have been acquiring for 3 years. For a lot of players, those aren’t goals anymore because we have everything we want out of the old set of legendaries.
An MMO isn’t going to last forever on a small set of endgame goals. As time goes by, people will accomplish those goals and new ones need to be added. HoT was sold to us under the premise that it was going to do that.
I don’t know about you but I think making 20ish Legendary weapons is a large goal itself, and not the only endgame goal that exists … so the idea that GW2 is going to come crashing down on people because ‘nothing to do endgame" isn’t really a sensible one.
I never said GW2 was going to come crashing down right now because of it. But an old, unchanging list of goals will eventually run out of players left to attain them.
And for how many people are all 20 an actual goal? Sure, there are people that will (or already have) make all of them just because they are legendary, purple, and shiny. But for most players, the ones we like and will use get made.
I have 6 of them, and there are 1 or 2 more that I might consider. The rest I have no interest in. They aren’t goals for me, as I don’t like them and won’t use them. A new set of weapons brings with it a fairly good chance of new goals. I’m probably not going to want all of them, but I’m very likely to want some.
Again, I don’t think that it’s a genuine argument to say we need continuous development of Legendaries because an old, unchanging list of goals will eventually run out of players left to attain them. Isn’t a continuous provision of new Legendary weapons in fact, and old, unchanging list of things to do just by it’s very nature of being a repetitive process? OK, the output is different, but make no mistake, there is nothing interesting about obtaining the mats for your 20th Legendary weapon. It’s simply mechanical at that stage.
It think what is more realistic is that 1) you get players who make the Legendaries they like and 2) you get players who make as many Legendaries as possible. Unless you can think of some other player that doesn’t fit those descriptions, I don’t actually see the current number of Legendaries as unreasonable to satisfy the desires of the former kind of player or see a reason for Anet to sink a large number of resources into Legendary development for the latter kind of player.
I think SAB will just be a momentary distraction. After the initial hype settles, and especially after SAB has gone away for another indefinite period of time, the community is not going to let go of the fact that the most prominent items on the already short list of endgame goals just got canned.
Except you can still make creating a Legendary an endgame goal so whatever the fact is that the community isn’t letting go of, it’s not that one.
Yeah, we can still make legendary weapons that have already been available for over 3 years. Weapons we’ve had 3 years to work toward, and have been acquiring for 3 years. For a lot of players, those aren’t goals anymore because we have everything we want out of the old set of legendaries.
An MMO isn’t going to last forever on a small set of endgame goals. As time goes by, people will accomplish those goals and new ones need to be added. HoT was sold to us under the premise that it was going to do that.
I don’t know about you but I think making 20ish Legendary weapons is a large goal itself, and not the only endgame goal that exists … so the idea that GW2 is going to come crashing down on people because ‘nothing to do endgame" isn’t really a sensible one.
More teams ran mesmer than teams that did not. The best teams ran mesmer, and i’m willing to bet week 2 will see most teams copying the composition that the last NA game ran.
As a mesmer main I can honestly say Anet did a great job with my class in terms of nerfing/balancing. We remain in the meta and not super OP. We can contribute in all aspects of a match. We as a class are FINE and need nothing.
If you can’t see this then you should look at the 3 classes that are actually hurting at this time.
Yes sure, we are not in the worst place, like guardian, thief or warrior. But saying mesmer is fine and needs nothing is just a joke.
I wouldn’t put too much merit into the OP’s position on this. He used the exact same “How many of this class in PVP teams during tournament?” premise for nerfing Revenants.
I think SAB will just be a momentary distraction. After the initial hype settles, and especially after SAB has gone away for another indefinite period of time, the community is not going to let go of the fact that the most prominent items on the already short list of endgame goals just got canned.
Except you can still make creating a Legendary an endgame goal so whatever the fact is that the community isn’t letting go of, it’s not that one.
This discussion hinges on one thing: how you define the ‘legendary weapons’ problem.
Firstly, I think Anet implemented crafting because they thought it’s what players wanted, otherwise they wouldn’t have done anything and just made new precursors and recipes for new legendaries with the old process.
Secondly, I don’t always believe that players know what they want or are honest about what they want. I really don’t think the majority of people wanted anything but an easier/cheaper/faster way to get a Legendary weapon and pushed the idea of crafting as a way to get that, being naive thinking it would give them the easier/cheaper/faster way they desired.
Therefore, I think the situation we are in, no one wins. Anet wasted lots of time implementing something players told them they wanted but didn’t and increased the work needed to make new legendaries.
I’m with the OP, conceptually. I think future development on new Legendary weapons should just go away, for good though. They little function beyond their Ascended weapon cousins and cosmetically, are unique because of footfalls, but not visual effects.
I think the solution is to offer ways to ‘earn’ the effects that Legendary weapon give and apply them to characters (I would love lava pools on my Condition Guardian or black holes for my theif). That’s a win IMO because it’s another level of visual customization, still gives endgame goals that legendaries do and may be a little simpler to implement for ‘earning’.
But players DID want crafting. What they didn’t want was such a complex, time consuming, hideous gold sink. They boxed themselves into this by creating such a convoluted system.
NOBODY asked for that.
See, I consider anyone that talks like that to be one of the people that fooled themselves into thinking they wanted crafting as a method to get easier/cheaper/faster way to get a Legendary weapon … because you DID get crafting.
If you wanted crafting and got it and complained about it, then there is some more significant underlying desire that doesn’t align with what Legendary crafting delivered. THAT is exactly what I’m saying when I say the the whole Legendary issue depends on how you define what’s wrong with it.
The fact that all Legendaries have been suspended pretty much says that Anet thought it wasn’t a good system, moreso than even the players.
End of story.
Hold on … Anet suspending Legendary development should not lead anyone to conclude that Anet thinks Legendary crafting isn’t a good system. Regardless, that discussion is academic; whether it is or is not the reason, doesn’t have much to do with the topic at hand.
I don’t see where Anet can go with Legendaries as a category of gear, be it weapons armor or anything else. It just doesn’t add much to the game compared to other tiers and when considering what players want. As a player that wants the most visual customization options, Legendaries are not an ideal situation; I like footfalls, I don’t like them tied to specific skins. Once you ‘settle’ for whatever effect/skin you get, your left with a weapon equivalent in performance to Ascended.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
The fact is that it doesn’t matter if it’s complex or not … Anet delivered a crafting system that some (many, a few, all … again doesn’t matter) players indicated was a reasonable approach to ‘fixing’ legendaries. Stop getting hung up on words.
This discussion hinges on one thing: how you define the ‘legendary weapons’ problem.
Firstly, I think Anet implemented crafting because they thought it’s what players wanted, otherwise they wouldn’t have done anything and just made new precursors and recipes for new legendaries with the old process.
Secondly, I don’t always believe that players know what they want or are honest about what they want. I really don’t think the majority of people wanted anything but an easier/cheaper/faster way to get a Legendary weapon and pushed the idea of crafting as a way to get that, being naive thinking it would give them the easier/cheaper/faster way they desired.
Therefore, I think the situation we are in, no one wins. Anet wasted lots of time implementing something players told them they wanted but didn’t and increased the work needed to make new legendaries.
I’m with the OP, conceptually. I think future development on new Legendary weapons should just go away, for good though. They little function beyond their Ascended weapon cousins and cosmetically, are unique because of footfalls, but not visual effects.
I think the solution is to offer ways to ‘earn’ the effects that Legendary weapon give and apply them to characters (I would love lava pools on my Condition Guardian or black holes for my theif). That’s a win IMO because it’s another level of visual customization, still gives endgame goals that legendaries do and may be a little simpler to implement for ‘earning’.
But players DID want crafting. What they didn’t want was such a complex, time consuming, hideous gold sink. They boxed themselves into this by creating such a convoluted system.
NOBODY asked for that.
See, I consider anyone that talks like that to be one of the people that fooled themselves into thinking they wanted crafting as a method to get easier/cheaper/faster way to get a Legendary weapon … because you DID get crafting.
If you wanted crafting and got it and complained about it, then there is some more significant underlying desire that doesn’t align with what Legendary crafting delivered. THAT is exactly what I’m saying when I say the the whole Legendary issue depends on how you define what’s wrong with it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
This discussion hinges on one thing: how you define the ‘legendary weapons’ problem.
Firstly, I think Anet implemented crafting because they thought it’s what players wanted, otherwise they wouldn’t have done anything and just made new precursors and recipes for new legendaries with the old process.
Secondly, I don’t always believe that players know what they want or are honest about what they want. I really don’t think the majority of people wanted anything but an easier/cheaper/faster way to get a Legendary weapon and pushed the idea of crafting as a way to get that, being naive thinking it would give them the easier/cheaper/faster way they desired.
Therefore, I think the situation we are in, no one wins. Anet wasted lots of time implementing something players told them they wanted but didn’t and increased the work needed to make new legendaries.
I’m with the OP, conceptually. I think future development on new Legendary weapons should just go away, for good though. They little function beyond their Ascended weapon cousins and cosmetically, are unique because of footfalls, but not visual effects.
I think the solution is to offer ways to ‘earn’ the effects that Legendary weapon give and apply them to characters (I would love lava pools on my Condition Guardian or black holes for my theif). That’s a win IMO because it’s another level of visual customization, still gives endgame goals that legendaries do and may be a little simpler to implement for ‘earning’.
But you know? You are right about the legendary weapons. Indeed, they broke their word on being able to offer 16 new legendary weapons.
You know, kind of the same way a parent may break their promise in getting their kid the number of clementines they requested.
“Sorry sweety, you asked for 16 but I could only get you 4, I’m thinking we need to invest in more foodstap—”
“THEN I WILL BURN DOWN OUR HOME AND CURSE YOUR EXISTENCE”It’s not a good analogy. A parent/child relationship is not even remotely similar to a business/consumer relationship.
Comparing apples and oranges here.
Yes, literally.
But if the best you have for me is to tell me my analogy sucks, we agree. My analogy sucks. I’m trying to convey a point, not be Shakespeare.
True, that analogy sucks. This one is better:
Anet: Hey guys, if we don’t realign our resources to deliver high value content to you, this whole thing you know as GW2 won’t exist in a few short years.
Ok, before you say it, that’s not an analogy but it is true.
So, you think that GW2 is flirting with bankruptcy, and that’s why they’ve decided not to deliver all their HoT content?
I wouldn’t go that far because I just don’t think it’s there yet, but I think we have all seen games shut down for various reasons and I don’t think GW2 is immune to those same reasons. From what I’ve seen, Anet is testing new waters on many things and some of those things were in HoT and the tests didn’t do too well. Time to change course or yes, I think they will be in trouble.
IMO, Legendaries in general, are a failure so I’m not surprised by the decision and I won’t be surprised if they don’t come back, or come back in a significantly different form. The concept, the implementation, even some of the designs. I think the only idea they got right was having footfalls/effects.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
But you know? You are right about the legendary weapons. Indeed, they broke their word on being able to offer 16 new legendary weapons.
You know, kind of the same way a parent may break their promise in getting their kid the number of clementines they requested.
“Sorry sweety, you asked for 16 but I could only get you 4, I’m thinking we need to invest in more foodstap—”
“THEN I WILL BURN DOWN OUR HOME AND CURSE YOUR EXISTENCE”It’s not a good analogy. A parent/child relationship is not even remotely similar to a business/consumer relationship.
Comparing apples and oranges here.
Yes, literally.
But if the best you have for me is to tell me my analogy sucks, we agree. My analogy sucks. I’m trying to convey a point, not be Shakespeare.
True, that analogy sucks. This one is better:
Anet: Hey guys, if we don’t realign our resources to deliver high value content to you, this whole thing you know as GW2 won’t exist in a few short years.
Ok, before you say it, that’s not an analogy but it is true.
With the endless supply of weapon skins coming out of the gemstore is it really that difficult to add new legendaries?
Hopefully there’s a good trade off for this
I don’t think the difficulties with legendaries is making the skin. I think it’s the fact that Anet has now burdened the already complex creation process with activities that need to be tracked and checks against mastery completion.
I think the tradeoff is just to add more items that give effects because really, that’s the value added by owning one.
Mostly Polish Pagan Gods/Monsters/Heros/Legends. I appreciate a unique, well thought out name. If I don’t like a name, I will delete the character. It’s that important. Unfortunately, the game doesn’t support many of the letters I need for proper spelling so I have to make due.
Obtena – Sylvari Theif (Name taken from a skill in V:TES for manipulating shadows)
Zoszia – Norn Guardian (Polish for: Sophie)
Dzivozona – Sylvari Necro (some minor mystical figure)
Zdzislawja – Human Necro (just a Female name, no English translation I think)
Wiktorja – Human Engi (Polish for: Victoria)
Wojowniczka – Human Warrior (Female Warrior)
Kolecja – Sylvari Revenant (Related to ‘Thorn’)
Cyganskie – Human Ranger (Name means ‘gyspy’)
Czyrenka – Norn Mesmer (I was going for Szyrenka – Siren)
Polevoi – Norn Ele (some minor mystical figure)
Zadymienie – Norn Theif (some minor mystical figure)
(edited by Obtena.7952)
You think giving away gems is going to do that? You’re not serious now are you? You don’t give yourself or others very much credit as consumers if that’s your thinking.
It isn’t about gems, it’s about player loyalty and customer relations. When players feel disrespected they aren’t likely to stick around or put faith in a company to do better in future. ANet have been terrible about maintaining the good will of their players.
I know a lot of players who stopped buying gems because of the Infinite Continue Coin issue. This is much, much bigger.
So giving away gems is about loyalty and customer relations? Sorry, but I’m just not that medieval a customer to believe that if a company values me and they make a mistake, that throwing stuff at me makes me feel good.
Gems doesn’t fix what’s wrong, so I don’t want them. I want things fixed. Any player that accepts gems as a way to be placated to doesn’t care in the first place; they are just looking for something for free.
At this point I’m convinced you’d believe it if they shovelled kitten in your mouth and told you it was sugar.
What they decide as a business decision to represent the most amount of work done with the least amount of effort is not a direct, qualitative measure of GAME IMPACT.
I’m not sure what convinces you of that. It’s not a stretch of the imagination that they cancel development of specific content because it’s just not justified based on what players get for the amount of resources put to it. In fact, that’s probably the best reason to cancel content.
If this decision was oh-so-beneficial for the players why is it not met with thunderous applause?
Btw. Don’t try and weasel your way out of the fact this is not the original argument ^^.
Oh, that’s an easy one … because people think subjectively and selfishly. They don’t actually care what’s good for the game; they care what’s good for themselves.
multiple people have already stated how legendaries help the game. they help the economy and they help aesthetics. they are a massive gold and resource sink for ascended mats, t-2-6 cloth/wood/ore/leather, karma, dungeon token, and probably a thousand other misc items im forgetting like cores and omnomberries. they are a goal to work towards for the people who “have everything” and give new and old players quests to do. they are a huge factor in fashion-warsing, which is a significant gemstore seller, both for black lion skins to match the legendaries, and outfits and armors and now gliders. they are endgame content, and they are not a tiny thing, they are a big godkitten deal. even if you dont like legendaries and never plan to have one, there is no way you can claim with any truth that they are insignificant to the game as a whole.
There’s no question they are good for the game. I’m not happy they are being taken out. I do understand Anet’s decision though and I accept it if it’s what they have to do to get things on track. That’s not really what the question here is though. That’s not what the context of that particular post was about.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
At this point I’m convinced you’d believe it if they shovelled kitten in your mouth and told you it was sugar.
What they decide as a business decision to represent the most amount of work done with the least amount of effort is not a direct, qualitative measure of GAME IMPACT.
I’m not sure what convinces you of that. It’s not a stretch of the imagination that they cancel development of specific content because it’s just not justified based on what players get for the amount of resources put to it. In fact, that’s probably the best reason to cancel content.
If this decision was oh-so-beneficial for the players why is it not met with thunderous applause?
Oh, that’s an easy one … because people think subjectively and selfishly. They don’t actually care what’s good for the game; they care what’s good for themselves.
Oh and just to be clear, I didn’t claim it was beneficial for players anywhere so I don’t agree with your statement there. I’m just providing a reason why players aren’t happy with the change like you asked.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Legendaries are too low impact and not worth the effort to develop for what it brings to the game. MOB’s decision was a good one. I hope his next good decision is to provide double the Gemstore content, or more varied content. People making Legendaries doesn’t keep the lights on. There are other more engaging activities Anet should focus on to get people to play and buy stuff at the Gemstore.
Frankly, I think this is a sign Anet needs to review how they value their development time and efforts.
You are so clueless. The only reason why any mats had any value is because legendaries were gold sinks.
I can’t be that clueless; at least I understand that legendaries are NOT being removed and are still gold sinks.
I don’t mean to be an kitten , but without legendaries, what’s there in post-story HOT besides the zerg grind?
I don’t know but it doesn’t matter because that’s a hypothetical question … we aren’t without legendaries; Anet isn’t removing Legendaries from the game, they just aren’t making new ones.
Because not everyone wants to make a staff, shortbow, axe and pistol. What if you bought HoT wanting another legendary greatsword? That’s one person that has now been taken out of the the HoT related economy. That is game impact.
That’s right, it is game impact. It’s simply not enough for Anet to consider funding it to develop it, that’s why it’s low.
Lmao. Your assumptions on their game impact are baseless and doesn’t even have circumstantial supporting evidence. Take away the gold sinks in the economy and you break one of the core pillars of an MMO.
Anet is not removing Legendaries from the game. Legendaries are not the only way to get gold from people. Those are not assumptions. Any risk you find with the economy because of this decision can be addressed in other ways … if it needs to be. These are not real concerns to be honest; we already know Anet is more than willing to make necessary changes to things in the economy to keep it where they are comfortable.
Furthermore, those are not my assumptions on game impact, they are in fact, based on Anet’s own decision to scrap Legendary development as a business decision.
Legendaries are too low impact and not worth the effort to develop for what it brings to the game. MOB’s decision was a good one. I hope his next good decision is to provide double the Gemstore content, or more varied content. People making Legendaries doesn’t keep the lights on. There are other more engaging activities Anet should focus on to get people to play and buy stuff at the Gemstore.
Frankly, I think this is a sign Anet needs to review how they value their development time and efforts.
You are so clueless. The only reason why any mats had any value is because legendaries were gold sinks.
I can’t be that clueless; at least I understand that legendaries are NOT being removed and are still gold sinks.
I don’t mean to be an kitten , but without legendaries, what’s there in post-story HOT besides the zerg grind?
I don’t know but it doesn’t matter because that’s a hypothetical question … we aren’t without legendaries; Anet isn’t removing Legendaries from the game, they just aren’t making new ones.
Because not everyone wants to make a staff, shortbow, axe and pistol. What if you bought HoT wanting another legendary greatsword? That’s one person that has now been taken out of the the HoT related economy. That is game impact.
That’s right, it is game impact. It’s simply not enough of one for Anet to consider funding it to develop it, that’s why it’s low.
they have been promising new legendaries for 3 years. clearly they thought it was a big deal enough to work on for years.
Maybe they did feel that way for 3 years, but that’s not really relevant now. No, what is clear is that they have come to acknowledge that of all the content they are developing NOW, Legendaries is the lowest priority for them.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Legendaries are too low impact and not worth the effort to develop for what it brings to the game. MOB’s decision was a good one. I hope his next good decision is to provide double the Gemstore content, or more varied content. People making Legendaries doesn’t keep the lights on. There are other more engaging activities Anet should focus on to get people to play and buy stuff at the Gemstore.
Frankly, I think this is a sign Anet needs to review how they value their development time and efforts.
You are so clueless. The only reason why any mats had any value is because legendaries were gold sinks.
I can’t be that clueless; at least I understand that legendaries are NOT being removed and are still gold sinks.
I don’t mean to be an kitten , but without legendaries, what’s there in post-story HOT besides the zerg grind?
I don’t know but it doesn’t matter because that’s a hypothetical question … we aren’t without legendaries; Anet isn’t removing Legendaries from the game, they just aren’t making new ones.
Because not everyone wants to make a staff, shortbow, axe and pistol. What if you bought HoT wanting another legendary greatsword? That’s one person that has now been taken out of the the HoT related economy. That is game impact.
That’s right, it is game impact. It’s simply not enough of one for Anet to consider funding it to develop it, that’s why it’s low.
Legendaries are too low impact and not worth the effort to develop for what it brings to the game. MOB’s decision was a good one. I hope his next good decision is to provide double the Gemstore content, or more varied content. People making Legendaries doesn’t keep the lights on. There are other more engaging activities Anet should focus on to get people to play and buy stuff at the Gemstore.
Frankly, I think this is a sign Anet needs to review how they value their development time and efforts.
You are so clueless. The only reason why any mats had any value is because legendaries were gold sinks.
I can’t be that clueless; at least I understand that legendaries are NOT being removed and are still gold sinks.
I don’t mean to be an kitten , but without legendaries, what’s there in post-story HOT besides the zerg grind?
I don’t know but it doesn’t matter because that’s a hypothetical question … we aren’t without legendaries; Anet isn’t removing Legendaries from the game, they just aren’t making new ones.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
This was a decision that makes sense. Legendary weapons, no matter how awesome, have a very low impact on the game’s activities.
Here it is again.
Thats your opening argument. People presented counter arguments against that. Now you are shifting the goal posts. You didnt “clarify” so much as admitting your argument was proven completely false. You might as well have said legendary weapons dont cure aids, therefore they were rescinded
I fail to see how I didn’t discuss the counter arguments. I saw one; that Legendaries are impact for the economy. My response was simple and true; They aren’t being removed, so they still have that same impact; I never claimed they didn’t.
My claim is very simple; Legendaries are low impact content in the game; in otherwords, they are lots of work, little benefit to the game; low ROI. For some reason you’re stuck on not being able to make the connection between what I mean between low impact and return on investment, even though I have provided you with multiple clarifications, including again, this one. That’s not backtracking, that’s not shifting goalposts; that’s ALWAYS been my position.
If that was always your position it REALLY should have been in your first argument thwn shouldn’kitten Otherwise why is the onus on others to understand what you’ve misled
I think it’s rather disingenuous to imply I’ve misled you since I’ve clarified what I’ve said many times. Unfortunately, I can’t force anyone to read more than they are willing so if you’ve gotten stuck on my first post and can’t move on, I’m not willing to accept blame for that.
My position hasn’t changed; Legendaries are too low impact and not worth the effort to develop for what it brings to the game. MOB’s decision was a good one. I hope his next good decision is to provide double the Gemstore content, or more varied content. People making Legendaries doesn’t keep the lights on. There are other more engaging activities Anet should focus on to get people to play and buy stuff at the Gemstore.
Frankly, I think this is a sign Anet needs to review how they value their development time and efforts. Seems to me they are giving it away too cheaply in too short a time. In hindsight, seem to be a pay to access real time scheme would be more appropriate because players wouldn’t feel ripped off.
“You want access to these three new Legendary paths? OK you pay”. I would go for that.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
They are probably doing what they are paid to do, and that’s not to chit chat on the forums. It’s a little ironic that people are complaining about developments getting cut, but then wonder why they don’t see devs chatting them up on the forums.
This was a decision that makes sense. Legendary weapons, no matter how awesome, have a very low impact on the game’s activities.
Here it is again.
Thats your opening argument. People presented counter arguments against that. Now you are shifting the goal posts. You didnt “clarify” so much as admitting your argument was proven completely false. You might as well have said legendary weapons dont cure aids, therefore they were rescinded
I fail to see how I didn’t discuss the counter arguments. I saw one; that Legendaries are impact for the economy. My response was simple and true; They aren’t being removed, so they still have that same impact; I never claimed they didn’t.
My claim is very simple; Legendaries are low impact content in the game; in otherwords, they are lots of work, little benefit to the game; low ROI. For some reason you’re stuck on not being able to make the connection between what I mean between low impact and return on investment, even though I have provided you with multiple clarifications, including again, this one. That’s not backtracking, that’s not shifting goalposts; that’s ALWAYS been my position.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Well, it did materialize, because I clarified it many times in following posts, giving you the opportunity to try and understand it. You simply decided to ignore all those times and choose to make a pedantic argument from your own interpretation of what I said.
Frankly, the whole idea of Legendary weapons is not all that great one because the effects are coupled to the skins and that really takes away from what is so great to this game; customizing the look of your character. I hope they have a good hard look at permanently scrapping effects tied to gear and implement a new way that allows players to simply choose desired effects and apply to characters as a whole without having to be coupled to a skins themselves.
Just speculating here but If these individuals are set to work on gemstore skins/items, the game is MUCH better served in that than what they were doing on Legendary development.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Monetizing your disappointments do not help to improve the game.
People quitting the game in droves doesn’t improve the game either. If there was something to stop the hemorraghing of players in the form of a gift you would be against it?
You think giving away gems is going to do that? You’re not serious now are you? You don’t give yourself or others very much credit as consumers if that’s your thinking.
So far, I have seen zero successful dismissal of arguments. The arguments still stand.
No argument presented is going to change the fact that Legendaries as content do not have a good ROI; this is low impact. These are business decisions, first and foremost.
Customer retention is high impact. They can start making decisions based on what the lowest percentage of players and what the highest percentage of players want, but guess what…eventually…when you lose enough of those lowest percentages…you aren’t going to have much left. Not the first game I’ve seen go with that strategy. Every one that has done that…has ended up as a failure.
Everything has a customer retention impact so that really doesn’t differentiate Legendary content from anything else. What does differentiate Legendary content is the ROI to make it. That’s why I say Legendaries are low impact content; Costly to implement, little to benefit from.
Yup, and that doesn’t change because Legendaries aren’t being removed so I don’t think what I said is wrong.
That still doesn’t change the fact that you continue to decide to ignore my clarifications to be antagonistic and argue on irrelevant factorss, ignoring the most important one; that this is a business decision and Legendaries are not good ROI for Anet.
Lmao, that isnt so much as clarification, its pure backtracking. Your original argument was blown out of the water, and now you are having another pointless try at linking it to business decisions.
My argument always was linked to the business part of the decision because that’s all that matters, you simply didn’t understand that.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Removing legendaries is a horrible business decision. As someone who enjoys skins, dressing up, and looking nice Legendary weapons are literally my endgame. Removing legendary weapons removes the endgame grind for people who want to have the perfect look. How many of those people do you think buy skins?
Sorry but that makes no sense. No legendaries are being removed from the game so you can still target whatever look you want based on whatever Legendaries exist right now. You can’t say you can’t get the perfect look because of Legendaries you never seen before that won’t become game content.
Yup, and that doesn’t change because Legendaries aren’t being removed so I don’t think what I said is wrong.
That still doesn’t change the fact that you continue to decide to ignore my clarifications to be antagonistic and argue on irrelevant factorss, ignoring the most important one; that this is a business decision and Legendaries are not good ROI for Anet.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
So far, I have seen zero successful dismissal of arguments. The arguments still stand.
No argument presented is going to change the fact that Legendaries as content do not have a good ROI; this is low impact. These are business decisions, first and foremost.
This was a decision that makes sense. Legendary weapons, no matter how awesome, have a very low impact on the game’s activities.
L. items are the pinnacle of the “work towards the cool looks” GW2 endgame. You’d be hard pressed to find another goal that’s as lengthy or expensive, or that even comes close. Crafting them, and Asc. drives the GW2 economy. You’d be hard pressed to name anything else in the PvE game that has a greater impact.
I’m not sure how you equate what has a great impact or not. Legendary weapons are low in my book; high entrance fee, high cost, minimal effect. Pinnacle or not, those factors make it low.
Much of the GW2 economy is driven by legendary crafting and precursor sales.
That’s just much speculation on your part. That doesn’t matter anyways … they aren’t taking them OUT, they just aren’t adding new ones.
you have little to no evidence that legendaries have low impact, where as the the trading post provides much evidence how much of an impact they have on the economy. My post was highlighting that fact.
You have no idea from the TP what fraction of sales are impacted by Legendaries crafting. Thanks though.
What I do know … not everyone pursues a Legendary, when they do it costs them quite a bit and they have little benefit to you once you do get them. The ‘evidence’ is quite clear by simply comparing to what other weapons are available and the cost/effort needed to make them. That’s why Legendary ‘content’ is low Impact content.
Have you been rubbing your hands recently selling sapphire orbs for 10x the price they sold for before HoT? Yes you have. You can thank legendaries for that.
Tyvm.
And that has nothing to do with Anet deciding to not introduce more Legendary weapons. TYVM.
You’re just rambling now. I already dismissed the arguments you are making because Anet isn’t REMOVING Legendaries, there will see me people wanting to make the ones that exist … Read my posts to see what I’m talking about when I say it’s low impact.
This was a decision that makes sense. Legendary weapons, no matter how awesome, have a very low impact on the game’s activities.
L. items are the pinnacle of the “work towards the cool looks” GW2 endgame. You’d be hard pressed to find another goal that’s as lengthy or expensive, or that even comes close. Crafting them, and Asc. drives the GW2 economy. You’d be hard pressed to name anything else in the PvE game that has a greater impact.
I’m not sure how you equate what has a great impact or not. Legendary weapons are low in my book; high entrance fee, high cost, minimal effect. Pinnacle or not, those factors make it low.
Much of the GW2 economy is driven by legendary crafting and precursor sales.
That’s just much speculation on your part. That doesn’t matter anyways … they aren’t taking them OUT, they just aren’t adding new ones.
you have little to no evidence that legendaries have low impact, where as the the trading post provides much evidence how much of an impact they have on the economy. My post was highlighting that fact.
You have no idea from the TP what fraction of sales are impacted by Legendaries crafting. Thanks though.
What I do know … not everyone pursues a Legendary, when they do it costs them quite a bit and they have little benefit to you once you do get them. The ‘evidence’ is quite clear by simply comparing to what other weapons are available and the cost/effort needed to make them. That’s why Legendary ‘content’ is low Impact content.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
This was a decision that makes sense. Legendary weapons, no matter how awesome, have a very low impact on the game’s activities.
L. items are the pinnacle of the “work towards the cool looks” GW2 endgame. You’d be hard pressed to find another goal that’s as lengthy or expensive, or that even comes close. Crafting them, and Asc. drives the GW2 economy. You’d be hard pressed to name anything else in the PvE game that has a greater impact.
I’m not sure how you equate what has a great impact or not. Legendary weapons are low in my book; high entrance fee, high cost, minimal effect. Pinnacle or not, those factors make it low.
Much of the GW2 economy is driven by legendary crafting and precursor sales.
That’s just much speculation on your part. That doesn’t matter anyways … they aren’t taking them OUT, they just aren’t adding new ones.
This was a decision that makes sense. Legendary weapons, no matter how awesome, have a very low impact on the game’s activities.
L. items are the pinnacle of the “work towards the cool looks” GW2 endgame. You’d be hard pressed to find another goal that’s as lengthy or expensive, or that even comes close. Crafting them, and Asc. drives the GW2 economy. You’d be hard pressed to name anything else in the PvE game that has a greater impact.
I’m not sure how you equate what has a great impact or not. Legendary weapons are low in my book; high entrance fee, high cost, minimal effect. Pinnacle or not, those factors make it low.
That’s a rather self-serving assessment. Some of the things you list are ongoing and others are just done.
This was a decision that makes sense. Legendary weapons, no matter how awesome, have a very low impact on the game’s activities.
See, I told y’all that eventually they were going to merge this into a completely unhelpful superthread of nonsense.
There was no question in my mind … it was the same topic. You’re thread really didn’t add anything to the discussion that was already going on.
I don’t understand why this is a big deal … if you have been paying attention, you know Anet adjusts for extreme situations for materials that are excessive or lacking.
There is actually no solution here because this isn’t a problem. Any != All
All that might be true. It has little to do with the problem that I and others see with outfits. People complaining that they can buy stuff in the gemstore is a rather stupid reason to stop offering things in the gemstore to be quite frank. The complaint wasn’t that they offered it in the gemstore, it was that it was in the gemstore ONLY. Exploring the space of more customizable skins in the gemstore could actually HELP deal with that.
Also, If someone is buying something transmutable, it’s also ridiculous to complain about the fact it’s transmutable. It’s also much less of a problem now that we get those transmutations as game rewards.
Regardless, those two points have little to do with asking Anet to explore the space of more customization on skins they offer in the Gemstore and I attest they should do so to optimize revenue.
I’m sorry but if I buy something of the gem store, I don’t expect to have to buy another item from it to keep.using it.
Awesome, because I’m not suggesting that at all ><
Also ANet has said outfits are easier to make, they don’t have to worry about parts matching up with other parts.
I know all this, you know all this, everyone knows all this. I’m not disagreeing with any of that; this thread isn’t a debate about why Anet makes outfits. If you can’t get past trying to start an argument that no one is willing to have with you, you clearly can’t understand what I’m talking about in this thread. Thanks.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
OK but the ratio of cost to stats increase is itself an objective measure.
Measure of what? What does it measure? The discussion was about worth, which is not measured by that ratio. The ratio is nothing but an obfuscation to cover the fact that the assertion was wrong. Even the ratio itself plays a purely subjective role in determining the worth of the gear. One player can point to it as evidence that the gear is well worth the price while another can use it as evidence that the gear is not worth the price.
For me it measures ROI. I give something, I get something back for it. That’s not just made up nonsense either; that’s pretty much exactly how every consumer or investor thinks too. Don’t try to pretend what I’ve proposed as a metric is so abstract that it doesn’t make sense.
Ironclad is what made me make this thread … there are actually elements of it I would love to use, but other parts of it that I think are as plain as skins you get from whites or blues.
I think it’s a stretch to imply Anet allowed any role/class combination because of traits and they intended it. I’m more apt to say they didn’t want it to be a thing, which is probably why it’s not a thing now.
That is reasonable. But I think the thread was not actually about what has more value to people; there is little to be gained in that discussion. It was simply the fact that Ascended armor isn’t necessary to complete raids, for organized groups or even for PUG’s. I think in either case, anyone insisting on Ascended gear simply doesn’t understand it’s impact on a groups ability to finish content. It’s in the noise.