Im still not convinced housing is really needed, because from what I’ve seen, relatively few people will actually stay in their houses/guild halls other than to look at a new feature for 5 mins and go ‘oh, that looks nice.’
There’s still so many fundamental features of the game missing that I think housing shouldn’t be the priority on the list of things to do.
I’m surprised that they think this will stop the flood of players leaving for ESO.
Or that we needed to wait five+ months for these changes.
Flood? I beta-tested it. No way there will be a flood. The game, when I played it, sucked.
I was just talking about this today in queensdale actually.
People who havent played it have a lot of faith in it but the actual game is very boring. There will be an initial flood but as the game doesn’t really bring anything new to the table, it’ll last a few months before it’s forgotten by most.
See the thing is this.
What people fail to realize is sub games are less impacted by players not logging on then micro transaction games.
For the few months people try these new games – even if they don’t like them and don’t stay Anet makes absolutely zero money since the majority of their revenue is from the gem shop.
It’s been proven with sub games that people generally don’t cancel right away while trying other titles since subs are assumed reasonably affordable.
Between Teso and Wildstar GW2 will loose people just as other games do as well. Add into the fact that we will see no new content till at least june and people may stay gone a bit longer longer then you think.
But on the flipped side of the coin, there’s also the advantage of GW2 being B2P instead of P2P. It’s the reason I’m not playing FF14.
I got the box, and some recent additions intrigue me. But the fact that I need to pay to check them out is a barrier to re-entry for me. With GW2, if an interesting update comes along, I’d probably jump in just to check them out, and maybe, if I like them enough, I’ll spend some money on gems.
In all honesty, things like account-bound legendaries hyped me up more than an expansion.
This is really the problem with the gaming industry these days. Everything has to be big. Huge bosses, massive expansions, blah, blah, enormous, blah.
Often its really the little things that makes a game good, and that’s largely forgotten.
Dont forget to reduce FOTM drop rates.
The amound of gold you earn on scale 40+ is ridiculous, Almost 2G!
I think FotM is a whole different issue. I think we need different, unique rewards for different content, otherwise there’s the inevitable issue of one piece of content giving better rewards than everything else.
FotM gives relics as well as gold. The way to go is to make relics more useful rather than balance its gold income.
Personally I never found the gold reward from events actually being something worth doing the events for.
In fact, as things are, I don’t really find there’s actually a point to doing any events once I hit 80.
If they’re going to account-bind legendaries, I think they should remove it from the wardrobe.
You get to share your legendary gear between characters since they are account bound so that’s not a problem anymore, and it would avoid problems such as the before-mentioned Eternity-making exploit to unlock 2 free legendaries.
The reasons people would complain now about removing them from the wardrobe would be either if you can’t deal with the effort of stuffing your sword into the bank when you want to switch playing on another character, or if you want to dual-wield legendaries without the effort of making 2.
You can only switch the legendary between level 80 characters – the Wardrobe will allow legendary owners to use the skin on alts that are still leveling. And since that will require plenty of charges to continually upgrade the weapon – why wouldn’t ANet want to encourage it?
Because would many people consume a charge on a leveling alt? You’re wasting a lot of money there.
If they’re going to account-bind legendaries, I think they should remove it from the wardrobe.
You get to share your legendary gear between characters since they are account bound so that’s not a problem anymore, and it would avoid problems such as the before-mentioned Eternity-making exploit to unlock 2 free legendaries.
The reasons people would complain now about removing them from the wardrobe would be either if you can’t deal with the effort of stuffing your sword into the bank when you want to switch playing on another character, or if you want to dual-wield legendaries without the effort of making 2.
Which is exactly what ANet is trying to promote. They want to reward player that worked hard to getting skins by allowing them to reuse that skin on other items. Quit seeing this only for legendaries, there is much more to it then legenday.
I don’t really see why would anyone be reasonably annoyed if they removed legendaries from the wardrobe.
In fact, why would you even make another say, greatsword if you made a legendary one? The only reason I can think of is if you want to be able to swap characters halfway into a fractal/dungeon run.
I’m pretty sure all the hardcore people left this game after about 2 months.
This game is the most casual game on the market, and yes that is including titles such as hello kitty online.
You log in, you swipe your credit card and you win the game, that’s all there is to GW2, and all there has ever been. If you want a game with progression, skill, challenge, and rewards then go to a sub game like wildstar.
Ummm. Log into Wildstar, swipe credit card to buy in game time, sell in game time to other people, profit. Unless it works differently to what I understood how it works.
And I’m quite certain you don’t get a lot of the most coveted skins from gold, because they can’t be traded.
On topic:
If we make ascended and legendaries account-bound instead of soulbound, wouldn’t it be better to just exclude them form the wardrobe?
There’s an entire 12 page argument in another thread with quite a few people on both sides of it, and theres a very serious exploit with Eternity to get Sunrise and Twlight at basically nothing. So to settle all that, wouldn’t this be the easiest method?
(edited by Xae Isareth.1364)
If they’re going to account-bind legendaries, I think they should remove it from the wardrobe.
You get to share your legendary gear between characters since they are account bound so that’s not a problem anymore, and it would avoid problems such as the before-mentioned Eternity-making exploit to unlock 2 free legendaries.
The reasons people would complain now about removing them from the wardrobe would be either if you can’t deal with the effort of stuffing your sword into the bank when you want to switch playing on another character, or if you want to dual-wield legendaries without the effort of making 2.
They did say in the past that they wanted to redo the Zhaitan fight because it was basically rushed to make it in time for release.
Yeah .. make it need 150 people for the hardcore crowd i suspect.
I’d very much favor making Zhaitan into a raid (not 150, a 15-man raid), but give the option to view the end cutscene without beating him.
They did say in the past that they wanted to redo the Zhaitan fight because it was basically rushed to make it in time for release.
If they forsaw it, why aren’t they saying what’s going to happen?
Its a pretty big issue to a lot of people. By not saying anything, to me at least, it seems they didn’t think of this and don’t really know what they’re going do about it.
Ya, you might be right, maybe they don’t know how to adress it to us without considering every solution for now. But I’m pretty sure they won’t let it happen for someone to abuse this somewhat ‘glitch’.
I certainly hope so but given how many bans were given during the course of the game ….
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Exploit#Historical_exploits
…. I have my doubts.
In terms of storytelling and keeping old stories alive, the best I’ve seen this done in a MMO is probably RuneScape still.
As old and technically-limited as that game is it tells its lore and story so kitten well. It doesn’t have a main, linear plot which the player follows. It has different chains of quests which all happen simultaneously and often interact with each other.
Each quest chain has a distinct main characters, plot and theme, giving them their own soul but at the same time, they all involve at least a few story elements which belong to other quest chains, making the world seem much more alive by giving an impression that a lot of things are happening at once (just like the real world).
This can be involving the characters from another quest, closing a non-main loose plot point which was started in another quest. or there are quests which bring multiple quest-lines together.
This also keeps old stories alive, as they aren’t just abandoned but are eventually worked on over time. The oldest quest chain still isn’t finished in that game, and even the finished quest chains are still involved in the plot of new quests because nothing is standalone.
I like how this discussion is getting so large and Anet hasn’t made one comment on it to any of the topics posted, including a lethal loophole with Eternity which is objectively not right.
The reason why they probably didn’t talk about eternity is, I guess, because they forsaw this issue. I doubt they would let people craft it and than sell and remain with 2 other greatsword skin… that would make no sense to anyone in-game. But for people with already equipped eternity, than they would keep both the greatswords skins and the eternity. If sold, both sunrise and twilight should be removed from wardrobe, that we are all aware of.
If they forsaw it, why aren’t they saying what’s going to happen?
Its a pretty big issue to a lot of people. By not saying anything, to me at least, it seems they didn’t think of this and don’t really know what they’re going do about it.
I like how this discussion is getting so large and Anet hasn’t made one comment on it to any of the topics posted, including a lethal loophole with Eternity which is objectively not right.
“Making the skins account bound could could decrease the price alot (Since you can use it on your whole account).”
^ incorrect, since the skins are account bound, the value is increased as people would be willing to spend more on account bound items.
look at the dye prices.
I disagree.
Low cost common dyes sky-rocketed because people can use alts to get extra Unidentified Dyes. (Which have the chance at being a rare dye and were ~1g on the day of the announcement.)
Unid-ed Dyes dropped back to like 50 silver yesterday after everyone came to their senses and realized that there’s going to be a massive amount of new unid-ed dyes added to the supply on the 15th.
I’m sure they strategically released the dye information to have this effect. (Higher dye prices in-game results in more people buying them in the Gem Store.)
I predict common dye prices will plummet once again after the April 15th update and everyone gets a boat load of unidentified dyes for all the dyes on their alts.
I think the impending account bound status has caused the Lion’s Arch dyes to be cheaper on the TP than the other limited-time dyes.
I wouldn’t come to any conclusion yet. The market isn’t perfectly efficient and not everyone is perfectly informed. The patch is still a while away, and people aren’t sure of what’s going happen exactly, not everyone likes to speculate, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see an Abyss dye surge after the patch kicks in.
There’s a lot of variables at work here. There’s an offsetting effect from a lot of unid dyes coming into the market soon, but once that’s over, who knows? Dyes are mosre useful than before, and they made it very clear that they are going to make unids harder to come by.
A lot of uncertainty, with likely differing short, med and long-term effects. Because of that, I personally didn’t invest into this, and won’t be surprised if a lot of other investors didn’t invest into it other than reaping common dyes whilst their prices are low to get free unids either. A lot of the remaining players are likely not to really care, doesn’t really know what to make of this because of all the uncertainty, or just prefer not to buy dyes yet because they won’t have any use of it for a while and that gold is needed elsewhere.
We still haven’t talked about crafting Eternity to unlock Twilight and Sunrise skins and selling it for 4000g
Is that fair?
SO this is already solved in the launch of this concept… As they state only account or soulbound skins will be unlocked… So they can’t sell Eternity if they want to keep it’s skin… or Twilight and Sunrise…
This is one exception. Please see:
1) You soulbind Twilight. You get the skin
2) You soulbind Sunrise. You get the skin
3) You create Eternity. It is created not soulbounded. You don’t have skin.
4) You sell Eternity. You have skins Twilight and Sunrise (it does not vanish from wardrobe probably)
5) Person who bought the Eternity soulbind it. He/she has the Eternity skin AND Twilight and Sunrise (as precursors for Eternity). Mean that Twilight and Sunrise skins from one object is actually in 2 players wardrobe. There is one Eternity skin – true.I’m not sure I see the issue of this sorry…
Player 1) Has Eternity and sells it… means they did the work to get Twilight and Sunrise in the first place AND SOULBIND THEM… Why shouldn’t they be entitled to the skins…
Player 2) Buys Eternity and soulbinds thus unlocking Twilight and Sunrise… They spent kitten near what it would cost to buy Twilight an Sunrise individually (current cost of Twilight & Sunrise as of this post is 2800g each, Eternity is 4250 wow… they save 350g lol)… Why shouldn’t they be entitled to the skins…
As I said I am not seeing the issue here… The only difference between having Twilight with Sunrise and Eternity is 5 piles of Crystalline Dust and 10 Philosopher stones lol
Edit: I love how you “nonchalantly” say buys Eternity lolz… I play the TP and there have NEVER been more than 8 listed for sale… EVER… so its not like this would turn in to some PROLIFIC issue lol
ummm 2x 2800=5600, saves 1350g. Might change with the update, perhaps people will want Eternity more, but not sure.
But anyhow, I think you missed both points. The point was that Player 1 (who made Eternity) gets Sunrise and Twlight for very minimal costs because they reaped most of the cost back when they sold Eternity, whilst having both Twilight and Sunrise as skins.
Player 2 buys Eternity, and gets the skins for Sunrise and Twlight as well. In terms of total skins unlocked, that’s 2 sets of Sunrise+Twlight unlocked for 1 craft.
This is going to massively devalue both Sunrise and Twlight. There needs to be a solution ASAP, as I reckon Sunrise and Twlight is probably the 2 most popular legendaries in the game because GS is one of the best weapons on every class apart from Ranger who can use one.
They need to also ASAP and inform the players. No solution means a lot of people are going to be very annoyed that their legendaries becomes known as the ‘free’ legendary. Not informing the public meaning a lot of worries from people trying to sell Eternity (is it suddenly going to become account bound?) and from people crafting one to sell (imagine if you just crafted Sunrise to MF with your soulbound Twilight so you can free up some cash, then the patch hits and you get ninja-nope’d).
^ no, we need to point out flaws and problems now. It’s actually very possible that they havn’t considered such an exploit on Eternity yet, so if we point stuff like that out, they might translate into release and really anger a lot of people.
I would be pretty annoyed myself if my sunrise suddenly became known as the ‘free’ Legendary.
I think the problem really boils down to them having to kitten the business impact of overhauling the transmutation system to make it 1 bind on initial unlock and free to use after instead of what they proposed. They can’t just change it back once they changed it, so of it leads to a significant decrease in profits, someone’s going to have to answer some tough questions from the top.
I’m not sure if that’s technically possible though.
Personally I think making Legendaries account bond instead of being availiable in the wardrobe is a much better idea.
Why? Because Legendaries are supposed to be ‘unique’. King Arthur didn’t just soulbind his Exalibur and give a fake copy of it to all his knights. It really loses its appeal when it becomes a reusable skin.
Also: massive exploit with Eternity.
Make Sunrise, make Twilight, bind them to unlock skins on both. Make an Eternity and sell it, real most of th cost back. This is a pretty huge exploit.
If they don’t change this, and I don’t see any dev responses on it, it would really wreck the value of Sunrise and Twilight, and perhaps Eternity as well from a surge in people making it.
3 solutions:
1. Remove Eternity from MF. Not sure how happy people would be with it as a discontinued item however.
2. Make Eternity account bound on creation.
3. Make soulbound Twilight and Sunrise unusable for making Eternity.
2 things I’ve realised which needs really to be addressed.
1. Having the same Fractal weapon dropped multiple times. This would be rather annoying, as the skins are already rare as they are, so getting a second almost pointless drop (basically only saving you 1 transmutation charge) would annoy a lot of fractal runners.
Solution: make it such that you can’t get a fractal skin you have gotten before as a drop.
2. The legendary greatsword Eternity. You can make Sunrise and then Twilight, bind them both to unlock the skins and then make an Eternity and sell it to reap back most of the costs involved.
This needs to be fixed ASAP otherwise it’ll massively devalue Sunrise and Twlight, angering a lot of people.
I guess the only way to really prevent this is to make Eternity account bound on creation from now on, or make soulbound Twilight and Sunrise unusable in the forge. Unless anyone can come up with a better solution?
I think this will make people want to get legendaries even more.
People who play multiple toons may be discouraged from making a legendary because it takes up truckloads of resources, and they won’t even be using it much. So this change might get those people to want legendaries.
I think it would be very much appreciated if there was an option to make a skin infinitely freely usable without further charges by using up a number of charges.
The current system bugs me because it just doesn’t feel like you actually unlocked those skins, but more like they’re up for sale from your hero panel.
Wow, I got both the longbow and dagger lol. Would love to trade either for the sword >.>
I think a price of 1.5k relics and 30 prestine relics is a fair price for a fractal skin.
New class: its way too soon to introduce a new class when the existing classes are very shallow (very few viable builds, very small selection of useful skills) as they are and very imbalanced. Fix what’s broken before making new content.
New race: personally I don’t see the point. We got 5 races already. New races simply slow down the designing of armors, which already happens at a snail’s pace outside of the gemstore.
Here are the people who are kittened off by the change so far:
-dual legendary holders, + other expensive exotics
-people who like to mix-match town clothes
-people who bought multiple dyes
-people who absolutely hate anything involving the gem storeThe first three I can get behind, the latter I have no sympathy for because they think GW2 should be a charity.
As with all changes, there will be people who will be negatively affected. And they are more than likely to be vocal about their displeasure.
Either way, these changes are for the good of the game – it’s players and creators.
I can see their concern. But the game needed a wardrobe change for a long time, as a game in which the endgame is focused on cosmetic progression with a really broken cosmetics system really doesn’t work.
It’s really a case of forgoing the minority’s needs for the good of the majority, as they can’t just exclude those items form the wardrobe change because they happen to be some of the most sought after cosmetics in the game.
I personally I’m not quite sure if people in general actually want housing.
The reason I make that statement is becuase of playing RuneScape, which given its (former) playerbase size, accessibility and demographic structure, I think gives a nice representation of the general playerbase of a MMO.
Now, the game had one of the most extensive housing systems I’ve yet seen. You can literally make anything, from kitchens to minigames to dungeons and costumise it in a gizillion ways. It even has some unique benefits like huge exp boosts and items you can’t craft otherwise. The devs also over the years pretty frequently tried to make it better and better by introducing new features.
….. And no one gave a kitten . The housing channel is pretty much abandoned, the only thing people use for houses is the huge exp boosts, and just to get to max level of the construction skill.
I tend to think that actually the majority of players really don’t care about housing because they’re too busy doing other things.
Do people actually not realize you can get ascended gear from drops?
The drop rate is so pathetic that it’s not worth the bother.
Have you run level 40+ FotM recently? Just looking in my guild, I’d say its a 20% droprate for an ascended chest.
To be honest, I think what GW2 really does right in terms of exploration is having this sense of grandeur and beauty. Standing on the tip of Divinity’s Reach and looking over the whole city in all its majesty, I could feel tears on my cheeks. Looking out into the sky and the birds flying around in the collosus fractal, my partymates had to wait a while for me to take a screenshot.
I think its GW2’s artstyle. Wildstar just can’t capture that sense of grandeur and magnificence, nor can ESO, their art just doesn’t have the flare and soul which the creators put into GW2. GW2 managed to find this perfect balancing point between being realistic and fantastical that I don’t think other games have managed.
There’s also something more minor: the easter eggs. Whether it be the room with all the cats, the polar bear snuggling next to a fire in Lornaar’s Pass, and my personal favorite, the Terminator 2 reference from the Iron Forgeman, although they’re little things, are things which makes the world ‘fun’. A lot of games has forgotten the little things these days.
@Skitz
1. I never really understood this idea of an endgame. You’re basically saying that 90% of the game should just be forgotten about after a certain point of progression when there’s a defined ‘endgame’.
The endgame for me in GW1 is just doing whatever I want, like how I played Skyrim.
2. Not requiring co-ordination really doesn’t mean it’s faceroll. Vindictus required next to zero co-ordination but it’s one of the most challenging games I’ve played, in a fair way (ie no IWTBTG stuff). And there are plenty of co ordination in the game anyways if you want to do it, and sometimes it’s even nessecary.
3. I want to point out your last sentence. ‘who cares?’. Not trying to be rude but if you don’t care, you clearly won’t find any. Also, so what if it’s a MMO? Why dues that mean it can’t have an exploration element to it? Especially it’s a living world to explore as opposed to a console game’s ‘dead’ world.
These guys are going to complain about anything. It’s what drives them. Makes them feel useful. Yea, most of the time they are absolutely wrong, but at least it’s actually a VAST minority of the players who play the game. One week they are complaining that something is too hard, the next week everything is too easy. They complain about only having two weeks to do stuff when 90% of the living story content was available for 4 week periods or more. They say the game lacks diversity in combat, but yet they don’t want their zerker builds touched because that’s all they play across the board. They implore that they need a fat, juicy carrot on a stick in front of them at all times, but yet they can’t ever see said carrot when it’s there.
You will find very little sense in this forum.
I have nothing against the game, I’m still playing it, but I’m just pointing out things from my point of view. its fine if you don’t agree.
About exploration – give me a reason to explore? I have already done 100% map completion, there is absolutely no incentive for me to go back and revisit these places. Thats why I said “who cares” GW2 has great maps, great visual, but its an abandoned wasteland for the most part unless you see alts leveling. People only every go to different places for the daily reset of meta world bosses. No one does any DEs like they used to back when orr was fun. Exploration is nonexistent imo.
I personally don’t see how you guys believe LS is content…. its small new peice of a story that after 1-2 days, you pretty much done with. You get the achievements, get the shiny new item or w/e and its pretty much over. If they had more with events like twisted, I would enjoy it. a lot of people just don’t see these activities like running around in a baazar doing races as meaningful content. Its just there to kill some time or have some fun for an hour or 2…. its not endgame
From what I gather, you want loot for exploring basically. That’s a very valid point, and one of my major concerns with DEs. But that shouldn’t be what exploration is focused around. A good game would make you explore simply because you wanted to reap the rewards of finding something or seeing a sight, just like in real life. I don’t go on holiday to Peru for the loot, in fact, I paid loot to go on holiday.
In a GW2 context, I went back to Lion’s Arch to see all the destruction that happened to it, to hear the new OST. I didn’t go back because there’s new loot there, that would in fact defeat the purpose in this partcular case because I would go find the loot instead of go find what’s changed with everything.
I don’t like the LS but having a defined endgame is not a good thing. What endgame in most MMOs mean is effectively forcing you out of certain content and forcing you into another. Ironically, that’s what the LS is doing, but that’s another argument.
Everything should be endgame content in a game. That brings in diversity. If someone’s endgame is just playing a few minigames for a hour or 2 of fun, what’s wrong with that? aren’t games supposed to be fun in the first place?
Too many WoW fanbois. I don’t blame Anet for ignoring the forums.
PS. GW2 is dead, don’t worry. Now, go cry in WoW forums instead of here, because you are wasting both your and our time.People use an example of success from – Em I dunno something that succeeded.
How is that unreasonable or fanboi’ish???
Also, Millions upon millions of players log in every day and play that game.
In saying that who is the minority and who is the majority?
It’s not unrealistic to think that Anet might be interested now in using time proven systems from other games and implementing them here.
Because what works there won’t work here. Medicine that cures the flu won’t cure cancer.
Except your analogy isn’t correct.
Both games can get the flu the only difference is one has a vaccine to fight against it one does not.
GW2 currently is trying to be different just to be different. That’s lovely and all but if different isn’t fun then you have a problem.
They should be more interested in making a fun game instead of a different game and I think they would be in a much better place.
They are trying to reinvent the wheel not realizing – why fix something if it isn’t broke?
So far their test theory has failed – If it had succeeded the game would be rivaling others in terms of player retention, player bases and profits.
The game has so much potential but continues to fall to mediocrity chasing an ideal which is counter productive.
Well ok, what ideas can you take from WoW and apply it here then?
The problem is that it’s frustrating. In the heat of battle you don’t want to jump through hoops because the game’s system is illogical and you have to force yourself to adapt to it.
It’s not a problem with positional counters, it’s a problem with efficiency. It looks like a fast paced game and this game just slows things down.
Too many WoW fanbois. I don’t blame Anet for ignoring the forums.
PS. GW2 is dead, don’t worry. Now, go cry in WoW forums instead of here, because you are wasting both your and our time.People use an example of success from – Em I dunno something that succeeded.
How is that unreasonable or fanboi’ish???
Also, Millions upon millions of players log in every day and play that game.
In saying that who is the minority and who is the majority?
It’s not unrealistic to think that Anet might be interested now in using time proven systems from other games and implementing them here.
Because what works there won’t work here. Medicine that cures the flu won’t cure cancer.
The simple answer would be the game has to actually be moving to say yes or no.
As it stands right now the game has changed little since release. For example a player who left the game before the LS and came back now would basically see almost no changes to the game in over a year.
Now, This is what I am thinking. With all the new releases coming out – GW2 has to change with the times. It will evolve so that it will not loose players to all the new games coming out.
GW2 was released with absolutely nothing to compete against. Wow attracts a different player base tbh. So while some may view it as competition – quite frankly GW2 isn’t even on Blizzards radar.
So now with these new games coming out GW2 for the first time will have direct competition for players. It will cause GW2 to adapt and evolve – which is exactly what this game has needed for a very long time.
We will just have to see how it plays out.
I don’t really see anything until EQNext. The biggest names on a release radar which isn’t far into the future are Destiny, Wildstar, ESO and The Division. 2 of them are TPS/FPSs and aren’t even really MMOs, Wildstar is a homage to pre-Cata WoW with some extra stuff (I heard Warplots are still bugged and they can’t make it work though), do none of those are really directly competing with GW2.
ESO is a very close competitor, and I’m interested I how that plays (Anet timing their feature release for basically ESO’s release and also slapping a WvW season with very attractive rewards on top of it has me thinking Anet might be playing aggressively). But they’re still fundamentally different: ESO has a trinity, it’s a sub, etc etc.
Actually I truly think Wildstar will be GW2’s biggest competitor. It’s A LOT closer to GW2 then most of these forum jokers are making people believe.
The only similarity it has to wow is that it caters to both casuals and hard cores alike and has content for both.
The combat system in that game takes GW2 and improves upon it. The content design is what I keep wishing Anet would get closer to making and the game mechanics are simply fun.
It’s different enough to be new and familiar enough to allow for enjoyable game play.
Quite frankly Carbine pulled a Blizzard. They apparently have taken all the best of the current crop of mmorpgs and put them into one title.
That is exactly what blizzard north did when they originally released Wow and we all know how that worked out.
What WS did was basically make every skill into a TAoE of some sort. There’s a lot of problems with that, a massive one being precision control is going to be a headache. Your basically putting a second step into targeting specific mobs and then not giving an intuitive way to achieve that.
Putting into an example. What if I want to pull the enemy team’s healer to me as a tank so my burst DD can nuke him? I can’t because the other team’s all crowding around him.
I mean, what’s wrong with a crosshair? It works, it’s precise, and it’s intuitive. It just seems like they’re just trying to be different for difference’s sake.
(edited by Xae Isareth.1364)
@Skitz
1. I never really understood this idea of an endgame. You’re basically saying that 90% of the game should just be forgotten about after a certain point of progression when there’s a defined ‘endgame’.
The endgame for me in GW1 is just doing whatever I want, like how I played Skyrim.
2. Not requiring co-ordination really doesn’t mean it’s faceroll. Vindictus required next to zero co-ordination but it’s one of the most challenging games I’ve played, in a fair way (ie no IWTBTG stuff). And there are plenty of co ordination in the game anyways if you want to do it, and sometimes it’s even nessecary.
3. I want to point out your last sentence. ‘who cares?’. Not trying to be rude but if you don’t care, you clearly won’t find any. Also, so what if it’s a MMO? Why dues that mean it can’t have an exploration element to it? Especially it’s a living world to explore as opposed to a console game’s ‘dead’ world.
I wish the Wildstar team the best of luck with their game, but good god have I never been so bored quickly with an online game before. There seems to be alot of similarities with GW2 (intentional or not) but the one thing they should have done was ditch the traditional quests and go with the GW2 model. I’d rather have GW2 in space than WoW in space.
That’s the same problem I found with Wildstar. It’s a solid game but it’s the same old same old. There’s really not much there in a fundamental level which it can call its own, and the art style really looks very generic. It almost has Pixar’s charm to it but falls flat on glare and soul.
I guess it can call its humorous tone it’s own, but for me, it’s rather slapstick and makes me facepalm instead of laugh. I guess I liked TSW’s dark and witty humor, which not everyone liked so perhaps that’s just me.
The biggest thing that’s interesting for me about WS however, is that in terms if ideas, content and artsyle, it practically declares war on WoW. That’s a very tough enemy to fight against, especially for a previously unheard of studio.
The simple answer would be the game has to actually be moving to say yes or no.
As it stands right now the game has changed little since release. For example a player who left the game before the LS and came back now would basically see almost no changes to the game in over a year.
Now, This is what I am thinking. With all the new releases coming out – GW2 has to change with the times. It will evolve so that it will not loose players to all the new games coming out.
GW2 was released with absolutely nothing to compete against. Wow attracts a different player base tbh. So while some may view it as competition – quite frankly GW2 isn’t even on Blizzards radar.
So now with these new games coming out GW2 for the first time will have direct competition for players. It will cause GW2 to adapt and evolve – which is exactly what this game has needed for a very long time.
We will just have to see how it plays out.
I don’t really see anything until EQNext. The biggest names on a release radar which isn’t far into the future are Destiny, Wildstar, ESO and The Division. 2 of them are TPS/FPSs and aren’t even really MMOs, Wildstar is a homage to pre-Cata WoW with some extra stuff (I heard Warplots are still bugged and they can’t make it work though), do none of those are really directly competing with GW2.
ESO is a very close competitor, and I’m interested I how that plays (Anet timing their feature release for basically ESO’s release and also slapping a WvW season with very attractive rewards on top of it has me thinking Anet might be playing aggressively). But they’re still fundamentally different: ESO has a trinity, it’s a sub, etc etc.
I guess when you start playing a different MMO?
Yes, but I want to do that in this game. Trinity is the answer that can save gw2.
I don’t really see how the trinity can solve anything. In fact, the trinity will just remove the possible potential for any if it to be solved.
By linearising roles, it won’t be the players finding zerking to be the best way to tackle everything (although I still don’t agree with that), it would be the game itself forcing everyone down a particular route.
It really depends on what direction you want the gane to head in.
Personally, I’m pretty torn. In terms of PvE content, I don’t like open world raids (they make you feel like you don’t really matter, and you can’t put any complex mechanics in there), I don’t like temporary content, the plot doesn’t make any sense. So no on that front.
The core ideas of the game however, I feel it’s slowly heading in the right direction. The latest dungeon content (despite there not being many), are very well made and the mechanics promote distinct roles unique to the encounter, the CDIs are more attention I’ve seen any dev put into listening to the community, and as much as I hate the LS, they are becoming better structured.
So I guess the answer is I’ll wait and see.
I am really disappoinment about upcoming changes to guardian…
As always we don`t have any changes for Spirit weapons, shield, sword, torch…
May be we have not bad changes for condition build but my opinion that condition build based only in one condition is meh…So what are you thinking guys?
Are you satisfied? =)
Or you disappoinment? =(Although I’m not really excited about the changes for Guardians either I disagree with some of the changes you want. Sword is already in a good position and is our best PvE weapon. Torch might get in a better position with the new burn grandmaster trait.
How they haven’t buffed shield yet is beyond me. It’s a shame really because I always imagined Guardian to symbolize the sword & board yet I rarely see anyone use it. Furthermore, I could care less about Spirit Weapons as I hate relying on AI. They could stay the way they are for all I care.
It’s quite ironic that the symbol for guardians is a shield yet we can safely say that any guardian playing with a shield is playing sub-optimally.
In PvE, the meta DPS guardian is basically a thief. You survive on dodges and blinds, and is one of the most squishy classes in the game.
You don’t hunt you enemies down in war. You neutralize targets that are attacking you, and let people retreat if they’re doing it peacefully.
If this is how war is practiced, then there wouldn’t be wars at all because no one would attack anyone else.
And I quote… “Rumors tell of a merchant interested in items from major events in Tyria’s recent history, including Blade Shards. Players are encouraged to hold on to these items if they are interested in trading with her when she appears.” Meaning she will be appearing, but hasn’t yet.
but again. you announce something in the notes, we expect it to appear. That quote belongs on facebook, twitter and these fourms. not the update notes
They put it into the patch notes. so people dont disgard their blade shards. Previously, people complained because info like this was not in the patch notes.
Unless I fall asleep in my IT classes, patch note is to describe something you updated on the program NOT something you going to do.
But thats why I love GW it always do some totally different from the establishment. :P
The patch notes is just simply the best place to put it. It’s on the front page, people tends to read them, and it avoids having a separate news article for ever little thing.
Did Anet ever mention that there was supposed to be a control/DPS/support trinity?
From the way I feel from doing Fractals, the endgame was supposed to have you supporting, controlling, and DPSing at the same time, and roles were supposed to be dictated by what the encounter involves and what classes you have in your party.
I don’t think they really need to massively overhaul what Defiance does, but put in skills enemies use which aren’t affected by Defiance that you need to interrupt, like the final boss in the dredge fractal, and mechanics which involve heavy use of CC (eg the boss enrages, pucks out a player to target with very fast and hard melee attacks, forcing you to immobilise/cripple and kite until the enrage ends).
As for Defiance itself:
- Weakness just applies a flat 15% damage decrease whilst it’s active.
- Keep Blind as it is, but increase the chance to miss to 15% and it doesn’t wear off after a single attack.
To be honest, I think they’re slowly getting there.
Looking at some of the more recent additions, for exmaple Subject Six, that’s kind of what a non-trinity but still well structured fight looks like. You got the main DPSers nuking down the boss and its adds, and you got CCers preventing the adds from reaching the boss. Its simple, but quite effective.
@Xae Isareth:
I like the idea but I wonder if it’s thematically more fit to a necromancer than a mesmer.Like destroy all current minions, then summon 3 Aatxes and tether them so that they take half of the damage/condition damage you receive. Lasts for 30 seconds, recharge 60 seconds.
It was an extension of iDefender’s concept.
I always though Mesmers are based on the idea of manipulating things. So I thought an elite which focused on manipulating the enemy’s attacks fits well.
I think it means having a wardrobe function of some kind.
That has been long needed really. A game in which the endgame loothunt is focused on cosmetics not having a wardrobe function is like a game based on the trinity system not having a reliable aggro mechanic.
The original ANet plan was to release new World Dynamic Event content every month, (along with occasional dungeon and other content), with the goal of doubling the Dynamic Events in the game during the first year of free updates. Some would advance the stories told by the original DEs for the zone. Others would become part of a rotation of DEs in and out of the game, in a fashion that would ensure that you’d find new content and a different combination of content when ever you returned to a zone after a month or two.
Actually this does sound pretty cool.
They did this strategy in the beginning. But people did not appreciate it. They had to change the strategy.
No. No no no no no no no.
It really wasn’t that people didn’t appreciate it. A lot of the DEs jsut came unannounced so people didn’t know it was there, and that plus the fact that rewards for DEs are just screwed on a core level (this is a MMO, people need loot as an incentive) meant of course it would be unappreciated.
For me, temporary content doesn’t work either, on so many levels.
1. It doesn’t add to the core game. Yes, LA is pretty cool, but what do we still do on a day-to-day basis? FotM, CoF1, etc etc, hasn’t changed for a long time.
2. Its a massive waste of effort. People often complain that the game has so little content compared to other games (notably GW1), but that’s not exactly true. If you count the amount of content that’s been released so far, its more than what most games get in 2-3 years. It’s just that its all temporary. Battle of LA is basically a new city, that’s an entire temporary city, that’s just such a huge waste of effort.
3. It concentrates players, and takes them away from other content because you put a deadline on them to play it soon as possible.
I agree on everything except with the scope of the temporary content in the second point. The meta-achievment grinds have stretched what little actual content there was out exponentially vs. the actual amount of playable content that has been introduced and then disappeared, with each Living Story update.
Being temporary has just made it easier for them to cover up the fact that the content they have produced was very thin on actual content.
Your third point is one of the most important. The problem with Living Story goes beyond how little the game has to show for it. It has actually been a method of providing game play that has trained participants, like mice in a maze, to think that the entire world is actually just a series of temporary mazes to be navigated for a reward and that no greater world or game play of any value exists outside of the latest maze. It not only concentrates players in one area, pulling them from the larger game world, but it degrades the perceived value of all that world content and destroys sustainable game play patterns that utilize all that content they spent over five years creating.
But really, all new content in MMOs is somewhat ‘thin’. They aren’t going to last long on their own merits because simply its impossible given the time contraints and budget to make it not thin. Even WoW’s expansions, which are huge in terms of MMOs, last for what a month? before it descends into a grind, that they come out every 2 years, not every 2 weeks.