Guild Wars 2

Archdevil.1748:

Raziel.4216:

Vieux P.1238:

Well Failure is a strong word i would’nt use to describe. But it has failed to be a success.
It’s more that it has’nt reached the potential it could of had.

According to whom?
We don’t know how successful it is, but we know it didn’t fail significantly by whatever meassure they use, no company would greenlight a second expansion after the first one failed.

MMO’s are not general games and this is not a second edition of a game. If they don’t green light another expansion will mean exactly the opposite. It will mean the game is dead. It would be a suicide not to make expansions.

If a game doesn’t succeed then there’s no point in investing more into aditional content.
It’d be even worse to make more expansions if the last one failed, that alone tells us it didn’t fail, we just don’t know how succesful it was.

Vieux P.1238:

Well Failure is a strong word i would’nt use to describe. But it has failed to be a success.
It’s more that it has’nt reached the potential it could of had.

According to whom?
We don’t know how successful it is, but we know it didn’t fail significantly by whatever meassure they use, no company would greenlight a second expansion after the first one failed.

Ashen.2907:

Raziel.4216:

Ashen.2907:

Raziel.4216:

Ashen.2907:

Again, you asked for his source when he claimed that there was at least one person with similar feelings.

Again

“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook” is a pretty bold claim, got a source for that? Where did most of the non-hardcore (out of at least 7m accounts since f2p) make it crystal clear that they’re not willing to overlook these major issues?

His reply to this post was that his source is all over the forums.
Once again, just in case that wasn’t clear enough:
“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook”

Ignoring requests for a source made by someone who contests a claim that at least two people are disatisfied with the expansion seems reasonable to me.

I tend to believe that reaction on these forums in not sufficient to support a claim, one way or the other, about the opinion of the majority regarding HoT. But once a person asks for an unreasonable proof, such as for the assertion that there is more than one person who is unhappy with the expansion (not a majority, not many, not even a few, just at leasr two), then it is reasonable to ignore their requests.

That claims involves most of the playerbase, not just 1 other player. I know he has no proof.
His claim is unreasonale, that’s why the source requested is just as unreasonable.

You asked for a source whe he said, “…you’re not the only one…”

“Not the only one,” does not involve, “most,” of anything. It involves more than one.

It is not unreasonable to claim that there is more than one person out of millions who is unhappy with the expansion.

Of course he has proof that there are at least two people who are unhappy with HoT. More than that many have said so, including in this very thread.

It is unreasonable to claim all but a few hardcore players have major issues with the game.

I told you what claim I am referring to.
With quotes, I even repeated it at the end of the post just in case.
Three times now?
I don’t know what else to say, you see what you like to see.

Ashen.2907:

Raziel.4216:

Ashen.2907:

Again, you asked for his source when he claimed that there was at least one person with similar feelings.

Again

“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook” is a pretty bold claim, got a source for that? Where did most of the non-hardcore (out of at least 7m accounts since f2p) make it crystal clear that they’re not willing to overlook these major issues?

His reply to this post was that his source is all over the forums.
Once again, just in case that wasn’t clear enough:
“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook”

Ignoring requests for a source made by someone who contests a claim that at least two people are disatisfied with the expansion seems reasonable to me.

I tend to believe that reaction on these forums in not sufficient to support a claim, one way or the other, about the opinion of the majority regarding HoT. But once a person asks for an unreasonable proof, such as for the assertion that there is more than one person who is unhappy with the expansion (not a majority, not many, not even a few, just at leasr two), then it is reasonable to ignore their requests.

That claims involves most of the playerbase, not just 1 other player. I know he has no proof.
His claim is unreasonale, that’s why the source requested is just as unreasonable.

Ashen.2907:

Again, you asked for his source when he claimed that there was at least one person with similar feelings.

Again

“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook” is a pretty bold claim, got a source for that? Where did most of the non-hardcore (out of at least 7m accounts since f2p) make it crystal clear that they’re not willing to overlook these major issues?

His reply to this post was that his source is all over the forums.
Once again, just in case that wasn’t clear enough:
“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook”

Ashen.2907:

Raziel.4216:

Vieux P.1238:

Raziel.4216:

Vieux P.1238:

Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe, other people like different things? and, omg I know this must be suprising but bear with me for a second, they…. might… like… the… game?
Mindblown right?

Are you serious? are you reading the same forum as we are?
We all love this game. That’s what makes it so difficult. It’s a great game overall. But it has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook. I’m hardcore myself, but got my limits. & i aint the only one.

Is your mind blown yet?

Never claimed the game is perfect, so, just like you said, are we reading the same forum?
I said other people enjoy different things, and enough people enjoy it for Anet to consider it successful enough to greenlight an expansion. The fact that you dislike some aspects of the game, maybe all of it, doesn’t mean that everyone else does too.
“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook” is a pretty bold claim, got a source for that? Where did most of the non-hardcore (out of at least 7m accounts since f2p) make it crystal clear that they’re not willing to overlook these major issues?
You shoot yourself in the foot when you try to support your position with “majority’s on my side!” kind of arguments when there’s no evidence to support it. No, that 3k+ posts forum topic is not representative of 7m+ people.

What you imply is bold as well. I can ask you the same, wheres your source?
As for me, my source is all over the forum.. Wheres yours?

ps: My foot is well where it stands.. On the ground..

What did I claim?
That the game’s successful enough for Anet to greenlight an expansion? read yesterday’s guild chat’s notes.
“Over the forums” is not a source. Notice how I didn’t direct you to all of reddit? or the entire internet? nop, I directed you to a very specific source, here http://dulfy.net/2016/01/08/gw2-jan-8-guild-chat-livestream-notes/

Looking foward to your source, expecting the same specificity.

You asked for his source when he claimed that the person he quoted was not the only one who felt that way about the expansion. Pointing out that there are similar posts all over the forums is pretty solid support for his assertion that there is at least one other person that has a sinilar view.

Source was requested for the following claim:
But it has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook

Notice: " only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook"

That means most of the non-hardcore players have a problem with these major issues.
Forum is not a valid source for that.

Very mature.
Can’t say I’m suprised.

As expected.

Like I said, you shoot yourself in the foot when you use “majority’s on my side!” kind of arguments, it’s way too ez to call’em out.

Vieux P.1238:

Raziel.4216:

Vieux P.1238:

Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe, other people like different things? and, omg I know this must be suprising but bear with me for a second, they…. might… like… the… game?
Mindblown right?

Are you serious? are you reading the same forum as we are?
We all love this game. That’s what makes it so difficult. It’s a great game overall. But it has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook. I’m hardcore myself, but got my limits. & i aint the only one.

Is your mind blown yet?

Never claimed the game is perfect, so, just like you said, are we reading the same forum?
I said other people enjoy different things, and enough people enjoy it for Anet to consider it successful enough to greenlight an expansion. The fact that you dislike some aspects of the game, maybe all of it, doesn’t mean that everyone else does too.
“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook” is a pretty bold claim, got a source for that? Where did most of the non-hardcore (out of at least 7m accounts since f2p) make it crystal clear that they’re not willing to overlook these major issues?
You shoot yourself in the foot when you try to support your position with “majority’s on my side!” kind of arguments when there’s no evidence to support it. No, that 3k+ posts forum topic is not representative of 7m+ people.

What you imply is bold as well. I can ask you the same, wheres your source?
As for me, my source is all over the forum.. Wheres yours?

ps: My foot is well where it stands.. On the ground..

What did I claim?
That the game’s successful enough for Anet to greenlight an expansion? read yesterday’s guild chat’s notes.
“Over the forums” is not a source. Notice how I didn’t direct you to all of reddit? or the entire internet? nop, I directed you to a very specific source, here http://dulfy.net/2016/01/08/gw2-jan-8-guild-chat-livestream-notes/

Looking foward to your source, expecting the same specificity.

Vieux P.1238:

Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe, other people like different things? and, omg I know this must be suprising but bear with me for a second, they…. might… like… the… game?
Mindblown right?

Are you serious? are you reading the same forum as we are?
We all love this game. That’s what makes it so difficult. It’s a great game overall. But it has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook. I’m hardcore myself, but got my limits. & i aint the only one.

Is your mind blown yet?

Never claimed the game is perfect, so, just like you said, are we reading the same forum?
I said other people enjoy different things, and enough people enjoy it for Anet to consider it successful enough to greenlight an expansion. The fact that you dislike some aspects of the game, maybe all of it, doesn’t mean that everyone else does too.
“has some major issues that only the very hardcore loyal base is willing to overlook” is a pretty bold claim, got a source for that? Where did most of the non-hardcore (out of at least 7m accounts since f2p) make it crystal clear that they’re not willing to overlook these major issues?
You shoot yourself in the foot when you try to support your position with “majority’s on my side!” kind of arguments when there’s no evidence to support it. No, that 3k+ posts forum topic is not representative of 7m+ people.

Vieux P.1238:

vesica tempestas.1563:

“They can plan another xpac all they like. I wish them luck but they won’t get a sale from my household. I don’t even go into HoT maps.”

So if the xpac turns out to be right down your street your not going to buy it? over dramatic nonsense.

I’m getting the feeling your not the only one having this feeling. The hype was to grand before launch & the delivery to disappointing to have any future credibility.

Source?
I get the feeling a lot of people enjoy it, so many that Anet considers it enough of a success to green light another expansion.
Which bellyfeelings are right? Waiting on that source.

Vieux P.1238:

Peeps would have to be way dumb to believe anything that comes out of Anets mouth for now on. I know i’ve learn my lesson. Anet is gonna have to thread hardcore to get my trust back.

Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe, other people like different things? and, omg I know this must be suprising but bear with me for a second, they…. might… like… the… game?
Mindblown right?

Sicarius.4639:

vesica tempestas.1563:

“They can plan another xpac all they like. I wish them luck but they won’t get a sale from my household. I don’t even go into HoT maps.”

So if the xpac turns out to be right down your street your not going to buy it? over dramatic nonsense.

Consumer power, he has every right to withhold from this purchase, unfortunately enough people will throw that power away and preorder it day 1 as usual.

Maybe they like what they see, they have every power to make the purchase.
Unfortunately for the ones who continue to claim it failed.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Raziel.4216:

LOL, more valid than one’s a full game and one’s an add-on.
Let’s compare D2: LoD with D3 next, or D3: RoS with D2 next.

Factions was both an add-on and a stand-alone game. It used the same engine, many of the same skills, the same classes and the same mechanics. So what if it had a leveling area. That invalidates comparison? Maybe in the minds of those looking for reasons to be dismissive.

Such as the devs who made the game? the very definition of expansion? or the comparisson with any other expansion out there?
Ah let’s ignore the ones who made’em, we know better right?

LOL, more valid than one’s a full game and one’s an add-on.
Let’s compare D2: LoD with D3 next, or D3: RoS with D2 next.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Raziel.4216:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Raziel.4216:

DresdenAllblack.1249:

Thge whole problem with this comparison is EotN was poor as well. Compared to what came before it, Eye was lackluster at best, and we would find out months later that the devs heart was already set on GW2.

So I do not care if HoT stacks up, they both still lack. HoT should be compared to Factions or BC or any other ‘first’ expansion. When compared to any of those its hard to argue in its defense.

Those two are stand-alone campaigns that do not require the base game, Anet already told us the only expansion for GW1 is EoTN.

You want to quibble over a word, let’s quibble over why that word should matter. Factions expanded what one could do in the game for those who already owned GW. It was the first pay-for offering by Anet which did so, just as HoT is the first pay-for offering that does so for GW2. Whether it was billed as campaign or expansion does not matter in the slightest.

That said, there are other reasons not to compare the two, but those would include EotN as well. Factions and EotN were produced with different technology, in a different market, in what was arguably a different age as far as games go. That should be ample reason to look at such comparisons with a jaundiced eye. No need to play word games with no substance.

You could own factions without having any other game, if I have factions and add the base game, did prophecies just become an expansion?
Expansions always add less than a game, require a base game to play, and usually improve on the end-game, like EoTN and any other MMO expansion out there.
Factions/Nightfall could be played without the base game and you could start new characters from scratch.
Go to the steams sales page, the only one that requires a base game and is labelled as an expansion is EoTN.
So, if it fails to meet the criteria when compared to any other expansion, if the company doesn’t call it an expansion, if the platform where you buy it doesn’t call it an expansion then it probably isn’t an expansion.
Unless you know better than the devs themselves ofc.

Nice exposition. Too bad you ignored my point completely. I’m not lobbying to call Factions an expansion. I’m saying that for purposes of comparison between two second offerings by the same company, which build on the first offering, the distinction is window dressing.

The second offering by Anet in GW1 was a standalone campaign that could be linked to the preexisting campaign for added benefits.
The second offering by Anet in GW2 was an expansion.
Comparing both makes no sense.
Stand-alone game vs expansion.

That report’s pretty old.
The most recent information available is that Arenanet is going to make another expansion.
That required the aproval from the higher ups and the suits wouldn’t aprove anything that didn’t meet their expectations of success.
We don’t know exactly how successful HoT was, but what we do know is that it definitely didn’t fail.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Raziel.4216:

DresdenAllblack.1249:

Thge whole problem with this comparison is EotN was poor as well. Compared to what came before it, Eye was lackluster at best, and we would find out months later that the devs heart was already set on GW2.

So I do not care if HoT stacks up, they both still lack. HoT should be compared to Factions or BC or any other ‘first’ expansion. When compared to any of those its hard to argue in its defense.

Those two are stand-alone campaigns that do not require the base game, Anet already told us the only expansion for GW1 is EoTN.

You want to quibble over a word, let’s quibble over why that word should matter. Factions expanded what one could do in the game for those who already owned GW. It was the first pay-for offering by Anet which did so, just as HoT is the first pay-for offering that does so for GW2. Whether it was billed as campaign or expansion does not matter in the slightest.

That said, there are other reasons not to compare the two, but those would include EotN as well. Factions and EotN were produced with different technology, in a different market, in what was arguably a different age as far as games go. That should be ample reason to look at such comparisons with a jaundiced eye. No need to play word games with no substance.

You could own factions without having any other game, if I have factions and add the base game, did prophecies just become an expansion?
Expansions always add less than a game, require a base game to play, and usually improve on the end-game, like EoTN and any other MMO expansion out there.
Factions/Nightfall could be played without the base game and you could start new characters from scratch.
Go to the steams sales page, the only one that requires a base game and is labelled as an expansion is EoTN.
So, if it fails to meet the criteria when compared to any other expansion, if the company doesn’t call it an expansion, if the platform where you buy it doesn’t call it an expansion then it probably isn’t an expansion.
Unless you know better than the devs themselves ofc.

Game was such a huge failure that they’re already planning the next expansion, right OP ?

DresdenAllblack.1249:

Thge whole problem with this comparison is EotN was poor as well. Compared to what came before it, Eye was lackluster at best, and we would find out months later that the devs heart was already set on GW2.

So I do not care if HoT stacks up, they both still lack. HoT should be compared to Factions or BC or any other ‘first’ expansion. When compared to any of those its hard to argue in its defense.

Those two are stand-alone campaigns that do not require the base game, Anet already told us the only expansion for GW1 is EoTN.

DeceiverX.8361:

Raziel.4216:

Uriel.6310:

Vayne.8563:

Guild Wars 2 didn’t raise the expansion. You can, in fact, still compete without having the expansion. Therefore, Guild Wars 2 is less pay to win than any of the competition.

Again, false. You did not reply to me so maybe ill make it shorter this time. WoW releases expansions that will not punish you directly for not buying it. GW2 does.

How does this punish you for not buying it?
…

Guilds and Guild Halls? They blatantly removed features from the base game and gated them behind HoT.

Guild halls removed all benefits a guild could have and removed benefits a guild previously had unlocked, gating the same benefits behind thousands of gold and can only be accessed by leaders with the expansion. New benefits for guilds are also completely obscene in WvW; these benefits are so incredibly massive that server populations have dropped by a full tier’s worth of WvW participation status game-wide. Full/Very High servers are now down to High status, and the number of organized guilds playing within the format who are incapable of getting the funding for the obscene expense that is guild halls are incapable of performing at necessary benchmarks to succeed as they did prior to HoT.

PvP is a complete mess at the moment. Not a single “core” specialization can make it into the competitive scene, and even the weakest of the new elite specializations fail to deliver on the promise of what was supposed to be not a clear advantage from the CEO himself by being innately stronger than core specializations that are intended to hard-counter them. We have seen many professional players call the elite specialization implementations “unbalanced”, “a joke”, “rubbish”, and “destroying sPvP”. We have seen top-tier competitive teams withdraw from the format/game announcing their withdraw based entirely on the imbalance of the elite specializations, bugged gameplay, and overall pitiful attempt to create a fun and exciting environment promised from HoT.

Dungeons and non-HoT gold-earning methods have been nerfed, new stat combinations in HoT are blatantly superior to the old, and all new developments to the game have been formally been announced as requiring the expansion.

There is an absolutely definitive and game-wide requirement of the expansion, otherwise players without it will be blatantly left in the dust due to what can be measured as objectively poorer methods of success across all game modes.

Guild point conceded, sure, but that doesn’t make the whole thing P2W.
Still waiting on a source for the PVP claim.
I still earn my gold with my previous non-HoT methods, so I don’t see your point there. Although I never depended on dungeons, there’s more than 1 method. Got a source for that one?

Out of your 3 claims only 1 can be checked objectively by anyone, the other 2 depend on player experience. If you want’em to be just as true as the first one you need a source. After all, you claim a HUGE portion of the game is kittened up and gated behind a big P2W wall, looking foward to it.

Uriel.6310:

Most of the elite specializations excel much better than the core classes and if you do not own the expansion, your punished by being over ran by those classes until you buy the expansion.

Source?
Since this is pretty much the core point for your whole argument, I’m sure you’ve something big to back it up besides “everyone I know says so”

Uriel.6310:

Vayne.8563:

Guild Wars 2 didn’t raise the expansion. You can, in fact, still compete without having the expansion. Therefore, Guild Wars 2 is less pay to win than any of the competition.

Again, false. You did not reply to me so maybe ill make it shorter this time. WoW releases expansions that will not punish you directly for not buying it. GW2 does.

How does this punish you for not buying it?

Is there a new and more powerful gear tier only available to expansion users, you know, like every other MMO?
Are there new stat boosts, pots or vertical progression systems available only to the expansion users?

Or wait, is it simply that expansion content is only available to expansion users? This content doesn’t give you a direct advantage over other users, therefore it’s not punishing anyone.

nickoboy.2063:

you’re right about being able to still compete, although people have an unfair advantage because they bought the expansion, which relates to the term pay to win? comprende

Your definition of P2W includes any MMO expansion, because they’ll always give you something that core users won’t have. A definition that fails to diferentiate between games and includes everything is simply useless.
That’s not how P2W is used.
If we could just drop 40$ and have a character with something that’s stronger (in a vertical way) than people who don’t throw 40$ down we’d be talking about P2W, like FLYFF or Mapplestory.
If NOONE can reach that level of power without paying for stat boosts, high-end pots, etc. we’d be talking about P2W.
If you don’t have access to a class or a part of a class because it’s expansion locked we’re talking about content designed to sell the expansion, are they inherently stronger than every non-expansion class? if so we’d be talking about P2W, but that’s not the case here.

Soon.5240:

Raziel.4216:

Soon.5240:

Raziel.4216:

Do you? Did you just call this a reasoned scenario?

Please show the reasoning behind the claim in question, it must be so deep that those of us who asked for a source can’t understand it.

Jeeesshhhhh,

Read my post, which you “quoted”. I listed three (3) scenarios.

Your scenarios are one thing. Those are posible situations that could be true.

His claim that most of the playerbase has already left and for a very specific reason is another.

You sure you read the claim in question?
Once again, talking about the claim in question, did you just call it a reasoned scenario?

I already said that I took his position to be an opinion, and nothing more. But your requesting data which you know not to exist doesn’t prove or disprove anything.

And your misinterpretation of Hitchens, as it applies to situations where less than adequate information exists, only tells me that you should read more Ernst Mach and William James, and less Hitchens. ; )

For you it’s an opinion, to others it looked like he was stating a fact, that’s why we asked for a source.
Hitchen’s razor applies to that.

Manthas.6234:

That’s true, only difference is, all that hate used to wash away in a few weeks.
Have you been to Reddit lately? All that “contructive critisim” has been turned to jokes about the state of the game. Some of those are really good actually.

Saying that game has failed or dead is pointless, no denying in that. But if that post brings points, which are faulty or could be improved, you shouldn’t ignore that. Pick your raisins out of the pie.

Those were updates that came out every 2 weeks, this is a major release, ofc discussions will last a lot more.
I’m not saying you can’t “Pick your raisins out of the pie.” my original reply was directed @ a post that was referring to the lack of statistical evidence required for these “game’s dead” topics.

Soon.5240:

Raziel.4216:

Do you? Did you just call this a reasoned scenario?

Please show the reasoning behind the claim in question, it must be so deep that those of us who asked for a source can’t understand it.

Jeeesshhhhh,

Read my post, which you “quoted”. I listed three (3) scenarios.

Your scenarios are one thing. Those are posible situations that could be true.

His claim that most of the playerbase has already left and for a very specific reason is another.

You sure you read the claim in question?
Once again, talking about the claim in question, did you just call it a reasoned scenario?

Since you talk about science, did you know there’s a difference between postulating a hypothesis and stating a fact?

Manthas.6234:

Raziel.4216:

Manthas.6234:

Raziel.4216:

mauried.5608:

Lets look at the numbers of replies and views of this thread.
123 replies and 6300 views.
How many players does GW2 have?
On the basis of 123 replies HOT is a failure.
Seriously?
A basic course in statistics would be a good start for some of the replies to this thread.

Get used to it, someone once said it failed and he talked for a “lot of people”, when asked he directed me to a topic with less than 2000 replies.
The usual reasoning is “my guild + everyone I know + the people my guildmates know = everyone”

Should we wait for Anet to step up and show numbers proving that HoT failed?

Real, objective and verifiable evidence is always available after a game’s release.
Stocks change, they fire/hire more people, they make moves that show a declining population (like merging server) or such, you can access real evidence eventually.
And it may show that the game didn’t fail.
This “analysis” proves nothing, it’s simply a rant.

And forums full of toxic community shows nothing? We should wait and do nothing, do not discuss, because real numbers hasn’t shown up?
Who do you think we are? Stockbrokers? We are players. And that “my guild + everyone I know + the people my guildmates know = everyone” in players eyes actually is everyone. People do not play with numbers, they play with their guild, people they know and the people their guildmates know. People give feedback, positive or negative, based on their experience. Should you wait for numbers while your experience is negative?

When are forums not full of toxic topics?
Ascended came out = filled with “game over gg arenanet ignored manifesto” topics.
LS1 came out = filled with “game will die because of temporal content, going to back to wow” topics.
LS2 came out = filled with “200 gems? game’s dead”
Fractals…
Stronghold….
You name it.
Reddit has more constructive criticism and the comunity can choose to ignore pointless topics by downvoting’em to hell.

There’s a difference between “I don’t like this” and “this product failed”. The second requires evidence to be valid.

Manthas.6234:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

nickoboy.2063:

Hopefully you have realised this already and understand that people quit for this reason

No most players quit because they finished hot already or 95% of it.

Source?

I don’t have a source i just know the new maps are more desserted than before.
after just 1 week i saw many lvl 50-120 players.
OP dont have a source of bad class balance either.
In pvp i see all classes except for warriors there is lots of thieves but it still sucks.
Stacked teams usually lose except for dragonhunters.

What if someone else “just knows” that it’s doing fine. What do we do then?
Hitchen’s razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Then you can dismiss OP too because no evidence.

I have.
His faulty reasoning and missuse of the term Pay to Win has been pointed out multiple times in this topic.

Maybe you should apply for work at arenanet.
As statistic analyst you know. so you can get the evidence.

Or maybe I can wait half a year and get the evidence based on it’s retention rate and changes in stocks, you know, like with any other game?

Ok, guys, next time wait half a year before posting on forums.

Before stating that a game was a success/failure and that most people left/continue to play? sure, please do.

Soon.5240:

Raziel.4216:

What if someone else “just knows” that it’s doing fine. What do we do then?
Hitchen’s razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

No. In the absence of information, you construct reasoned scenarios and weigh the risk/rewards.

You must not work in the applied sciences, am I right?

Do you? Did you just call this a reasoned scenario?

Please show the reasoning behind the claim in question, it must be so deep that those of us who asked for a source can’t understand it.

Manthas.6234:

Raziel.4216:

mauried.5608:

Lets look at the numbers of replies and views of this thread.
123 replies and 6300 views.
How many players does GW2 have?
On the basis of 123 replies HOT is a failure.
Seriously?
A basic course in statistics would be a good start for some of the replies to this thread.

Get used to it, someone once said it failed and he talked for a “lot of people”, when asked he directed me to a topic with less than 2000 replies.
The usual reasoning is “my guild + everyone I know + the people my guildmates know = everyone”

Should we wait for Anet to step up and show numbers proving that HoT failed?

Real, objective and verifiable evidence is always available after a game’s release.
Stocks change, they fire/hire more people, they make moves that show a declining population (like merging server) or such, you can access real evidence eventually.
And it may show that the game didn’t fail.
This “analysis” proves nothing, it’s simply a rant.

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

nickoboy.2063:

Hopefully you have realised this already and understand that people quit for this reason

No most players quit because they finished hot already or 95% of it.

Source?

I don’t have a source i just know the new maps are more desserted than before.
after just 1 week i saw many lvl 50-120 players.
OP dont have a source of bad class balance either.
In pvp i see all classes except for warriors there is lots of thieves but it still sucks.
Stacked teams usually lose except for dragonhunters.

What if someone else “just knows” that it’s doing fine. What do we do then?
Hitchen’s razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Then you can dismiss OP too because no evidence.

I have.
His faulty reasoning and missuse of the term Pay to Win has been pointed out multiple times in this topic.

Maybe you should apply for work at arenanet.
As statistic analyst you know. so you can get the evidence.

Or maybe I can wait half a year and get the evidence based on it’s retention rate and changes in stocks, you know, like with any other game?

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

nickoboy.2063:

Hopefully you have realised this already and understand that people quit for this reason

No most players quit because they finished hot already or 95% of it.

Source?

I don’t have a source i just know the new maps are more desserted than before.
after just 1 week i saw many lvl 50-120 players.
OP dont have a source of bad class balance either.
In pvp i see all classes except for warriors there is lots of thieves but it still sucks.
Stacked teams usually lose except for dragonhunters.

What if someone else “just knows” that it’s doing fine. What do we do then?
Hitchen’s razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Then you can dismiss OP too because no evidence.

I have.
His faulty reasoning and missuse of the term Pay to Win has been pointed out multiple times in this topic.

Extreme.8350:

Raziel.4216:

Extreme.8350:

nickoboy.2063:

Hopefully you have realised this already and understand that people quit for this reason

No most players quit because they finished hot already or 95% of it.

Source?

I don’t have a source i just know the new maps are more desserted than before.
after just 1 week i saw many lvl 50-120 players.
OP dont have a source of bad class balance either.
In pvp i see all classes except for warriors there is lots of thieves but it still sucks.
Stacked teams usually lose except for dragonhunters.

What if someone else “just knows” that it’s doing fine. What do we do then?
Hitchen’s razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

mauried.5608:

Lets look at the numbers of replies and views of this thread.
123 replies and 6300 views.
How many players does GW2 have?
On the basis of 123 replies HOT is a failure.
Seriously?
A basic course in statistics would be a good start for some of the replies to this thread.

Get used to it, someone once said it failed and he talked for a “lot of people”, when asked he directed me to a topic with less than 2000 replies.
The usual reasoning is “my guild + everyone I know + the people my guildmates know = everyone”

Soon.5240:

Raziel.4216:

Burden of proof falls on the one making the claim.
If you claim people are leaving you’ve to provide a source
Let’s look @ your reasoning in other context:

You: I have fairies in my garden.
Anyone: Proof?
You: Proof that I don’t?

Looking foward to the sweet and reliable source in your next post

Lol,

You completely missed the point. I did not claim that people are leaving the game. Read again.

The source was requested for this claim, whomever made it:

Extreme.8350:

No most players quit because they finished hot already or 95% of it.

Soon.5240:

Arlee.7038:

Extreme.8350:

nickoboy.2063:

Hopefully you have realised this already and understand that people quit for this reason

No most players quit because they finished hot already or 95% of it.

And your quantitative data showing most players have stopped playing is where?

And your quantitative data showing most players haven’t stopped playing is where?

HoT’s three scenarios:

1) HoT is wildly successful. It’s attracted a huge, new player base, it’s the talk of the gaming community, servers have been added and the future of GW2 is secure.

2) Hot was meh. It brought in some new players, but also lost about the same amount. In this case, the game’s future is limited. HoT was not sold to it’s investors as a “wash” in revenue.

3) HoT has failed to expand the player base, and is losing players. It’s future is not secure (which might explain the lack of updates). It was a good 3 1/2 year run, but it’s pretty much all down hill from here.

You’d think that Anet would be shouting from the roof tops if the player base has grown tremendously or that it would be evident by having to add new servers, etc.

Which of the three scenarios is most likely?

Burden of proof falls on the one making the claim.
If you claim people are leaving you’ve to provide a source
Let’s look @ your reasoning in other context:

You: I have fairies in my garden.
Anyone: Proof?
You: Proof that I don’t?

Looking foward to the sweet and reliable source in your next post

Extreme.8350:

nickoboy.2063:

Hopefully you have realised this already and understand that people quit for this reason

No most players quit because they finished hot already or 95% of it.

Source?

More masteries! + SAB

Tigaseye.2047:

You’ve, basically, invented your own totally arbitrary criteria, which you apparently think we are all supposed to adhere to, while posting on this forum.

The criteria of backing claims up?
If someone calims the game’s doing bad based on patch notes, some conference call and financial documents (was there something else?) I’d expect whoever made the claim to provide this information that’s supposed to back his position.
It’s called burden of proof, it’s not my arbitrary creation.

Tigaseye.2047:

Then, as if that wasn’t enough, you have not only accused people of not adhering to your arbitrary (and rather bizarre) criteria, but you have also (totally falsely) accused them of wrongly describing their comments as adhering to that criteria.

Burden of proof is not bizarre, it’s expected when making claims that should be backed by external sources.

Tigaseye.2047:

That isn’t at all reasonable, you know.

Your reply isn’t, that’s for sure

Tigaseye.2047:

As I say – we can say what we like, when it comes to personal opinion about the game.

There’s a big difference between I don’t like something and hey guys, this game’s doing bad according to X, Y and Z.

Tigaseye.2047:

If we say we “feel” something, that is fine and totally acceptable.

Not when people have different “feels”, you can’t have 2 realities.

Tigaseye.2047:

We don’t have to try to prove it.

This would apply if it was simply a matter of opinion

Tigaseye.2047:

If you don’t like people posting their unproven feelings and impressions, I suggest you either try to adapt, or avoid all forums, from now on.

I’m doing just fine calling baseless claims out, thank you for your concern.

Tigaseye.2047:

Because forums everywhere are full of people saying “I think” and “I feel”, all the time and that isn’t going to change any time soon.

Nor should it.

I don’t expect that to change, there’s a difference between bellyfeelings and factual reality.
Bizarre indeed

Pandaman.4758:

Raziel.4216:

Soleil.1304:

Raziel.4216:

Arenanet has introduced lore, updates, income and variety with a lot of different methods that do not require mounts, these benefits are not worth it in the dev’s eyes, why? Could be a lot of reasons, I’d guess it’s one of these:
a) The % of the population that wants it is way too small.
b) It goes agaisn’t their design philosophy.

No

Raziel.4216:

Horse has been beaten over and over and over again, let it die. It’s not happening, if it’s THAT important to you then feel free to move on to a game that meets your mount needs.

No. I already said why.

”That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence”
Hitchen’s Razor.

You’ve yet to show any correlation that supports anything you claim, this has been pointed out multiple times in the last page, saying “nanananaaaa I’m right !!” is not an argument.

After three pages of this nonsense I think we should just leave the OP alone. This isn’t the thread you want to be in if you want an actual, intelligent discussion.

Guess you’re right, at least we tried.
Have fun, mounted savior of the game.

Soleil.1304:

Raziel.4216:

Arenanet has introduced lore, updates, income and variety with a lot of different methods that do not require mounts, these benefits are not worth it in the dev’s eyes, why? Could be a lot of reasons, I’d guess it’s one of these:
a) The % of the population that wants it is way too small.
b) It goes agaisn’t their design philosophy.

No

Raziel.4216:

Horse has been beaten over and over and over again, let it die. It’s not happening, if it’s THAT important to you then feel free to move on to a game that meets your mount needs.

No. I already said why.

”That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence”
Hitchen’s Razor.

You’ve yet to show any correlation that supports anything you claim, this has been pointed out multiple times in the last page, saying “nanananaaaa I’m right !!” is not an argument.

Soleil.1304:

Raziel.4216:

Soleil.1304:

Bellatrixa.3546:

Soleil.1304:

Squee.7829:

And I’ll remind you that teleporting through a dense jungle is still infinitely preferable to riding a horse/motorcycle through it. Terrain isn’t an issue. It’s not worth discussing.

Please read the comments before you post yours. We’ve already addressed the teleport vs mount issue. If you’re not going to read up on the conversation, don’t expect us to entertain your uninformed comments out of the blue recesses of your mind.

And yet saying that, you haven’t read all the posts yourself and haven’t answered this question which people have repeatedly asked:

Yalora Istairiea.6287:

Soleil: You suggest that “Mounts will save this game”.

Question:

1. What do you propose the game need saving from?
2. How will the introduction of Mounts facilitate this redemption?

Haha I already answered this. Moving on.

Where?
Can’t find any post that quotes and replies those questions in your post history.

You must look harder and come to a full understanding.

Or you can provide the evidence, if it exists.
If your next post doesn’t provide it we can simply assume it doesn’t.

Soleil.1304:

Thank you for your personal opinion. Which I and others think is very wrong.

And Anet disagrees with you, just pointing that out

Soleil.1304:

Mounts that give 10%-15% increased speed would not put anyone at an advantage because we already have mechanisms for that. Therefore, we do not NEED a free version of a mount. Everyone is still equal. No real need for balancing issues. The mount should be a Gem-Store item. We need to support ANET with our $$. It’ll make the game better trust me.

Speed bonus on top of every other speed bonus = advantage.

Soleil.1304:

The need for a mount is much bigger than that. As I had mentioned before: Update, income, lore, variety and many other reasons point to the benefit of mounts. The ones I’m most concerned about is the lore and income. Mostly because low stocks and low income means slower updates and less content, and as I had mentioned in the OP, these are intelligent beings! It would be natural to have mounts which is completely missing due to a misguided innovation.

Arenanet has introduced lore, updates, income and variety with a lot of different methods that do not require mounts, these benefits are not worth it in the dev’s eyes, why? Could be a lot of reasons, I’d guess it’s one of these:
a) The % of the population that wants it is way too small.
b) It goes agaisn’t their design philosophy.

Horse has been beaten over and over and over again, let it die. It’s not happening, if it’s THAT important to you then feel free to move on to a game that meets your mount needs.

Soleil.1304:

Bellatrixa.3546:

Soleil.1304:

Squee.7829:

And I’ll remind you that teleporting through a dense jungle is still infinitely preferable to riding a horse/motorcycle through it. Terrain isn’t an issue. It’s not worth discussing.

Please read the comments before you post yours. We’ve already addressed the teleport vs mount issue. If you’re not going to read up on the conversation, don’t expect us to entertain your uninformed comments out of the blue recesses of your mind.

And yet saying that, you haven’t read all the posts yourself and haven’t answered this question which people have repeatedly asked:

Yalora Istairiea.6287:

Soleil: You suggest that “Mounts will save this game”.

Question:

1. What do you propose the game need saving from?
2. How will the introduction of Mounts facilitate this redemption?

Haha I already answered this. Moving on.

Where?
Can’t find any post that quotes and replies those questions in your post history.

Tigaseye.2047:

Of course it isn’t a “valid source of info” – it’s just a hunch (albeit, possibly, a somewhat informed one).

This isn’t a science project; it’s just a forum.

People are allowed to post their feelings here, too.

Sure, just don’t call’em valid sources of info when one is requested to check the validity of an argument, and make sure you admit you lack any real info to back up the “game’s dying!!!1!, mass exodus!! everyone abandon ship!!” arguments.
There’s way too many people throwing the doom predictions around like they’re facts. When a source is requested, people have “numbers”, heck someone even had “a conference call” between important people and “financial documents” to prove his point, he just forgot to link’em.
Remember, you’re entitled to your opinion, your “bellyfeelings”, but not your facts, reality checks are not limited to science projects.

I’m curious about two things pointed out here

a) To the people who claim the game needs saving, it’s doing real bad, it’s gonna die!!1! and anyone that compares “some numbers” out there will come to the same conclussion, can you please provide your source? Remember your source must have a very large sample size, game has at least 3.5m paid accounts and 7m since the f2p release according the Anet’s own infographic.

b) To the people who claim mounts will save us from our doom and that noone has ever argued agaisn’t it succesfully, can you please argue in favor for it? Things like “I want it!” or “it worked in that other game” or “whoever disagress with me is wrong, na na na naaaa!” are not valid arguments.

Thanks in advance.

Daharahj.1325:

we already have way points, wtf you need mounts for

besides they look so silly, and companies add all type of kittened mounts to squeeze money from players.

no no no. we don’t need mounts.

+1

You can play plenty of games out there that meet your mount needs.

Tigaseye.2047:

Some people have a sense for these things.

Probably not sensing that sales are falling, as such, but sensing discontent, unhappiness, or just sheer (relative) emptiness.

Not a valid argument, unless you can prove that your “sense” is somehow a valid predictor when compared to real evidence.

Tigaseye.2047:

Not to mention that, for example, if you are in a few big guilds and they seem a lot emptier, it’s not rocket science to extrapolate from that, that it might be happening in more than just your guilds.

You’d need a huge sample size for that to be valid.
My guild is very active, can I extrapolate that and assume that everyone else’s is doing just fine?
No, that’d be just as flawed.
Same for WvW maps, we know they’re doing bad not because we “feel” it, we’ve Arenanet telling us they’ll try to fix it.
Bellyfeelings are subjective and not a valid source of info.

DresdenAllblack.1249:

Do we need facts? You can FEEL it in-game, something has changed, and not for the better. I pretty much have played every day since launch, now due to a log jam on masteries I mostly log in for dailies only.

Sales are one part of the pie, running through ghost maps is another. I always see more people at SB then I do in VB. Congratulations on the challenging content Anet that 2.7% of the population asked for.

You can “feel” sales dropping?
I can “feel” them just fine.
Someone else probably “feels” they’re rising.

Was that sarcasm or something?

DresdenAllblack.1249:

Do we need facts? You can FEEL it in-game, something has changed, and not for the better. I pretty much have played every day since launch, now due to a log jam on masteries I mostly log in for dailies only.

Sales are one part of the pie, running through ghost maps is another. I always see more people at SB then I do in VB. Congratulations on the challenging content Anet that 2.7% of the population asked for.

You can “feel” sales dropping?
I can “feel” them just fine.
Someone else probably “feels” they’re rising.

Was that sarcasm or something?