(edited by Obtena.7952)
Great, 99.9% of your play time is to farm.
Not sure if sarcasm but … just playing the game gets you the rewards needed to work towards a Legendary if you want it.
If a player joined a team, and didn’t make sure (before entering) he fits, it’s all his fault.
That’s one way to look at it. Of course, that’ appears to be the view of someone who puts their fate into someone else’s hands. If a person’s enjoyment hinges on someone else, it’s THEIR best interests to ensure they play with people that don’t negatively affect that enjoyment. That includes someone who has a specific requirement making a team. Never is anyone relieved of the responsibility to play in a way that they enjoy themselves. That’s why I advocate people play how they want. It’s why it makes SENSE to screen players in teams.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
The bottom line is that the so called “elitists” aren’t the ones asking for a change.
It’s interesting you mention that because casual players aren’t the only one QQing about being kicked from teams where they don’t ‘play right’. It actually goes to why I think people hate elitists. Of course, it’s way back there, page 2 or something, so I’m sure you missed it because you keep wanting to play the blame game with me starting on page 5.
Yes, the OP’s care doesn’t carry any weight here … maybe he should have attached funny GIF or video of a staff-camp Guardian AMIRITE?
Regardless … if people didn’t care, this thread would have ended 5 pages ago.
Nobody cares what you think is justified, what you think the reasons are, or what you think about the arguments.
The OP cares, otherwise wouldn’t have made the thread. If YOU didn’t care so much, you wouldn’t reply either.
Who’s looking for a solution? My teams aren’t ruined by any of this … I don’t make up extra requirements for teams I form. It’s the same for anyone else that doesn’t bring extra baggage and requirements to team building as well … Bring your build, let’s have fun … and we do. If ANY should be looking for a solution, it’s the people that QQ about casuals or whatever they are called.
I’m suggesting what I think is the sources of hate for elitists. Perhaps you don’t think that’s justified so you’re putting up these 3 arguments about who’s to blame. I don’t care. Justified or not, it happens and there is a reason for it and I’m pretty sure I’m not far off from what that reason is.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
You’ve got to be kidding me.
Nope, not kidding. Cookie’s got it figured out, some others too. I’m not getting drawn into some debate about how it’s someone’s fault. I’m pointing out what I think is why hate for elitists. Both sides have to make efforts to improve.
You can claim all the forum PWNage you want. Just another reason people will add to the elitist hate list. Might as well make some bowbear ranger fail vids while we are at it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’m not arguing that from a lore POV that they can’t or shouldn’t exist. IIt’s simply not practical. My stance is simple 3 points … there is no need for mounts, it’s alot of work for little return, it’s not inline with the concept of the game. Two of those points aren’t even my opinion. Mounts would not get people anywhere faster than current methods. Mounts would not improve GW2 bottom line based on the work required to implement them. As a business decision, mounts would be dubious; a gamble. Anet doesn’t need to gamble.
Based on the information you obtained from the last Anet meeting you attended?
Based on the fact that it takes time money and effort to make when they aren’t needed in the game, especially if they already compromise current game content and concepts.
I don’t really care what fancy buffs you think a mount could have. Fancy buffs aren’t compelling reasons to make a whole new system to deliver them. If you want fancy buffs, it’s simply a new elite skill or whatever. There are plenty of ways to deliver buffs to team mates in the game already. Justifying mounts with buff delivery … nonsense.
I have an understanding of how the business works, what I try not to do is speculate on things without the numbers that can prove my point.
I have already proven that Anet will compromise current game content and concepts.
I also don’t really care less what you think as well, so by that token at least we agree.
It’s cute you don’t care less what I think. I guess you threw that in there just to make me feel bad? I will just go back to the fact that mounts aren’t needed and too much work to bother with. Ah, now I feel better.
OH I think I heard a flea fart … must mean it’s a good time for mounts. I jest. Everyone keep making non-compelling arguments for mounts. It’s working good.
So a system like this leaving a bad taste in someone’s mouth is not “finding it offensive”?
Sure, but it’s not Anet’s issue. People expect the most expensive gear in the game to be easily gotten. When it’s not, they quit or QQ forever. Those aren’t compelling reasons to change anything or even leave the game if you like it.
Also, it’s kind of a distortion of the topic to simply call it “visual content.” AFAIK, you can make ascended weapons that are as powerful as legendaries, so yes, they’re not “the best.” But they’re obviously intended to be a highly-sought-after item and are a mark of someone who has invested a lot of time into the game (they are also very recognizable, giving them extra show-offy prestige).
Exactly … Legendarys are just Ascended gear but more fancy. Visual Content. If someone can’t make a Legendary, it’s of no matter. They can get Ascended. The only reason to get all bumhurt due to not having a Legedary is because there is no brag factor. Rightly so … it’s a bragging item. People need to get over how ‘hardcore’ they are when they see how much effort it takes to get a Legendary.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Excuse me? I have over 7k hours in game. I’m hardly a casual player.
You and I used to play on RoF together, a whole lot of WvW.
I guess you’ve forgotten that?
You know what this tells me … you can’t even earn an average of 50s per hour of play (=3500 g for your 7K hours of play) to get a legendary. What are you doing with your time?
What made you think I don’t have one? I never said that.
I have Dawn on my mesmer. I also have ascended weapons on most of my characters, most of them with reasonably rare skins from the forge. I have ascended armor on one character, all crafts maxed and 15k achieve points. I play this game a LOT, but mostly WvW which is no way to get rich in this game.
You talk like it but your right, I assumed too much. Still, Legendary isn’t something people need, so if someone doesn’t earn enough to get one, tough. Thread is silly.
I’m not arguing that from a lore POV that they can’t or shouldn’t exist. IIt’s simply not practical. My stance is simple 3 points … there is no need for mounts, it’s alot of work for little return, it’s not inline with the concept of the game. Two of those points aren’t even my opinion. Mounts would not get people anywhere faster than current methods. Mounts would not improve GW2 bottom line based on the work required to implement them. As a business decision, mounts would be dubious; a gamble. Anet doesn’t need to gamble.
Based on the information you obtained from the last Anet meeting you attended?
Based on the fact that it takes time money and effort to make when they aren’t needed in the game, especially if they already compromise current game content and concepts.
I don’t really care what fancy buffs you think a mount could have. Fancy buffs aren’t compelling reasons to make a whole new system to deliver them. If you want fancy buffs, it’s simply a new elite skill or whatever. There are plenty of ways to deliver buffs to team mates in the game already. Justifying mounts with buff delivery … nonsense.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
The fact is that Anet still didn’t say BiS.
How is “best statistical loot” different from BiS? Read the link above, they clearly said “best statistical loot”. The fact is, you’re wrong.
I’m not wrong … Anet didn’t say BiS. That’s there out. They fed us a line that doesn’t make sense. People interpret this as BiS … Anet says “well, we never said BiS, you did”.
I’ll ask again, how is “best statistical loot” different from BiS? Until you can explain that (which you can’t since the terms are synonymous), you’re still very very wrong.
I’m not wrong because I’m not claiming it’s the same or different. I’m just telling you the FACT that Anet NEVER said BiS.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
The fact is that Anet still didn’t say BiS.
How is “best statistical loot” different from BiS? Read the link above, they clearly said “best statistical loot”. The fact is, you’re wrong.
I’m not wrong … Anet didn’t say BiS. That’s there out. They aren’t that stupid so they fed us a line that doesn’t make sense. People interpret this as BiS … Anet says “well, we never said BiS, you did”.
Excuse me? I have over 7k hours in game. I’m hardly a casual player.
You and I used to play on RoF together, a whole lot of WvW.
I guess you’ve forgotten that?
You know what this tells me … you can’t even earn an average of 50s per hour of play (=3500 g for your 7K hours of play) to get a legendary. What are you doing with your time?
Witch’s broom has no animations, etc … it doesn’t demonstrate the mechanics needed for mounts is in place.
I’m not arguing that from a lore POV that they can’t or shouldn’t exist. IIt’s simply not practical. My stance is simple 3 points … there is no need for mounts, it’s alot of work for little return, it’s not inline with the concept of the game. Two of those points aren’t even my opinion. Mounts would not get people anywhere faster than current methods. Mounts would not improve GW2 bottom line based on the work required to implement them. As a business decision, mounts would be dubious; a gamble. Anet doesn’t need to gamble.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t think it’s realistic to compare one class to another because the concepts are different. Does Guardian work as it’s class is conceived, designed and implemented. I would say yes. If that’s ‘deficient’ when compared to other classes, players can choose other classes to play. Anet has made it VERY clear (as well as seen historically in other MMO’s) that class concepts dictate what you get and how you do stuff and that Guardian concept is where they want it to be based on the Ready Up interview on class balance.
Technically we have instances with in them raids because of megaservers.
I’m not exaggerating it at all. Ignorant players assume it’s something done in a weekend. It’s a massive implementation. It’s quite irrelevant that other MMO’s do it. It took those MMO’s significant effort as well.
Well considering that it’s completely plausible for someone to be extremely loyal to this game, burn hundreds of gold trying to get a precursor, and never get one.. I don’t see how that’s being senselessly fickle.
Going to say it again … loyal players don’t quit over visual content, unless they find it offensive. Loyal players don’t focus on the few small things they dislike about the game. They revel in the great many things the like about it. Burning hundreds of gold does not matter to them. Let’s look at that article:
“The one thing that could probably bring my better half back to GW2 is the option to earn a guaranteed precursor weapon through dedicated gameplay.”
Instantly I have a problem … If I’m ‘dedicated’, assuming that means someone plays ‘alot’, then you are guaranteed a precursor. Everything ingame gives you rewards that you can use to make gold, which inturn you can buy a precursor which is always available on the TP. Obviously this writer’s better half isn’t as dedicated a player as would be necessary to justify even owning a legendary. I stopped reading there because that writer’s statement is just nonsense.
The biggest complaint about legendaries shouldn’t be how much gold you need to craft/buy one; it should be the fact that you don’t need to do anything epic to earn it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Let’s start with the 3 arguments you keep ignoring, as they’re going nowhere.
Because you’re only interested in debating who’s to blame … I don’t care about that. It’s not important. Blame who you want. It doesn’t change how people act ingame. It doesn’t change why people hate elitists. None of the ‘helpful debate’ you’re proposing I have with you accomplishes anything IMO. It’s just more toxicity. If avoiding that makes ME the troll, so be it.
If people can’t move on from pointing fingers, they deserve to get their LFG messages ignored, kicked from teams and all the other drama that comes with blaming people and acting poorly.
Its quite simple. There doesn’t need to be a completely new system.
?? Quite simply it does because it doesn’t exist ingame. You can think up any system you want … that doesn’t make it magically appear ingame. Skins, animations, rules for access, at a minimum. None of that exists for mounts. If they allow possibility to fly … etc… CLearly you haven’t though about what kind of mounts people are wanting here. They want to climb up on dragons and wolves, etc… because it’s pretty. The argument we need mounts for speed is nonsense because we have that. It’s about aesthetics.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’m commenting exactly the format that I would like mounts to take – speed boosts. Which traditionally takes the form of mounts.
I think that’s exactly why you won’t see them introduced in the game. Everyone already has access to that.
This is why exactly I am advocating that they be introduced. Most professions already have it (not all).
Why not separate a quality of life feature from the core combat mechanics, and avoid the unfairness of some professions not having access to it?
SO you’re advocating Anet waste time to re-implement something that isn’t needed or is even universally desired by it’s players simply to separate QoL from a mechanic that already exists? Compelling argument ><
There is nothing unfair here … profession concepts dictate what is ‘fair’ for your profession to have as skills. If you don’t like that, Anet is nice enough to give you an out with Traveler’s runes.
I didn’t want to come back and get caught up in another endless debate over mounts, but what you say here kinda warranted my need to supply you with an observation.
MAGIC FIND This right here is prof that Anet can and will at their discretion compromise functionality and gear, if the desire for change is there. They took a system within the game and changed almost all of it, except for what food and boosters.
I think that comparison is flawed … MF was ALWAYS this ingame as a concept, including the idea it could be buffed, etc.. . It was simply modified to be a permanent stat on your character. Mounts on the other hand are NOT a concept ingame. In fact, nothing ingame works like a mount for players. It’s a completely new system that Anet would have to implement for questionable ROI.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’m commenting exactly the format that I would like mounts to take – speed boosts. Which traditionally takes the form of mounts.
I think that’s exactly why you won’t see them introduced in the game. Everyone already has access to that. Anet seems to be a little off the beaten path with their concepts. Their goal isn’t to make a WoW clone. That’s why they are successful with the game. Speed-boost mounts doesn’t seem inline with GW2.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I think we are all saying the same thing then. The difference is that I don’t believe that’s a problem. It’s just a consequence of the class concept and balancing.
I want mounts. Why?
Because compromising my build to include perma 25% run speed is stupid.
Because paying through the nose for Traveler’s Runes, which provide little benefit other than perma 25% run speed, is stupid.
Because sacrificing a slot on my skill bar for perma 25% run speed is stupid.
Assuming that mounts would prevent any of that is EXTREMELY presumptuous. Players love to imagine how they would like something to work. It rarely ends up how they envision it. Even if mounts DO make it in game, I don’t believe they would compromise the class concepts and gear that is available to overcome those deficiencies.
In short, you just described great reasons for not introducing mounts …
Loyal players are healthy for the longevity of any MMO, regardless of how much money they directly funnel into the hands of the company. An MMO with a population of 100 people, all of whom are spending hundreds of dollars on gems, is not a popluation that’s going to last – there’s no community for them to play the game with.
That said, the point of my response wasn’t to talk about the value of a player that quits. My point was more that it’s a buyer’s market right now for video games in general, so players can get away with having higher standards and quicker dealbreakers than they would have in the days when you could count your game options on one hand.
Then your point has nothing to do with legendaries … a fickle player in GWE2 over something as trivial as an aestetic item is just as fickle in other games. YOu speak of loyalty? Anyone who quits a game over this triviality isn’t ever loyal, so they aren’t contributing to the healthy longevity of any game.
If your logic is to play top tier classes, quit now. Even the mighty will fall.
Funnily enough you were the one who brought things off topic. Anyway thanks for the entertainment.
Nothing off topic here. Much of what is being discussed points directly to the question asked by the OP.
Pretty much this. I figure anyone that wants to move out of inefficient pug runs are aware of the situation and will do the research. Googling ‘gw2 speed run’ will get you 90% of the way there. It’s certainly not hard. Getting gear, build and an idea of what to do is most of it.
This shows you don’t understand other people’s values. Not everyone is trying to get out of ‘inefficient PUG runs’ so they have no reason to do what you suggest. Again and again … they don’t value what the content and message for those speed run videos have to show them. Why would they watch them?
Noticing you signature I’m starting to see why you keep making up things stirring up drama. Just because people say and prove that your burning guardian build sucks in meta PvE, doesn’t mean you have to take your angst out on the people that want nothing to do with you.
Oh look, I’ve hooked a big one boys. That burning build link is good bait.
So you are being a troll. How sad.
Perhaps if people stuck to the topic and the discussion at hand instead of making assumptions about someone’s signature, they wouldn’t need to get trolled. My sig isn’t relevant to the topic. Why would you bring it up if you wanted to be part of a serious discussion? Sorry, you are trolling ME.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Is it so unreasonable to expect people to have 2 working brain cells?
If this subforum is an indicator, I would say yes. Does two working braincells allow someone to learn what requirements are for speed runs from watching a dungeon run video? I’m thinking no.
=/ I thought this was an actual debate. Well now I feel a bit silly for wasting my time.
I don’t think there is a place in the debate to claim that two working brain cells equates to people understanding someone’s requirements for teaming, even after watching some dungeon run videos.
Noticing you signature I’m starting to see why you keep making up things stirring up drama. Just because people say and prove that your burning guardian build sucks in meta PvE, doesn’t mean you have to take your angst out on the people that want nothing to do with you.
Oh look, I’ve hooked a big one boys. That burning build link is good bait.
Is it so unreasonable to expect people to have 2 working brain cells?
If this subforum is an indicator, I would say yes. Does two working braincells allow someone to learn what requirements are for speed runs from watching a dungeon run video? I’m thinking no.
I feel really sorry for you if you cant work it out for yourself.
Don’t be sorry for me … I’m not the one making teams with gear/build requirements that people ignore.
I did, the rest was just a nice story that makes me feel warm and fuzzy about how you act to people that don’t meet your requirements. What you want me to say? You’re right about apathetic people not learning what you want from them because you’re so helpful?
Is it so unreasonable to expect people to have 2 working brain cells?
If this subforum is an indicator, I would say yes. Does two working braincells allow someone to learn what requirements are for speed runs from watching a dungeon run video? I’m thinking no.
No, no. Listen.
I don’t expect every new player to know everything from the very beginning. I just expect them to show some interest, to watch a kitten youtube video of whatever dungeon we’re running before joining the group or at the very least voice that they’re inexperienced and would like to learn.
I’ve watched Youtube videos to learn dungeons. There are many. They don’t explain specific requirements for teaming with specific groups. You don’t necessarily learn that watching youtube videos … or even coming to the dungeon forums ironically. That’s just another opportunity you guys are missing. Where is the guide to teaming with speed run people?
We have no obligation to do so.
No you don’t, but it is YOUR best interests to do it anyways.
Do you realise how much time we would spend explaining if we did that for every single person?
What’s the alternative? People reading LFG message working out?
It seems you live in fantasy land with your unnatural optimism. But unfortunately the world isnt quite like that. Deal with it. Not everyone is willing to help others and certainly not all the time.
That’s pretty ironic statement considering I’m not the one with the problem people playing how they want. It’s not my unnatural optimism that makes me think people will learn others expectations for teaming through mind reading and respect LFG messages.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Being new doesn’t magically mean you have no responsibility to show some initiative.
And in the same vein, being a veteran with requirements for teaming gives you the most knowledge and incentive to ensure new people understand those requirements; help them out. Again, take initiative to WHAT? What ingame clues people into these player-established requirements? Nothing. It’s an excuse. It’s your requirements, it’s your responsibility you team people that meet them.
I mean, I think this twist on the conversation is pretty funny: You don’t want gimps joining your teams and your fanatical about the level of performance and values you want from people that team with you …. but you don’t want to do anything to educate or discourage people that have no idea they aren’t meeting your requirements from joining your teams. GG guys. You’re laissez-faire approach to what appears to be a very meaningful part of the game to you leaves me speechless. Expect so much from others because you’re willing to do almost nothing for yourself.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
What about the professions that have no access to poison?
What about not running solo in group content, then wondering why a class is dificient in poison?
Can still end up not having poison in group content. Just sayin, its not on every build let alone every profession (4/8 if they even use it).
So, we nerf healing then? I don’t think so.
Where did I say nerf their healing?
That was the context of the reply I made to that guy. You didn’t say it, but it’s not too much to ask you understand the context of why it was made if your going to respond.
I could be misinterpreting this. But what I took from this post is you think its ok to set requirements for a group. But if someone who doesnt meet those requirements joins your LFG you should take the time to explain exactly what your LFG message means before removing them. Or you are not allowed to kick them at all.
What twisted logic makes you think this?
The logic that tells me people with requirements want better understanding and behaviour from people joining as their teams as PUGs.
I’d like to know how are experienced players supposed to teach the less experienced if they don’t do so much as asking a darn question?
I’ve already addressed that. The fact that people don’t ask doesn’t relieve anyone of their own responsibility to ensure they team with people that share their values. I know it’s an extra step for people to be nice and tolerant to but … if you want to be helpful to them AND people that share your teaming values, you can take a minute to explain what you are after and why they don’t fit that expectation.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Then I guess you don’t mind when bads join your team when you do PUG then. I’m glad you’re so tolerant.
Well, it doesn’t really matter how objectively smart or stupid your reasons for quitting an MMO are. Bottom line is numbers (players and profit) because it’s a business. The market is saturated with a billion alternatives right now, so it doesn’t take much to motivate someone to go spend their time on another video game, MMO or otherwise.
It’s more complex than that in GW2 because it’s not sub based. I already covered this argument. It’s not about number of players, it’s about number of players willing to buy gems. It’s more likely the type of players that quit over hate are less likely to buy gems than players that stay because of love.
Every single guardian build can be kited by almost every other class in the game, with the meditation build being the only one where you have to actually concentrate whilst doing so.
This is down to the guardians super low HP pool, and lack of mobility. It focuses our build sets on a very narrow path and means we can’t experiment much without severely weakening ourselves. Our traitlines are all over the place, and there is little synergy.
That’s why great players do well in builds outside the standard ones anyone can play … because they aren’t so narrow mindedly focused on only what their class does to kitten what they are capable of in PVP. You seem to be ignoring the fact that PVP in this game doesn’t always happen 1 vs. 1. Play smart and co-operate with others and a world of build opportunities opens up for you.
The whole concept of the Guardian class itself is team support, co-operation. I would say anyone taking a class with that concept and assessing it in a bubble has alot more to learn about PVP than they think.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I could be misinterpreting this. But what I took from this post is you think its ok to set requirements for a group. But if someone who doesnt meet those requirements joins your LFG you should take the time to explain exactly what your LFG message means before removing them. Or you are not allowed to kick them at all.
What twisted logic makes you think this?
The logic that tells me people with requirements want better understanding and behaviour from people joining as their teams as PUGs.
I can tell … you must be a latte kind of person … lots of froth.
Firstly, it goes both ways. There were lots of people before the lfg who were casual players who were just as abusive towards others as there were evil elitists roaming around taking scalps. And secondly you cant claim to know who cast the first stone because you weren’t there for each and every individual’s situation. And thirdly, you’re trying to say that the problems now are caused by what happened in the past which you can’t really prove.
You’re still frothing over blaming someone. This doesn’t help. Everyone has been treated badly. I’m suggesting why elitists are ‘hated’, though I think it’s a terrible nomenclature to be using.
I was under the impression you were aware of these activities, having seen you participate in the Guardian forums in these discussions.
I could be grossly mistaken, but I’m under the impression that the only people who do this in current day are non-factor/tryhard players, not the bigger figures in the community, unlike in the past.
I could be wrong again, but I imagine the people arguing with you here in this thread aren’t the ones going to random build threads and bashing them for kicks and giggles.
I wasn’t suggesting they currently are doing that. I was indicating that the poster should have been aware of negative player interactions, even prior to LFG tool introduction.