Guild Wars 2

laokoko.7403:

no one even know what the meta is for revenant. hammer might be terrible for spvp that no one use it anyway.

Just wait and see. Too hard to predict.

No harm in talking about it now. We’ll surely talk about it a lot more when they get to beta’ing PVP

rotten.9753:

Windsagio.1340:

Except, and correct me where I’m misinterpreting that, the natural (not even reducto) conclusion of your position is all access to everything immediately.

I’m all about having htings to work for even if they’re dumb. What I don’t like is feeling I have to work for one particular thing or another.

It’s far from “access to everything immediately”. It’s more about encountering a boss for the first time and have a chance to beat him (mechanically)..

I’m curious if that’s actually true. Wouldn’t it be cute if it were extremely difficult (extremely) but possible without the mastery?

Not likely I admit, but I suspect it would please folks ><

Content gates are pretty universal, and GW2 has always had them. There are content gates in the mastery system, and they’re less restrictive than the prior ones. I’m not sure why it’s such a great betrayal.

Jerus.4350:

I understand what it is very well. I ran the treadmill for years in other games. They’re bringing the carrot on a stick back. You can dress it up with pretty words but that’s what’s happening. It’s just a bit disappointing as someone that was a huge fan of that change.

Except, and correct me where I’m misinterpreting that, the natural (not even reducto) conclusion of your position is all access to everything immediately.

I’m all about having htings to work for even if they’re dumb. What I don’t like is feeling I have to work for one particular thing or another.

Jerus, honestly it’s presentation and attitude.

Giving players something aspirational in the endgame drives retention. In most MMO’s that’s gear upgrades to beat harder content.

In current GW2 it’s pretty lacking, you have mostly meaningless ascended gear and a legendary in pve, but that’s really it (PvP and WvW have somewhat more aspirational progression tracks).

GW2 is committed heavily to no (meaningful) gear progression, but titles aren’t really meaningful progression to most people.

To be meaningful the progression has to have real game effects. If it’s instant there’s no sense of progression.

I use the mitigating terms because they’re faced with somewhat conflicting goals/values, and I think this is a pretty good compromise solution.

rotten.9753:

Windsagio.1340:

Well yeah, they’re not ‘endgame progression’, they’re content gating. Very different concepts.

The bark ripping thing is (to my understanding of the skill) as much of a content gate as hang-gliding or mushroom bouncing is, or as much as the “you need to have X lore mastery to enter the challenge of the Gods!!!”.

But they are sold to us as their new approach to end-game progression.

They’re trying to present it in a way you guys will find pleasing

Edit: No that’s not really fair. It is progression, with content gates at various points in the progression.

What it isn’t is endgame progression as understood in the usual MMO context

Jerus.4350:

Windsagio.1340:

Cbomb.4310:

The whole money argument needs some devils advocacy.
If all they cared about was the bottom line, they might as well push more development into gem-store content. Develop an expansion to sell for 30$ vs releasing a bikini on the gemstore for 30$ (and gem equiv). Hmmm what would take more time to develop?

They need to create a quality product, and if the instanced content is lacking then they’re going to have to give us A LOT of something else to make up for it.

Engagement and retention are massively important to profits. If people quit playing your game because they’re bored, they’re not going to buy those raven wings.

So the question is, do dungeons, on the whole, drive engagement?

They certainly do for some people, but for how many?

^^ THIS!!!!

Exactly the point I’ve been trying to make in all these threads. I can’t help but feel that they’re off on their projections when the decided to drop dungeons.

I think ANet has realized this and why they’re repeating that there will be challenging group content so often. The question will be how is it going to be packaged, if they’re able to pull it off without instances, cool, it’ll be a first I’ve seen since people realized the strength of zerging. I doubt they’ll be able to though, so I can’t help but think that we’ll see instances of some time with content in them, that or they simply won’t follow through and actually give us challenging group content.

That’s why personally I won’t be pre-ordering, and I’ll be asking people about it for the first few weeks to see if it’s even worth playing.

“Fanboyisms” aside, there’s a PR element to the challenging group content bit, or so it seems to me.

I’m also curious to see if they can have their cake and eat it too on this, although I enjoy both (3 of 4?) versions of the gameplay so I’ll be relatively ok either way.

On whether they’re wrong about the de-emphasis on dungeons, I’m more likely to think Anet knows what they’re doing than to trust people on the forum who are largely pushing a POV. I could be wrong of course ><

Dahkeus.8243:

Windsagio.1340:

Belzebu.3912:

Windsagio.1340:

50% uptime moving reflect is pretty insanely terrible for rangers though.

If you rely on LB, yeah, you’ll be screwed.
If you can handle yourself with GS or if you are a trapper then it’ll barely make a difference.

Longbow, Shortbow, Axe yeah.

I’m not sure we should be comfortable with a weapon skill that invalidates builds.

Don’t forget that you’ll have to swap pets if you’re using a spider….and you won’t be able to throw the greatsword either.
Oh, and no throw torch for Condi builds.

Warhorn’s untouched!!!

For the sake of the discussion (and to make it clear I’m not really up in arms about this, rev balance is going to be examined heavily as part of the beta process anwyays, and we’re not to the pvp beta yet):

Ranger ranged attacks negated by this:
LB: 1,2,3,4
SB: 1,2,3,4,5
Axe: 1,2,3,4
Torch: 4
Dagger: 5 (I think 5 is the throw)
Greatsword: 4 (on cancelling block)

Ranged attacks that don’t care:
LB: 5
warhorn 5

Melee attacks:
LS: 1,2,3
GS: 1,2,3,5
Axe: 5
Dagger 4

The vast vast majority of ranger attacks are physical projectiles. This is fine, it’s an interesting trait of the class. Nevertheless, a very high uptime block makes for an absurdly bad matchup

Jerus.4350:

Windsagio.1340:

rotten.9753:

rhapsody.3615:

Well, one of the masteries shown in yesterday’s beta was Fractal mastery. No info about it, but it was there long with Precursor crafting mastery. So we will see something new with fractals. Hopefully it’s more than just raising the levels and making us need more AR.

Masteries will not help if the reward structure is not completely reworked. Besides, masteries will probably be like AR except it’s account based, not gear based. Once you get a certain mastery, the game becomes easy enough (like this bark skin effect).

Right now, masteries (at least maguuma ones, since some of them are already implemented) are a simple non-gear wall. You cannot kill an enemy as long as you don’t farm enough points and xp and then this enemy is killable. If anet puts their hope in this system, I seriously fear for this game so-called end-game progression.

Well yeah, they’re not ‘endgame progression’, they’re content gating. Very different concepts.

The bark ripping thing is (to my understanding of the skill) as much of a content gate as hang-gliding or mushroom bouncing is, or as much as the “you need to have X lore mastery to enter the challenge of the Gods!!!”.

Return of the good ol’ timesink… GW2s successful avoidance of that was one of the things that pulled me in to start, sad to see them abandon it in favor of easier/cheaper design of artificial time sinks.

I’m okay with this one because it’s directed. Not having resets hurts some, but if there’s something you really wanna do you can do it quickly. It takes a while to do everything, but I like picking the order.

@Your other post, you’re very right blackmail is a bad word, I’m gonna nuke the post

Cbomb.4310:

Windsagio.1340:

CureForLiving.5360:

Windsagio.1340:

Cbomb.4310:

The whole money argument needs some devils advocacy.
If all they cared about was the bottom line, they might as well push more development into gem-store content. Develop an expansion to sell for 30$ vs releasing a bikini on the gemstore for 30$ (and gem equiv). Hmmm what would take more time to develop?

They need to create a quality product, and if the instanced content is lacking then they’re going to have to give us A LOT of something else to make up for it.

Engagement and retention are massively important to profits. If people quit playing your game because they’re bored, they’re not going to buy those raven wings.

So the question is, do dungeons, on the whole, drive engagement?

They certainly do for some people, but for how many?

Only ANet would have those stats and they’re not telling us.

So we try to extrapolate what they’re thinking based on their behavior, with the assumption that they’re a rationally run company.

You know what happens when you assume.

Oh c’mon now. Are you saying that it’s more likely this (apparent/likely) decision is based on irrational decision making?

rotten.9753:

rhapsody.3615:

Well, one of the masteries shown in yesterday’s beta was Fractal mastery. No info about it, but it was there long with Precursor crafting mastery. So we will see something new with fractals. Hopefully it’s more than just raising the levels and making us need more AR.

Masteries will not help if the reward structure is not completely reworked. Besides, masteries will probably be like AR except it’s account based, not gear based. Once you get a certain mastery, the game becomes easy enough (like this bark skin effect).

Right now, masteries (at least maguuma ones, since some of them are already implemented) are a simple non-gear wall. You cannot kill an enemy as long as you don’t farm enough points and xp and then this enemy is killable. If anet puts their hope in this system, I seriously fear for this game so-called end-game progression.

Well yeah, they’re not ‘endgame progression’, they’re content gating. Very different concepts.

The bark ripping thing is (to my understanding of the skill) as much of a content gate as hang-gliding or mushroom bouncing is, or as much as the “you need to have X lore mastery to enter the challenge of the Gods!!!”.

Solori.6025:

What they need is a revamp to the AI of enemies.

I wonder what the game would be like if AI behavior was different every day.
Like at one point We get lupi using a staff and using different staff skills, Then the next day we get a lupi that uses sword and mesmer skills.

Something to keep encounters fresh.
To have AI use tactics and combo off of each other vs the run and gun AI we have now.

They can add 3 new dungeons every year, but every year we will have the same group of hardcore people mastering every new dungeon and invalidating the work with easy runs.

Lets change the way enemies work first before we just introduce more crappy stack and burst dungeons.
That will be mastered and farmed for the first month.

You know what’s fun? Having Mai Trin run directly away from all the players just to get out of the lightning field

Kronos.2560:

CETheLucid.3964:

Windsagio.1340:

50% uptime moving reflect is pretty insanely terrible for rangers though.

You realize the skill you’re talking about blocks projectiles, yes? It does not reflect them.

And then the silence, because nobody actually read the tooltip until now….

I didn’t play beta, so I just go by what they tell me :p

It’s still a pretty nuts skill, but that’s better >>

~~~

Belzebu.3912:

The SB and Axe is what made me say “barely make a difference” instead of “no difference at all”

But as I said, let’s wait for the actual release, currently we know that Revs are just way too strong in everything, 50% projectile reflection uptime, infinite stun breakers, pretty much 100% stability uptime, 1200 range AoE blast with low CD, low CD fire field + blast, obviously it will change.

Oh I totally agree with what you’re saying there. As it exists it 100% negates a classes signature weapon and one of the more common pvp builds, and that’s kind of messed up.

They’ll likely re-examine it before release, along with the other things mentioned, on that you’re totally right

Ashen.2907:

Windsagio.1340:

Ashen.2907:

Although it could have been expressed differently the OP’s post is one of the best forms of feedback a company can get from a paying customer:

“I will not continue to buy your product unless it includes X.”

Except they lie.

It might not be intentional, but players pull this all the freaking time, and then they’re back complaining after whatever they said they were going to quit over or were going to not buy.

Now he might think he’s serious, but anyone who’s spent any time on game forums knows the pattern very well.

That’s why I called it blackmail (which I kind of regret, it’s a bit harsh), he’s trying to leverage something with a threat, and it’s a threat that he likely won’t follow up on. Developers can’t listen to random posts like that individually they’d never get anything changed or done ever.

If there’s a true groundswell sure, but in this case it’s just one naked threat.

“I am willing to spend money on your product if it includes X, but not if it doesn’t is not a threat. It may not turn out to be accurate either. It is entirely possible that once the OP sees a finished HOT he will discover that elements of it are sufficient to change his mind. Even so the basic feedback of, “more dungeons = more of my money,” is exactly the sort of feedback that companies actually pay to get.

Read the title, it’s framed as a threat “NO DUNGEONS NO CASH”

I suspect they know that there are some folks on here that are really mad about the lack of dungeon content anyways :p

Belzebu.3912:

Windsagio.1340:

50% uptime moving reflect is pretty insanely terrible for rangers though.

If you rely on LB, yeah, you’ll be screwed.
If you can handle yourself with GS or if you are a trapper then it’ll barely make a difference.

Longbow, Shortbow, Axe yeah.

I’m not sure we should be comfortable with a weapon skill that invalidates builds.

50% uptime moving reflect is pretty insanely terrible for rangers though.

Ashen.2907:

Although it could have been expressed differently the OP’s post is one of the best forms of feedback a company can get from a paying customer:

“I will not continue to buy your product unless it includes X.”

Except they lie.

It might not be intentional, but players pull this all the freaking time, and then they’re back complaining after whatever they said they were going to quit over or were going to not buy.

Now he might think he’s serious, but anyone who’s spent any time on game forums knows the pattern very well.

That’s why I called it blackmail (which I kind of regret, it’s a bit harsh), he’s trying to leverage something with a threat, and it’s a threat that he likely won’t follow up on. Developers can’t listen to random posts like that individually they’d never get anything changed or done ever.

If there’s a true groundswell sure, but in this case it’s just one naked threat.

Many.8419:

Windsagio.1340:

pickpocket.2071:

I am someone who has spent over $1000 in the gem shop and have been a strong supporter of gw2 since head start, however if there are no new dungeons released in this expansion i will not be supporting this company any further. I will not buy the expansion or purchase anything from the gem store again.
I’m also pretty sure this is my first post i’ve made and i know of a lot of other people with the same mindset of myself who don’t bother to post in these forums.

GLHF pressing 11111 with your boring living story zombie key mashers

I like people trying to blackmail developers.

This is how capitalism works. We have money they want from us so let them do content we want. If content is lackluster why should we pay? I agree with op. You call it blackmail but it’s just how capitalism works.

Except he’s trying to leverage something that might not even exist at all.

More to the point, posts like that are a dime a dozen, and most devs have learned to ignore threats like that long ago.

They’re usually empty, and the company probably has a good projection of the sales effects of this subject.

ketchup.2783:

i’m just sad that we will not see skilled, elite pver’s doing phenomenal play based on skill in new dungeons anymore, in the future. :’(

Go watch it on PvP. Yeah the turtling’s annoying, but you’ll see some sharp play.

Or get into GvG’s, that’ll do ya too.

Nike.2631:

BlackBeard.2873:

Jalis elite is a stunbreak, and uses no energy if you cancel it after stunbreak! Revenant has INFINITE STUNBREAK!

And you think that’s going to last for even one more build?

The rest of the class team already made the Revenant design lead buy them all lunch for letting such a laughably bad loophole make out into the public eye. Or they should have. Either way, its not going to last.

But, you know what? Such a skill is totally OP (as per the thread title).

The changes might come in before (like some of the others) that’s not something they can really just apply to expansion players… so it’ll be like defiance.

On the lessening of differences, you still have that for other enemies and for PvP. The only bit of that that matters to me is that it really adversely effects pushes and pulls.

CureForLiving.5360:

Windsagio.1340:

Cbomb.4310:

The whole money argument needs some devils advocacy.
If all they cared about was the bottom line, they might as well push more development into gem-store content. Develop an expansion to sell for 30$ vs releasing a bikini on the gemstore for 30$ (and gem equiv). Hmmm what would take more time to develop?

They need to create a quality product, and if the instanced content is lacking then they’re going to have to give us A LOT of something else to make up for it.

Engagement and retention are massively important to profits. If people quit playing your game because they’re bored, they’re not going to buy those raven wings.

So the question is, do dungeons, on the whole, drive engagement?

They certainly do for some people, but for how many?

Only ANet would have those stats and they’re not telling us.

So we try to extrapolate what they’re thinking based on their behavior, with the assumption that they’re a rationally run company.

it’s a different server probably with copied account info. That’s how betas usually work.

Cbomb.4310:

The whole money argument needs some devils advocacy.
If all they cared about was the bottom line, they might as well push more development into gem-store content. Develop an expansion to sell for 30$ vs releasing a bikini on the gemstore for 30$ (and gem equiv). Hmmm what would take more time to develop?

They need to create a quality product, and if the instanced content is lacking then they’re going to have to give us A LOT of something else to make up for it.

Engagement and retention are massively important to profits. If people quit playing your game because they’re bored, they’re not going to buy those raven wings.

So the question is, do dungeons, on the whole, drive engagement?

They certainly do for some people, but for how many?

I’ll never get people looking for excuses to be dissatisfied.

spoj.9672:

Shadelang.3012:

I see people throwing crowd control around quite a bit. While ignoring what its really used for in most games that have CC dedicated builds. And thats (reducing or removing a specific set/group of threats through the use of control skills allowing other players to behave and act unhindered.)

Namely. CC builds aren’t MEANT to be for the massive bosses. There meant to keep the swarms of adds from wrecking the field.

The problem with this idea is that a lot of CC skills ingame are single target. Making them completely useless for trash mobs. And it essentially means every single target CC is just break bar damage skill. Regardless of its effect. Thats quite a step back in options from what we have currently. The current system has its problems. But it still gives players choice.

Id like to say the regular break bar just give CC vulnerability instead of a predetermined stun. That way it works just the same as now but better scaling. And you wont be able to get a free CC off at the start of a fight.

I really strongly suspect that most new bosses are going to be essentially unbreakable (as per the defiance news post example) outside those windows. Not all, but most.

The only issue I have with the normalization is that it’s gonna be harder to use knockbacks to force positioning on bosses, that could be a pain at times… (But again might also effect difficulty in a way we like).

Put simpler, most of the weapons are balanced to consider “Pet DPS” (cue laughter). It makes the balance much more complex if they have to refactor the weapons.

That being said, I remember reading that pet dps is supposed to be 15-20% of your damage (could be remembering wrong). I wouldn’t mind Druids getting a buff that said “your longbow,sword,greatsword,shortbow,axe,warhorn, and torch get a 15% increase to damage” and losing the pet

Jerus.4350:

Windsagio.1340:

Jerus.4350:

Don’t disagree with anything your saying about it, though I really don’t see it having very much effect on anything. The speed runners will still burn through things quickly and the other side of the spectrum will still be confused about what the heck is going on, but at least those people can’t screw up my defiance anymore And, incomming Slick Shoes meta!

Hah, “LFG NEED THIEF!!!” Meta is what I see ><

Blinds>break bar + black powder = stupid cc power (honestly custom breaks make headshot much stronger too, although it’s legit pretty good)

Aren’t blinds going to be quite toned down, such that it’d be like the equivalent of a 2s stun for the entire duration of a black powder or something like that? So not realy the bursty thing that might be needed… /shrug we’ll see what happens but I’ve been trying to figure out burst options. Of course Mesmer shatter + Mantra + Pistol + Sword(or focus) will be great.

I’m not totally up on the news, that would make a ton of sense. Pistol 4 is still going to be really excellent CC burst though, probably the most reliable volume in the game (mesmer I’d agree is higher potential, and it makes the mantra good, but it’s reliant on your clones/phantasms being up for the shatter).

~~~

See for me, this kind of talk makes it exciting. If the CC burn is hard and Fast, (snicker), and getting the Break when you need it is important enough, there are both reaction skill challenges and some interesting build questions that come into the discussion (a mesmer max stun setup isn’t your normal combat build at all, although thief is usually S/P anyways so that’s flexible).

Jerus.4350:

Windsagio.1340:

Jerus.4350:

For sure, it removes the potential for intelligent coordinated play and promotes a more “ok, everyone spam now” mentality.

Could be fun, not really complaining, just calling it what it is, a system that is far easier and less powerful.

Or, rather, it removes CC from the equation (effectively) except for special cases, and requires players be much more on point with their active defenses. Fights in general will be a little longer without icebow burns being so easy, and people will have to be a little bit better at dpsing on a boss that’s not actually stunned.

The thing I like about the cc burn phase is that it gives the skills some use some, and it solves the issue common with a lot of the LS encounters, which are:

DPS PHASE > INVULN DODGE PHASE > DPS PHASE.

Accepting the argument about losing a skill element (although again I think it trades for a different skill requirement gain) you get

DPS PHASE > INVULN DODGE PHASE > DPS PHASE
| |
CC BURN > DPS PHASE

They can make the CC burn a reaction check (it likely will be) to keep it from being a pure dumb spam.

Don’t disagree with anything your saying about it, though I really don’t see it having very much effect on anything. The speed runners will still burn through things quickly and the other side of the spectrum will still be confused about what the heck is going on, but at least those people can’t screw up my defiance anymore And, incomming Slick Shoes meta!

Hah, “LFG NEED THIEF!!!” Meta is what I see ><

Blinds>break bar + black powder = stupid cc power (honestly custom breaks make headshot much stronger too, although it’s legit pretty good)

spoj.9672:

Windsagio.1340:

It’s going to be exceptionally hard to CC bosses now (depending on the strength of the bar), in general it’s a subtle piece to make encounters harder for organized groups without effecting chaos/pugs.

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. All the evidence ive seen shows that the break bar scales to the number of players. Which means it will be easier for organised groups. And it will be easier than it is currently because we dont have to worry about defiant stack management and saving the control vulnerability for specific types of CC. It removes a layer of complexity from organised groups in favour of simplifying the system for everyone else.

I like it overall. It should open up the possibility for more interesting encounters. But i really hope some break bars allow CC vulnerability instead of just a predetermined stun. Because otherwise we have literally no use for skills like scorpion wire or taunt in PvE when fighting bosses.

An unorganized group whether in an instance or in open world is generally not getting any meaningful benefit from CC. In comparison, an organized group is getting massive advantage from CC.

It’s making it somewhat harder for the group that’s currently getting the advantage. The increased difficulty doesn’t matter for the other group, that isn’t getting the benefit currently anyways.

~~~

That’s my logic. CC is currently relatively easy to manage if you have a coordinated group. It is impossible to use effectively in an uncoordinated group or a zerg.

In the new system, it becomes harder for the coordinated group because you can no longer “store” defiance stripping. It’ll probably be the same for an uncoordinated group because in my experience they’re usually firing off their CC’s as fast as they possibly can anyways.

Jerus.4350:

For sure, it removes the potential for intelligent coordinated play and promotes a more “ok, everyone spam now” mentality.

Could be fun, not really complaining, just calling it what it is, a system that is far easier and less powerful.

Or, rather, it removes CC from the equation (effectively) except for special cases, and requires players be much more on point with their active defenses. Fights in general will be a little longer without icebow burns being so easy, and people will have to be a little bit better at dpsing on a boss that’s not actually stunned.

The thing I like about the cc burn phase is that it gives the skills some use some, and it solves the issue common with a lot of the LS encounters, which are:

DPS PHASE > INVULN DODGE PHASE > DPS PHASE.

Accepting the argument about losing a skill element (although again I think it trades for a different skill requirement gain) you get

DPS PHASE > INVULN DODGE PHASE > DPS PHASE
| |
CC BURN > DPS PHASE

They can make the CC burn a reaction check (it likely will be) to keep it from being a pure dumb spam.

Jerus.4350:

Cherokeewill.7504:

Jerus.4350:

In other words, less intelligent play, more spam.

I don’t understand how what has been described would produce the effect you state. Spamming CC would have little effect. It has been stated that the break bar will only be vulnerable at certain periods or require a severe concentrated effort on the part of the players. Spamming CC will make the break bar move but only a coordinated attack will break it and thus provide the benefit to the group.

This also adds the mechanic of Commanders actually commanding.

My point is that it’s not about using the right CC at the right time, but simply spam as much CC as you can at the right time.

World bosses it’ll be nice, as the current defiant system with like 20+ stacks… there’s always someone ready to ruin the opening with a dumb CC. On smaller stuff where groups can realistically coordinate and manage defiance to utilize CCs effectively, well, now we won’t be able to use the CC we want to use. It’ll no longer be about precise use, but simply about spamming everything you have at the right time every time encounter demands it.

As for commanders… /shrug I’m told the bar even glows at the right time, so really no communication necessary, just lob everything you have when that bar glows.

That’s the point, though. It’s going to be exceptionally hard to CC bosses now (depending on the strength of the bar), in general it’s a subtle piece to make encounters harder for organized groups without effecting chaos/pugs.

The other thing is, I strongly suspect that many many of the new champions will be unbreakable for most of the encounters.

~~~

Lessening the effectiveness of CC is a major part, in my opinion, of getting pve difficulty under control.

godkitten login ate my post.

Short version: Not to argue with the OP, but CC is/was super strong before HoT. You start with a free control effect (0 defiance) and coordination is actually pretty easy as long as you don’t have a ranger with a dog pet who thinks that Point Blank Shot is a DPS skill.

~~~

The real money in the new system is the Wyvern model, where they’re normally unbreakable but you need to run a “CC Burn” at certain points in the fight. That has potential.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

So if people think that dungeons are just too expensive to develop, that would imply this expansion should be very cheap since it doesn’t have them. I can’t imagine spending more than $20 for this expansion if there are no raids, no dungeons, no new race, and the zones are as small as they seem to be.

Everything about this expansion seems to be about saving money instead of building a better game. I’m afraid that the terrible failure of china’s launch has them scrambling for cash grabs instead of really building up the game.

Dungeons being expensive doesn’t mean that other things are cheap, I’m kind of depressed that I even had to type that out.

More to the point, GodKittenIt, anet is a company! They want to make a better game while making money, but the one thing they have to do is make money!

The way this is a problem is that “a better game for most of their players” and “a better game for ZudetGambeous (or a better game for Windsagio)” might well be entirely different concepts.

Clipping is an issue :p

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Windsagio.1340:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Windsagio.1340:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

HawkMeister.4758:

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

Yeah. Unless the fractals mastery system is any good, I won’t be buying it.

Maybe a year or two down the line when they have a 75% off sale or something.

Which is fine, if a product isn’t for you you shouldn’t buy it.

Gamers say this all the frickin’ time though, we’ll see what happens

Do you think the mastery system will be available to the beta testers? If so, I’ll let you know my decision then.

I’d bet money it is (although subject to a huge amount of tuning, beta and all), I hope you like it, more people is good

The fractal mastery system even? I mean they released information about many of the other masteries but for whatever reason have kept the fractal mastery “obscured by the Mists.”

1 Mastery Point: Follows Advice – Details are obscured by the Mists
2 Mastery Points: Agony Channeler – Details are obscured by the Mists
3 Mastery Points: Mistlock Singularities – Details are obscured by the Mists
5 Mastery Points: Recursive Resourcing – Details are obscured by the Mists
8 Mastery Points: Essential Singularities – Details are obscured by the Mists
10 Mastery Points: Hyperactive Singularities – Details are obscured by the Mists

They have to test them at some point, I’d be surprised if thats a big secret they’re holding (although yeah it’s possible).

It might not be beta 1, but I bet we’ll see them before the official release.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Windsagio.1340:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

HawkMeister.4758:

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

Yeah. Unless the fractals mastery system is any good, I won’t be buying it.

Maybe a year or two down the line when they have a 75% off sale or something.

Which is fine, if a product isn’t for you you shouldn’t buy it.

Gamers say this all the frickin’ time though, we’ll see what happens

Do you think the mastery system will be available to the beta testers? If so, I’ll let you know my decision then.

I’d bet money it is (although subject to a huge amount of tuning, beta and all), I hope you like it, more people is good

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

HawkMeister.4758:

To me no dungeon means the expansion is 5$ less worth than the 40$ that seems to be the end price rumor.
Thus if the expansion costs more than 35 bucks I won´t buy it.
It´s that simple.

And as the expansion is the main reason I came back, this will free up some of my time for another game.

Yeah. Unless the fractals mastery system is any good, I won’t be buying it.

Maybe a year or two down the line when they have a 75% off sale or something.

Which is fine, if a product isn’t for you you shouldn’t buy it.

Gamers say this all the frickin’ time though, we’ll see what happens

rotten.9753:

Windsagio.1340:

From a POV of difficulty balance? Arguably.

Certainly that implies it’s much much easier than was intended.

When one guy solo’d lupi for the first time few months after the launch, anet designer was impressed of his skill, never said anything about the difficulty or lack of it.

“arguably” :p

An argument can be made that it’s easier than intended if it’s soloable. Also an encounter that is poorly tuned ~= an encounter that’s BROKEN and is worthless.

Still, a discussion can certainly be had on the issue.

spoj.9672:

So every encounter in the game except for Triple Trouble and Tequatl is badly designed? And thats only because they start off scaled to about 40+ people.

This is a game that has an active combat element. There is active defence. Its common for games with this kind of combat to be doable by less than intended numbers of players if they have above average skill and reflexes. If anything thats good design. Artificially limiting players has never been considered good design. Why is this game any different?

From a POV of difficulty balance? Arguably.

Certainly that implies it’s much much easier than was intended.

Zenith, let me ask you seriously, knowing it’s a little trite.

Given that you hate open world content and have contempt for people who do open world content and want dungeons, given their ongoing direction, what are you expecting from this discussion? From what you’re saying yourself, it doesn’t seem like they’re moving towards dungeons (fractals being different) in any way, and you’re not presenting anything that says they will be, where’s this going for you?

spoj.9672:

Actually we can change something. If we prove there is enough interest in new dungeons….

You arent doing anyone any favours by saying things are absolute and argueing against new stuff. Anything is better than nothing. Which is why i never understand why people say no to any form of addition to the game. If its not something that interests you thats fine. But theres no need to speak out against it. You dont see me saying stop wasting resources on new pvp, wvw and open world stuff.

Not for HOT we can’t :p

Also, we can’t fool Anet. They know just about how much forum chatter is worth as compared to player activity and strategic goals.

I’m not saying anything is absolute beyond not wanting to shoot myself in the foot by constantly repeating qualifiers. I’ve been pretty clear on that point several times (and clear on the fact that yeah I don’t have arenanet internals, can only speculate based on observation).

And, I think it was a page or two back: IT IS SOMETHING THAT INTERESTS ME, I JUST DON’T THINK IT WILL HAPPEN. Even with my occasional kittening about the ‘crowd’ new dungeons are something I could enjoy immensely, either with my running buddies or just in pugs.

The difference is, I’m not going to tell myself a fairy story about why something that isn’t likely to happen actually is. That’s a bad scene for any number of reasons.

spoj.9672:

Then you must be rolling at the thought that we can solo world bosses like grenth, melandru, lyssa and statue of dwayna (pre megaserver change).

In general, Obtena does have a point there at the end of the last page, why are people so combative about this?

Especially given that there’s no policy result from this. Anet’s decision is made, we’re not going to change anything, and we’re (mostly) talking about what we think will happen, not what we think should happen.

spoj.9672:

I dont see why dungeons cant be a small side feature. It doesnt need to be the main focus. Which is what i assumed you were implying. I thought you were suggesting that to get dungeon development it has to be a major focus and hurt other development areas. Which im completely against.

And yes fractals could be the best alternative. Unfortunately it doesnt look like it will ever become the perfect format for it. With the poor rewards, RNG and completion time with no save progress. Theres a lot of good ideas to make it the perfect solution. But i doubt anet will completely overhaul the entire format.

That’s my central point though. The problem with dungeons is that they’re relatively expensive to develop. You need a new environment, tighter encounter design, special rewards, it adds up. The numbers come up because if more people did them the cost would be more justifiable.

I’d agree that fractals are the best alternative, and by all signs that’s what they’re going for.

Jerus.4350:

Windsagio.1340:

@Spoj: As I’ve mentioned, I think dungoneers have been digging their own grave on that. Regardless of who’s at fault, the meta/anti-meta drama and arguments have driven many people away from dungeons.

You mean when the meta was knights gear with a Pillar guard possibly wearing soldiers gear even? You mean back then before zerk meta?

Yeah…

I’d believe most likely people didn’t do dungeons because they actually challenged players and they were unknown. So the majority cowered away and found a comfy place to farm for cash to make shinies. Just like I have no doubt that this “challenging content” Anet is bring will either not be challenging at all and zerg rushed the instant people gain access to it, or will again be ignored by most while they sit in their newly found comfort zones farming for the new legendaries.

I didn’t say which meta, did I :p

Still, I should quit bringing up that point, it’s not particularly constructive to the question at hand, which is that Anet apparently feels that dungeons aren’t worth developing.

I’m gonna stick to my basic point for this (will bold and italic because I’m like that):

If arenanet thought dungeons were a good investment of their resources they’d spend resources on developing dungeons

People are trying to say it’s bad company culture or stubbornness or whatever for that, and I’m just going to keep repeating that its far far more likely that Anet thinks it’s not worth investing resources… and that it’s more likely they know the right answer on that than it is that we know the right anwer on that.

@Spoj: As I’ve mentioned, I think dungoneers have been digging their own grave on that. Regardless of who’s at fault, the meta/anti-meta drama and arguments have driven many people away from dungeons.

Why do I think it’s cheaper?

It’s actually really simple: Effectively 0 asset development.

Even something like the Glorious armor is a tiny fraction of the art/asset work of doing a new dungeon. Designwise you need people doing skill balance, but you don’t need an encounter designer.

If you’re designing a new map, yes the costs are similar (but still likely smaller, less encounter design and the pvp maps don’t tend to be as big or complex), but we all know how massively common new pvp maps are.

Admitting I’m estimating, I’d guess that a full dungeon is 3-5 pvp maps of art and level design. Combined with the fact that the vast majority of the pvp development hasn’t been content per se, I feel pretty kitten safe saying it’s cheaper.

Should note the server and matchmaking stuff isn’t free, and that’s a cost that pve doesn’t have, but its my experience that content development is more expensive per gain.

So, I’ve tapped into one of the mantras.

Important notes for this meme:
1) The dungeon community knows the numbers better than Anet
2) The dungeon community knows anets motivations better than Anet
3) Anet is playing a long game that the dungeon community knows (rightly) will never pay out.

~~~

Development costs for PvP are low. Promotional costs into pvp don’t just promote pvp, they promote the game as well. Tournaments and big payouts get game media coverage.

How do you guys even think ***Esports even makes money for a developer?

Cbomb.4310:

I didnt say ‘stubborn jerks’ I said ‘stubborn management’ and ‘lack of communication’.
Considering their history of lack of communication with the community do you really think thats impossible to believe within their own company?

Thats based on people that left the company and various testimonies.
Why else would they immediately fire and not replace the dungeon team after a few AC changes?

This is reason for them not making new dungeons (OP) – in regards to the Esports nonsense?, its not my forte but I agree with the above posting. Other games are successful at it and make tons of money, they want it too. Those games are pretty casual at the basic level so they figure their game is a good fit. I think they’ve ignored it for so long though that it will take far more effort to make as popular as they’d like.

I know from my own experience, exit interviews are often… biased.

At issue is the ‘stubborn’ argument comes down to saying “They’re incompetant and prejudiced in a particular way” along with some speculation on the why’s of particular decisions.

I still think ‘they have numbers to support this mode over this mode’ is simpler and more likely than “they’re subborn and lazy (and a bit incompetent)”

…especially when we’re discussing the why’s of a decision that we all see coming that we don’t like.