(edited by phys.7689)
How do you feel about non item based trade, such as the selling of services, player to player.
like dunegeon completion, puzzle portals, guided tours, whatever else people can come up with.
Would you ever attempt to formalize the system?
My fractal group used to 3 or 4-man 50’s. We tried to sell the last slot a few times but had no luck with buyers. Can’t say I’m surprised. I wouldn’t want to pay 10+ gold for an ascended ring either.
PMed u. I think there needs to be an unofficial forum for this kind of thing since dungeon selling isn’t illicit so as to coordinate and to verify honest sellers and buyers.
to be honest, even though its not against the rules, i am not sure how anet feels about any sort of non TP based trades. And selling of any services
(edited by phys.7689)
Why dont they auto lock all threads older than 30 days if they dont want us to post in them? This is beyond stupid.
I would assume because they thought people were mature enough to not necro threads of the reason of necroing them?
It is not really that hard to not necro a thread. You are required to know the rules of the forums after all.
there is nothing particularly immature about necroing threads, there are many sites that prefer necro threads. Its really just a bad word for no good reason. Necro-ing as a bad thing, is when the thread is no longer relevant
notice how before the last post, it had been 3 months before someone commented.
truth is, there is nothing intrinsicly wrong with necro threads, ANet is just mad right at this specific case for whatever reason, in fact i dont even know if there is anything in the official forum rules, about necroing at all. I just re read the forum code of conduct and as of today 8/3/2014 i see nothing mentioning necro posts at all, in fact it sort of suggests you are supposed to look for old threads and post in pre existing threads.
So dont make this about being mature, or some sort of obvious rule of thumb. Its really not. Its anet’s forum, they can set whatever rules they like, but this was not one of them, it was probably never intended, and thats probably why they didnt create the forum to auto archive old threads, For all we know there is still a archive older than check mark in forum software for a high level admins. It really is not high level tech, in fact they could probably make a couple lines of code in SQL to make it impossible even now.
The ley line weapons are decent skins that I’m sure many people would buy outright.
As they are now, RNG weapons are really just a horrible attempt at monetization.
Currently the skins are around 50g each. Only taking 7.5g out of the economy when they’re sold. (with the 15% tax)
By comparison:
Kasmeer’s staff skin was 600 Gems.Assuming 13g to buy 100 Gems, each skin would take 78g out of the economy (thus providing a very nice gold sink for people with loads of gold.)
That’s 10x more gold taken out of the economy PER SKIN.
Conversely, it would also encourage sensible people to actually buy Gems. (Any reasonable person should acknowledge that Black Lion Keys are a waste of cash.)
Currently, you can (on a good day) get 10g per 100 Gems. That’s just 500 Gems (or $6) per skin. (Less total cash in ANet’s pocket than simply selling the skins at 600 Gems each.)
TL;DR:
BLC drop rates are pathetic (like real-life gambling)
The game’s economy and ArenaNet’s coffers would be better served by simply selling skins.You do realize the gem exchange also supply gold to the economy.
So in order for 1 person to spend 78 gold to buy 600 gems. There is also another person selling 600 gems and induce 56 gold to the economy.
Obviously the tax rate is larger. And some of what I said probably isn’t entirely true (since Anet never says for ever 1 gem bought, there is 1 gem sold in the gem exchange. But the gem exchange also supply gold to the economy.
yeah this is a key fault in the math, gold to gems is not necessarily a money sink, depends on if they destroy the gold they get via fee, or if they keep it in the pool. At most, its a 30%ish gold sink, but its also possible it is a 0% gold sink.
anyhow, other than that carry on
See?
This is why they don’t even bother posting. Because when they do people just complain even more than if they were just quiet.Yup. I agree. I can understand people getting angry and frustrated and wanting to vent because of a lack of response and/or lack of updates (or lack of what they think should be added). But people keep forgetting that any member of Anet dev team are not required to post anything, anytime, ever. Period. Now some (and I know they will) claim that it is a bad business practice, and actually hurts the game. But these same people will also try to claim that because of this, WvW, and the game in general, is rapidly declining, and might as well be dead. Although no one can offer any proof of the actual numbers of people playing, it’s all theory and speculation.
Also I heartily agree with Mark when he said that the toxic and ranting posts are not endearing the devs to comment. As we have seen in the case of Marks posting on the matter. Being straight up called a liar, that everything he said is just PR crap, and that he and the others aren’t really doing anything at all. I don’t know ANYONE who would want to respond to such things, when they know that ANYTHING you say is going to be taken way out of context, that you will only be met with more anger and frustration, because you legitimently can’t speak on whats in development (see: Non-disclosure. A legally binding contract that basically says you cannot speak, write, email, or otherwise communicate on projects that are under development until so released, generally in writing, by the company to do so.). But all that will be seen as a “weak” excuse for not appeasing the masses, or telling them the specifics of what they want to hear.
NDA isnt magical mouth binding, its that you cant say what the company doesnt want to say, usually companies have a lot they want to say. If you dont want to have to continue to appease your customers, you probably shouldnt make an MMO. If you dont like customers asking you questions, how do you expect to be in business
Once again how is it that almost every other company gains more than they lose by communicating intent to customers? You act like this is the only way to do things when its far from the standard business practice
See?
This is why they don’t even bother posting. Because when they do people just complain even more than if they were just quiet.
If you cant stand kids, dont make a chuck e cheese.
Blizzard changes their plans all the time, and they still manage to put information out.
yep, i find it odd that people say this is the only way to do business with customers, when its almost never the case.
TV series/movies are anounced when they are just ideas in someones head. Bars tell you what events they have planned months ahead. Video games are talked about even in early development( i remember being told to sign up for the gw2 beta coming soon when i bought eye of the north, boy did that plan change), plans for buildings are decided from even before the lots are purchased. When is the last time you were given virtually no information about what to expect on almost any product that is being developed?
Ok first, the probabiity i get a aclarative answer for this is really low, but still:
After almost 2 years of this game, the content that was realized and its replayability havent been enough for the time spending hardcore community, as such theres 2 question that arise:
First: Is gw2 also targeting hardcore spending time players as such, and not only casual players?
If the answer is no, then stop here, if not, since the content release power isnt enough i have a question:Second: Are you devolping something with the repleyability power of about 10 times what you are releasing now for every realease shedule or the budget for developing is that limited?
If not, since your goals are also in the hardcore audience, are you planning to change your bussisness models (adding expansions), search for founds, or make the development budget bigger?.
Because in fact the season 2 is much better quality, but your overall quantity of content isnt enough for such a audience, specially because the lack has been for near 2 years.
Thank you, and sorry for the straight forward questions and commentaries.
the function of power is not a direct result of money, like any machine, how much power you get out of it has a lot to do with how effecient your machine is. It is possible that money is not the main problem, but the design of their systems.
That said, it is also possible the problem is money
I don’t believe there was a lack of content at release. It seemed like a pretty big world to me. Over 1500 Dynamic Events, World Bosses, Dungeons, PvP, WvW, etc. So, two years of a lack of content seems a tad exaggerated.
I understand some people would like what they feel would be more challenging content, or content with what they would deem more replayability. The things I would like are probably not what most would enjoy. Lol.
I doubt you will get a definitive answer from any of the Devs, but good luck! =)
the content created before release, was created before release, so it wouldnt really fit into the, what have they done with 2 years of development time.
Also note the structure of development was fundamentally different before release, it is entirely possible that their old development power was much greater than it is right now.
Having now leveling a first character after the update, I feel like the new system is just kitten compared to old one. What was wrong with it? You get traits earlier and can experiment without having to go out of your way to do something horrid like a zone clear you wouldn’t normally do.
Now, I feel like the trait system could work for grandmaster traits only. Those are special, it’s alright that you need to do some big deed to get them. But simply for tier 1 traits? No way.
this i think is another major oversight, somethings are good for certain special things, but not good as a rule for everything else.
Having to do like map completion for crappy low level adept traits is a bit obnoxious. In GW1, you were hunting special EIite and powerful skills. Here, you are hunting basic traits.
bah bad design
Oh wow Trait point i forgot they where even in the game after i spent my first point until i was level 80 ! did all the starting zones so had all the skill points i needed and no need to go to that section again
And other than 1 trait i was not really missing out on much they seem to be very weak
just because the game is easy, doesnt mean traits are weak, just means the game is easy. They actually made it easier to balance out the loss of trait points, so there ya go.
2) your concept that dynamic events are static events, because you have seen them before, is not accurate. dynamic means in motion, it does not mean newly generated or unique. Dynamic means in motion, i have studied dynamics, and statics in engineering and i can assure the difference is studying things that do not move versus things that move.
The ‘in motion’ you refer to implies a delta with start and end points, as anyone who studied physics would know …
The most accurate description for the so-called ‘dynamic’ events in GW2 is ‘cyclical closed system,’ All events have starting and ending conditions that stop or pause the events when either conditions are not met, then advance until conditions are met, and then repeat, and so on …
This is does equate to ‘dynamic’, in any vocabulary I am familiar with.
For those of you defending or claiming GW2 events are dynamic, because they scale, are desperately grasping at straws.
First, let look at scaling, as currently implemented, separate from ‘dynamic’ events,
The concept, as I understand it, adjusts the number and/or type of mob(s) that spawn in a given location based on a proximity algorithm. Essentially it executes a /supplyinfo command at a particular point in time, tallies the number against a list-table that sets the mob type (vet, elite, champ, etc.) and numbers.
If a number of players run out, or run into, of the proximity area after the sampling count, the algorithm cannot adjust for this until the next sampling occurs, if it does occur. Regardless, the mobs have spawned according to the first sample.
This is a predetermined system based on a number count at a specific point in time.
This is not a dynamic system.So, claiming a predetermined system integrated into a cyclical closed system somehow transforms it all into a ‘dynamic’ system is just wrong on so many levels.
cyclical closed system has nothing at all to do with dynamic.
dynamic means in motion thats really exactly what it means.
Even if every result is calculated the fact that it is in motion makes it dynamic. It changes, Closed systems can be dynamic, open systems can be dynamic. For example a pendulum is a dynamic force, building a structure to properly hold the pendlum is a question for dynamics. regardless that the pendulum has a cyclical and predictable behavior, it is a problem that you have an extra dimension in solving. because it changes over time. Some times the force required to hold the structure is one thing, in the next moment, the moment changes.
however, everyones arguing here, and they are missing the point.
call it whatever you want, define it as whatever you want. It really is irrelvant.
Whats important is not what we each THINK dynamic means, but what any body actually wants or doesnt want from the questing system. So instead of arguing (even though i am guilty as well) about the semantics of the word dynamic. How about people say what they expect, or actually want
Bottom line is you can level to 80 with minimal traits and still do just fine.
Except it’s boring as hell. Point of leveling up is to get cool stuff like skills/traits and you got that feeling with the old trait system starting from level 11. Now you don’t even start getting traits until 30 and you have to level up 6 times before another trait point comes your way. Feels way too slow.
Well it’s sort of boring as hell either way, considering how many traits are passive. It’s not like most traits are more than just fire and forget anyway. And you know, it takes me like half an hour to get a single level. So it’s boring as hell for the 20 hours from 40-80?
I’m going to spent far more than 90% of the time on any character at 80th level. The traits haven’t particularly made leveling more interested for me in the past anyway.
you are wrong, some traits are more powerful than even many elites were. Some classes traits define builds more than others.
For example beastmasters signet, totally changes how you play and your synergies,
illusionary persona, gives you 1/4th more effectiveness per shatter, and allows you to shatter on the dime in aoe around you.
clone on dodge turns evasion and vigor into fuel for shatters
mantras that give 3 instead of 2
20% cooldown reduction is equivalent of many energy returning elite types.fresh air for elementalist (refreshes lighting attunement on critical)
engineer swiftness/vigor on kit swap combo.
empowering mantras
chaotic interuption
prismatic understandingsome classes Traits are more integral than others, and not every elite made the build, many simply increased the effeciency of the build.
Point is playing with no traits, and playing with traits can be a very substantial difference in playstyle, and builds and definately makes many classes way more entertaining.
also leveling takes about 45 min to an hour if you play normally, especially in the middle levels.
This is why I used the word most. Most being the majority of.
But now you have a different situation. You have a few traits that rule the others. How hard are those specific traits to get.
I’m not defending the system, because I don’t like it. But I have leveled a character after the April first patch to check it out.
The way I play it made little difference. Obviously the more into builds you are, the more difference it will make.
i played it after as well, almost solely to test it out. I chose the class that least needs traits, warrior, and it is still overall an inferior experience, and i dont even hate WvW/jumping puzzles/eotm (so imagine for those that do?) etc.
The level push alone makes the whole game feel end heavy in a bad way. I did enjoy some events, but too few of them were well placed. The basic idea is not a bad one, the execution is extremely poor. Figuring out ways to deal with a bad system, its not that hard to deal with, but its still a bad system, in sooo many ways, which i have named before.
UI sucks
Understandability sucks
Adaptability sucks
replayability sucks
different modes people hate sucks
starting level of30 progression sucks
Odd points at weird levels sucks
more points at level 60+ sucks.
skill point reqs suck
its just really poorly done on many levels.
I don’t think we should give up hope guys!
There was a thread that complained about how the amount of dailies got reduced and it was a major pain. We did not let that thread die. And guess what? Not long afterwards, the amount of available dailies was increased.
So I think there WILL be a fix to this horrible horrible implementation of the megaserver system. But it’s most likely taking a while because of the complexities involved.
So don’t think Anet is just waiting for people to get tired of complaining about this horrible horrible change to the game and then it will just continue to haunt us forever. (Did I mention it is horrible btw?) No – I think a fix that will address all of our concerns is on its way.
I gave up hope a while back, I have little to no faith in ANET to address these issues. Lets be realistic here. Months later, 55909 views and 2316 replies to this thread alone (as of writing this) and growing daily (not to mention the other threads)…
Like the optimism, and really hope you’re right and that I’m wrong, but if they had anything to say or were monitoring this thread and if they believed there was an issue, there would have been urgent meetings and strategies in place a while back and we would know that its being addressed and awaiting a magic vX.X patch.
55909 views, but no data on what those viewing feel about it. 2316 replies to this thread, but how many individual posters, for and against. Or talking about different problems.
It’s very easy to quote a page number or a number of replies but at least some of those replies are from me, and I think the mega server has done well for the game. Others have posted similarly.
The amount of pages aren’t as important as the amount of individual posters and what they stand for. The number of views, unless we know what the viewers stand for is pretty much irrelevant to the conversation.
I disagree, its not irrelevant at all… yes, we have people debating back and forth so one person may post several times, and number of views account for continuing to see the last few posts, but that is all very very relevant. It shows that this is a hot topic, regardless of the stance individuals take, and from the comments here people are very passionate in their views both for and against megaserver… my point is, even with all the views and posts in this thread and others like it, they are all ignored
I’m in favor of the mega server. I don’t feel like I’m being ignored. I’m willing to wager those who like the mega server don’t feel ignored for the most part. The people who will feel ignored are the people who don’t like it.
But I’m still not sure what they expect Anet to say. If Anet isn’t changing it, coming here and saying so will cause a riot. If Anet is looking into changing it, but hasn’t decided how or when, saying anything will lead to expectations that they won’t be able to control. If Anet is looking into changing it and they think they have a solution but it might not work, from what I’ve seen anyway, they’re best off not saying.
The only time they’d be smart to say something is when they have a solution that they know works, that they can implement in a timely manner.
Anything else accomplishes nothing.
If reality when exposed would cause a riot, that means reality is riot inducing. Not saying anything doesnt change the reality.
You are also wrong that they are better off not saying anything. Once again hiding reality does not change reality. If people will hate their solution, they will hate it before hand as well, or love it or not care.
The advantage to telling people things early? people know what to expect, how to deal with it, and should they still be here.
If you have no intention of ever marrying your girlfriend, not telling her doesnt change the reality that you dont want to commit to her. You lose nothing by telling her this, unless your intention is to string her along
You are smart to say something all the time. Set expectations, engage customers, let them know whats you intend to have in the future (so they are returning customers) this is the basics of business. Its far more common to tell people months and months ahead of time than it is to say nothing. You know why? because telling people stuff and keeping them engaged works
from what you say, i m not sure if you would particularly like dynamic events in any iteration(even if they were as you viewed them dynamic), but thats fine, not everyone likes everything.
As for not being able to do it, you are right, you wont be able to do it if you dont have the right people, working together. Often times in pugs this doesnt happen, but most of the times i did beat these events low man was also just random pugs. Some people learn the events/bosses, and work together better. I remember many times trying to explain boss mechanics in chat, and people just saying we need more people, when a great many times more people just means more people to scale the boss/enemies, and screw up, and cause failure. Often times people brute force the event to the point nothing matters, but that is actually, usually a failure of design. It should theoretically be as hard with 15 people as it is with 100, but i suppose thats hard for them to design well.
anyhow, i like dynamic events, i have played other games since gw2, and even though i may like other facets, the world feels a lot more dull and limited, in the ones that dont have these type of systems. For others, its all useless fluff and they could care less regardless. Different strokes.
Make no mistake, dynamic events without updates, changes, new content, thats not going to entertain anyone forever, i havent played the game for more than a few hours in months, but i wouldnt say that dynamic events effected that at all. I doubt many people at all would say dynamic events mess up the game, at worst i would think one would be indifferent.
In contrast to standard dungeons, raids typically involve large group(s) of players. Because all GW2 dungeons (instanced content) is designed for a max of 5 players at a time, repeatable events (inc world bawses) also took on the function of raids, whether it was intentional or not.
Ok, so any quest where you accompany an npc is dynamic then. Under that definition even GW had dynamic quests. And rather entertaining ones at that (remember the escape with prince rurik?)
Well, from what I’ve seen there are usually two possible outcomes – you don’t have enough people and therefore cannot complete it (or struggle really, really hard), or you have too many. The smaller ones are doable with less people, true. But those are usually even more static under my definition, as they normally don’t interact with other quests.
I disagree. It is just impossible to demand an advanced level of coordination from what is basically a zerg of strangers. Guild zergs can pull it off with voice comm or just by being prepared/knowing their particular role (so basically, an open world raid), but expecting something like that from a large group of random people is just an effort in futility and frustration.
It’s not about hatred. They are static quests on a repeat button, or an elaborated version of repeatable quests you come across in many other games.
The only truly dynamic zones are pvp and to an extent wvw (well, zvz).
2) the GW1 quests were always started in the same place, by the player. They always lead to the same things, failure didnt generate more possible options. Whether or not people completed them didnt open up other areas. The fact that i succeeded at an event didnt open up a bridge, or a portal to a different area. The fact that i failed didnt take all the cows away, or turn a hostile area into a player friendly area. Dynamic events change a lot more than just in what position in the map they are. The main point is, what people are doing or not doing in the world alters the world itself, and it actually really does happen. Even though most new events, are less driven by this.
3) from what i have seen most events, even most of the big ones, scale well from 5 to 20ish people(there are a few broken ones which scale wrong), i am talking about temple events, dragon fights, world bosses, boss chains ( i have completed both balthazar and grenths with 7 people) mini dungeons (font of rand) This means people working together using fields dodging at the appropriate times, dealing with mechanics, etc.
4) the advanced level of coordination is in fact demanded in game, with wurm and tequatl, now i wont say these are truely super difficult, but they definately require an advanced level of coordination, and a small group of screw ups can make the event way harder or failable. Also, the temporary event marrionette, allowed a few un coordinated people messing up to fail the event. So it is definately not impossible, or something they would never do, it is in fact in play right now, and has been so in the past. Now you see its an excerise in futility and frustration, that may be true, but that hasnt changed the fact that they have done it.
To be honest having participated in some of these events, although a few players can mess it up, when you do find the right groups (often with guilds and voice coms, etc) it is actually really sweet. And i feel the marionette event design is probably the best execution of a mid teir difficulty event, sure it failed a lot, but it always felt like it mattered, it varied up the experience a lot, and when you won it felt really good.
Ok, so you dont hate dynamic events, but to say they are quests on repeat, really doesnt accurately represent them, or how they generate a different feeling and structure of the open world. It really is miles apart even now that i am bored of them and seen them time and time again. They are still more likely to catch my attention, and make an old area more entertaining, and feel different than traditional quest structures. I would expand on them rather than abandon them, but thats my opinion
Anet likes to be agile, and willing to change their overall plans in order to adapt
Where did you get this from?
well this is what they have said at game developer conferences, and they have been known to make large scale changes to basic things. Doesnt mean one loves the changes, but if they feel like they should, they will turn the game on its head.
Ok then.
The funny thing is, they ARE static, you just don’t see them as such, because they’re wrapped around in cellophane, or something.
Why is it so hard to accept the game might not be as great as you picture it?
Agreed, Karla.
LoL. Save Moshpoipoi! Every… single… time I go through there.
Static is why we have the ravening horde doing the Frostgorge hampster wheel.
Static is why Shaman goes down faster than a tray of free Twinkies at a Walmart.
Static is why timers work.
etc.A duck in a quaggan suit is still a duck. Even if the suit is unique to GW2. It’s still a duck.
well if you take a little break from farming perhaps next time you could like you know, defend moshpoipoi and prevent it being taken over in the first place so there is no saving to be done.
Also interesting statement:
“Static is why timers work.”static means unchanging, if no change occurs what do exactly the timers do?
I don’t farm or zerg run, sorry. Don’t try ad hominem, you aren’t very good at it.
Defend Moshpoipoi. Why. It will only get overran again next cycle. over and over and over. I have..but I don’t do Hampster Wheel. Ring and chain events are not new and only interesting a couple of times. I did them when prior to Anet even announcing this game. Actually EQ2 had ring events that were random and not linked to a set location or time. You could not decide to go x place and “wait”.
Wow. A static event on a timed spawn lets people show up when it spawns. ie World Bosses. The event, and the time it spawns are static.
you are mistaking not liking the implementation with it being static.
First of all not all dynamic events/chains are the same.
Second of all some dynamic events change what areas are available, and what enemies are around.
Yes dynamic events are not completely new ideas, doesnt really change anything whether its new or not.
World bosses are now static events, i agree, i think it was a bad idea, and a blow to the whole dynamic event system. A lot of new events are following a static principle, and not changing much in the area, and are not very interactive. I agree.
Poor post release implementation, and back peddling doesnt make dynamic events bad, it just means anet is not delivering on the potential of their concepts. I would fight for more dynamic (truely dynamic events) and less of the new world boss and LS type events which dumb down the dynamic event system to just being similar to public events.
Actually much of the criticism is based on opinion, even with the facts. It’s a fact that there are no instanced raids in this game. There’s an opinion that this is a bad thing. It’s a fact that the megaservers have issues. It’s also a fact that some people feel they’ve revitalized the game.
That the issues exist is factual. But the percentage of people who dislike it is purely speculation.
I think you’ll find I’ve never actually argued against a fact. But anyone can tell you that facts can be interpreted many ways. That’s what lawyers do.
On ‘dynamic’ events:
It is a fact instanced raids – the larger group events for mmos – have been replaced by repeatable events (so-called ‘dynamic’ events, world events, and LS events)
It is a fact they boil down to STATIC quests on a repeat button, triggered by preset conditions, or a series of conditions
It is a fact they cannot function without zergs
It is a fact zergs come with a lot of lag (unless you’re rolling on a high-end machine and a lot of bandwidth)
It is a fact such events (must!) include a significant drop in difficulty, as requiring some superior coordination from a large group of random players is a recipe for disaster
It is a fact such things are a massive watered-down version of typical raids (see above for reasons) – which is a double-edged sword
It is also a fact that it would be wise to have the best of both worlds – diversity, you knowIt is also a fact GW2 dungeon and mob design both have significant quality issues (the game/profession mechanics were designed with pvp in mind), which is why it is highly unlikely that instanced raids would suddenly become an exception to that rule (<a logical assumption)
It is also a fact you ignored my arguments against dumbing down games for the masses , because it debunks your argumentation of ‘I like it, ergo it is fine.’@Gai..Galen Grey
Whenever I read such comments, all that comes to mind is a rubber ball bouncing of a brick wall.
We realize you really like the game, but those events are about as dynamic, or ‘alive’ as watching a pointer doing a full round on the clock and giving a loud ring on a particular time (if set).
Moreover, scalable does not equal dynamic, unless of course you consider the entire game dynamic then. In which case you may refer to the previous 2-3 pages to clear that part up. The tech simply isn’t here yet to make pve in mmos truly dynamic, which is why pvp is the only really dynamic ‘content’ of mmos. That of course does not mean the pve cannot have longevity..when done right.
you have some points, but your personal opinions cloud some facts.
1) it is not a fact instance raids are replaced by dynamic events. large scale dynamic events play more like world bosses in other MMOs. Some devs have mentioned a desire for raids, honestly i have no desire for raids at all, but likelyhood is it will happen eventually, and it wont likely be in place of large scale dynamic events
2) your concept that dynamic events are static events, because you have seen them before, is not accurate. dynamic means in motion, it does not mean newly generated or unique. Dynamic means in motion, i have studied dynamics, and statics in engineering and i can assure the difference is studying things that do not move versus things that move.
3) it is largely untrue that dynamic events cannot function without zergs, the ONLY events that cannot be defeated by 6-7 people are tequatl and wurm. I know this because i have done almost every major event with low numbers at one time or the other. In fact i would say most dynamic events work, and are way more entertaining without zergs present.
4) The reason dynamic events arent hard has little to do with the nature of dynamic events, and more to do with the fact that anet prefers to make easy content most of the time, because hey people like easy content.
now, yes, i would say in general pve design could use a step up, and they could have more challenging/engaging encounter design.
But As for your hatred of dynamic events? while i wish they were executed better, more far reaching, etc. That is not due to the nature of dynamic events, its due to the implementation, some existing dynamic events/chains have changed the nature of the area you are in, the enemies that appear, what other events are happening, and after going back to other quest structures, by and large, is far superior in my opinion, for most types of quests. (although overarching and some personal quests/side quests would be a good compliment to the dynamic ones)
So with some recent anet posts, i think its clear that this level/style of interaction pretty much normal and in line with their general plans. Just to be clear, im not really talking about moderation or forum rules here, im talking about how information is disseminated, future plans, feedback, etc.
I understand it, it makes sense.
Still i think its a bad plan. Its not working to your advantage.
As things currently stand, anet doesnt seem to get much out of the interaction, we got bad blood, feelings of abandonment, uncertainty, poor misdirected feedback. The players also get very little.
So, change it. Anet likes to be agile, and willing to change their overall plans in order to adapt, however the interaction is basically similar to the type of interaction that was expected while the game was in development.
I live in nyc, i take the train, they have many long term projects, but they can tell you what they are planning years ahead. I can see all the maintenance plans for the next _ months. They can literally tell me now, they are working on new stations they plan to finish 2 years from now. And to be honest its not even as important, and directly related to customer retention that they do that, as it would be for anet.
Tell people what you are planning, you will actually get less whining for being late than they currently have for an information black out.
Tell people what are important goals of the current developments, this allows them to give feedback more closely relevant and related to what you are developing.
Get some people who arent on the dev team, but can communicate BOTH ways. Its not really the devs job to come in here and talk/tell us what they are doing, but it should be someones job, This product makes more money, the more people believe in it. People have to feel this mode has a future, it doesnt really have to be everything they want, but they have to feel that its going to evolve/grow/change.
Anyhow basically, im just saying that while i understand your paradigm for player interaction, and its your choice, i think it would be in the best interest of all parties if you decided to change it.
You say I am unable of accepting some ppl like the game and I claim you are unable to accept the fact very many don’t.
This game had more income in the 1st quarter this year than Guild Wars made in the last 10 reported quarters of income.
I guess that’s a lot for many don’t like the game.
And that isn’t counting China.
my basic assumption based on various releases is that gw2 is doing better than gw1
However, earnings dont necessarily represent how MANY people prefer gw1 style of gw2 style.
The main reason is because the monetization is fundamentally different. In GW1, the richest players contributed similarly to the poorest. per expansion, each player probably paid like 60-100 bucks. now? some players spend hundreds a month. The non spending player also in general seems to spend similarly or more on GW2, so really it could just mean they are monetizing the game better.
That said, for a business, thats usually more important by far than the number of people they are pleasing.
The real question, is would some of these things these players suggest increase the money GW2 specifically makes. Which requires a much deeper analysis than sales numbers on either side of the debate.
also, really shouldnt compare a game in its prime to one that is next to retirement and hasnt recieved new content in like 2 years?
Bottom line is you can level to 80 with minimal traits and still do just fine.
Except it’s boring as hell. Point of leveling up is to get cool stuff like skills/traits and you got that feeling with the old trait system starting from level 11. Now you don’t even start getting traits until 30 and you have to level up 6 times before another trait point comes your way. Feels way too slow.
Well it’s sort of boring as hell either way, considering how many traits are passive. It’s not like most traits are more than just fire and forget anyway. And you know, it takes me like half an hour to get a single level. So it’s boring as hell for the 20 hours from 40-80?
I’m going to spent far more than 90% of the time on any character at 80th level. The traits haven’t particularly made leveling more interested for me in the past anyway.
you are wrong, some traits are more powerful than even many elites were. Some classes traits define builds more than others.
For example beastmasters signet, totally changes how you play and your synergies,
illusionary persona, gives you 1/4th more effectiveness per shatter, and allows you to shatter on the dime in aoe around you.
clone on dodge turns evasion and vigor into fuel for shatters
mantras that give 3 instead of 2
20% cooldown reduction is equivalent of many energy returning elite types.
fresh air for elementalist (refreshes lighting attunement on critical)
engineer swiftness/vigor on kit swap combo.
empowering mantras
chaotic interuption
prismatic understanding
some classes Traits are more integral than others, and not every elite made the build, many simply increased the effeciency of the build.
Point is playing with no traits, and playing with traits can be a very substantial difference in playstyle, and builds and definately makes many classes way more entertaining.
also leveling takes about 45 min to an hour if you play normally, especially in the middle levels.
It’s not all that odd if you think about it. ArenaNet is only interested in making money. Giving people a 2 week limitation forces people to buy, Buy, BUY! If they made it unlimited, yet kept the rarity the same, some people would still rush in to purchase keys – but nowhere near as many that will because its “2 weeks only”.
Oh no. A business wants to make money to pay their employees and keep the game actually running. How dreadful.
see this, is highly overated. Because anet isnt their own business. If the company you work for is making massive money, or if they are just making good money, they will probably pay you the same.
Fact is, most likely ncsoft has already decided their budget, and even though they are essentially one of their biggest earners, it really doesnt look like they have much more resources or pay, going by sources on the net.
That said, as you say businesses exist to make money, so they will obviously try to make money. Essentially its up the customers and the competition to say how far they can or should go. If people are buying, then from many standpoints they are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing.
Do they have a sale on keys to coincide with it? People who get it are better off to just hold into it it until well after the two weeks are up if they plan to sell.
I haven’t logged in yet, so I’m not sure about a sale on BL keys. I don’t think you need to hold onto it if you get one. The notes say it’s a “very rare drop”. That means you’ll probably spend $200 on BL keys and still not get one. I don’t think a surplus will suddenly appear.
If you say so. Three weeks from now I suggest you take a look and see how things played out.
kinda depends on the drop rate and whatever the max someone feels like paying is. might be that it is already close to its max regardless of rarity.
will people really go over much higher than 3500-4700 on a regular basis?
For only two weeks… it’s a start, but it’s still not good enough tbh.
Why not do the same with the other permanent contracts that are always (albeit a small chance) available through black lion chests? Why do they insist on making the perm hair style so much rarer than the others? I mean, really? Only two weeks?
I just find it extremely odd…
A good start, but odd…
I think this is purely an opportunity for another cash grab rather than doing it as a kind gesture for the GW2 community. It’s like… “Hey guys, we’re putting the perm hair style contract back in black lion chests FOR ONLY TWO WEEKS so make sure to buy up hundreds of keys, and even then, you probably won’t get one, but good luck and remember to give us all your money”.
Seriously… Make the permanent hair stylist contract a PERMANENT feature of the black lion chest, just like you have with all the other perm contracts available through black lion chests. It’s not hard.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s great it’s coming back… but the two weeks thing is just plain nuts.
they probably need a revenue spike for whatever reasons, For finance having money at certain times is better than others.
the monkey king wouldnt be that out of place if they didnt ignore the entire canthan continent
Those animations remind me of Gambit. Also, they are awesome.
Can we get a monkey man race please?
Martial artist profession? bowstaff flipping hand to hand kicking class, spirit technique? make it so.
Heres what i think anet should do regarding this issue, regardless of their what there plan is, ASAP.
Release a statement saying what if anything is even possible, and within the scope of possibility, type of changes/additions/fixes they would make in the forseeable future for Megaserver/related issues.
What issues they are dissatisfied with.
that alone would be a lot of useful information. Once thats out there, they could re-examine how or if they desire to work with the community to solve these issues, or if they percieve the issues of being of import at all.
Those expectations need to change when they aren’t fulfilled. It was a bad thing for Colin to not deliver on this. At the same time, when it’s not delivered, it’s also not unreasonable for people to use that grey matter between their ears to think why that might be.
Im just saying anytime you create an expectation that you will do something, until you deliver, people will expect it, and probably ask for it. Unless anet says its no longer in the works, then people just have to accept it isnt going to happen, and do what they will with that information.
But until anet gives another date, or delivers the project, people will continue to ask, what is up with that thing you said you were going to do. To be honest, thats what they should do, Im not saying terrorize them, but yeah if someone said they were going to give you something you desired, it makes sense for you to ask them when they are going to do it, when they are late.
They changed their minds … everyone can keep referring to that post all they want but clearly, it doesn’t mean crap. I also seen a post (not going to find it) where some Anet rep said they are rethinking how to introduce alternative approach to craftable precursors. That statement was made after the link you provided.
I think if you stop cherrypicking your quotes to support the QQ, you get a more realistic view of how Anet is approaching this issue. Frankly, they should just drop it because it’s not actually that important.
pretty normal when you change your mind, people will have an expectation. There is no business or relationship, where someone can say they are going to do something by a certain time, and it doesnt arrive within 8 months of that day, and people dont bring it up.
Thats the normal and expected behavior. There are reasons, which things get delayed, that doesnt change the fact that it has been delayed, and it doesnt make people wrong for having expectations.
What I think bugs me most about these topics is that suggestions for actual improvements are few and far between. What I usually see is “X is too expensive, therefore we need more X.” “I don’t have enough gold for X, therefore everyone needs to be getting more gold so I can have gold for X.” “I want a Y, therefore I deserve a Y, and why aren’t you giving me a Y?” When the things that are rare become commonplace, they also become worthless. And not just for one person, but for EVERYONE. When you dole out gold-encrusted baubles at every event, people are going to farm the bejeezus out of that event until gold-encrusted baubles are considered junk (substitute Elemental Blade for GW1 equivalent). When everyone has more gold to throw around, prices on unaffordable stuff is going to rise until it is unaffordable again (substitute precursors and legendaries).
If the game is not supposed to be a chore, then stop treating it like it is one. Set realistic goals for the pace you intend to keep. Get off the World Boss train if it isn’t fun. Is that legendary you put so much faith in changing your life still going to bring a smile when you flash it for the 30th time?
The Risen Wizard already has something similar in place. First kill: unlocks a trait. Followed by salvage items and the occasional tchotchke.
Oh, and fix Fractal rewards. Finishing an FotM 50 should yield at least 5 gold, not 1.4.
No. No it shouldn’t. Fractals have never been about getting rich. They have always been about being a harder challenge and the rewards were bragging rights and a small increment to stats.
it seems like you think getting rewards detracts from anything you do.
why cant fractals be about harder challenge AND worthwhile rewards per effort?
why can exploring be fun on its own AND fun because there are more possibilities for what you discover feeling worthwhile/special?
why do you seem to be saying its better when things arent rewarding?
I mean i can think of a few reasons, but you seem to be saying that these things are better off not being rewarding on general principle
NO, but it is entitlement to ask that craftable precursors be added according to impatient players timetable. Anet never said when it would happen but it’s not some game breaking issue either, so I don’t imagine it’s that high on their TODO list. Though if it’s not, I would like to also know that as well.
you can call it entitlement, but regardless asking for something to be dealt with within 8 months of your own public timetable, is not really crazy, and in fact pretty normal.
I tend to find it odd, that people always claim people want something for no work, because they want a different method to achieve it.
I will also point out that the amount of “work” currently required is fairly relative, since some people make 100 gold a day in 4 hours play and some make 2 gold a day in 4 hours play.
the rate is pretty low(if its like other contracts), and its only two weeks, i think it will still be a high value item lets say they only put out 40 a year.
that will still put it in the realm of the top 4% who want the item.
And yet before megaservers some events were completely impossible to even do, due to lack of people.
I for one prefer to have badly scaling events to impossible events. But that might only be me.
lets be honest, no event in GW, aside from teq and wurm, needed more than 6 people to complete.
so really it was more a problem of getting people to want to do these things.
Anyhow, im not saying megaserver serves no purpose or has no advantages, I am saying its implementation is very rough, and incomplete. In order to be an overall improvement to the old systems, it still needs a lot of work, and not just on an algorithim/number crunching method.
I dont think any one is served by it remaining in its current state, or not pointing out the major concerns.
As it is, i dont think it is overall better than what we had before, just a different set of problems. I do think that with the proper development, it has the potential to be better than what we had before.
However, i think that for something this big, and its solutions, they will probably need to either have a really great plan (better than we have seen with most implementations outside of release) or they will need to revise based on feedback a lot.
Since they havent responded or run anything by the communitity, and have iterated otherwise, in the last what 3, 4 months? The only real hope is they have a well thought out genius plan.
well that or this is the system take it or leave it.
The fact the game is easier to play because of those features and has lost a lot of depth in the process isn’t a red herring. It’s a fact. It just so happens that pvp is affected more (in general, not just this supposed ‘hard-core playerbase’), but it also has consequences for the pve, which I surely listed above.
Making the game accessible should not equal dumbing it down. Sacrificing depth at the expense of making it more available is what mediocre games do (and unlike I, you seem to consider GW2 more than that). It’s what your typical mmo does to gain as big a playerbase as possible. But invoking the argument of ‘the causal’ to dumb the game down is an insult to said playerbase – bad players will be bad even in a game that has been dumbed down, while the rest (including casuals) which could have played the game even if it had more depth will be left with less means to make a difference.
And yet you call such a thing a plus. Man I don’t even….Depth means different things to different people. Build diversity has certainly suffered, that much is true.
But that build diversity from Guild Wars 1 you cherish so much came with with a whole host of problems that have been acknowledged elsewhere. You simple prefer those problems. I prefer these problems.
Depth can be measured and dictionary definitions cannot be twisted to suit your particular version of reality. If you cannot go beyond those basic notions, you should honestly stop replying, because you’re just hopping from one topic to another (currently at build diversity, from dynamic events via innovation) as soon as you run out of reply material.
I’m sorry, but you don’t get to choose whether I reply or not. I’ve said straight out, in other threads as well, the Guild Wars 1 had more build diversity. I’ve also said Guild Wars 2 needs more build diversity. That’s a weakness in the game. I believe this 100%. I’ve said so in the past, even recently.
But it doesn’t change the fact that the complexity of Guild Wars 1 was both its biggest strength and its biggest weakness. It was too hard to balance (as per Anet) and it wasn’t welcoming to new players at all, which is why it developed such a small, hard core community.
It’s great that that happened, but this game is larger and more ambitious. The staff is bigger. It requires a bigger audience.
I’m not sure how you’re going to get that without simplifying stuff.
Hmm, the way to generally simplify without simplifying is to make it optional. Also, organization helps a lot with things that need a lot of options.
Regardless, i dont think gw2 will survive if it doesnt start also worrying about the current and old players as well as the new.
Essentially, everyone who plays will eventually want more depth (in some respect) This is why I think it is best to have a large pool, with deep end, and a kiddie end. Just making the whole thing kiddie end will eventually bore even the kiddies.
answer is options, messaging and organization.
I and Teofa clearly defined what dynamic events are, yet you are still heralding them as ‘something done right’ in comparison to other games. Thing is, you never had an argument to start with, because the events are as static as any other quest, yet here you are, defending oranges believing they’re apples.
Our arguments aren’t unfair. We’re simply call a spade a spade.
As mentioned earlier, the sun rising and setting must be the definition of dynamic according to that logic then.
uhh your wrong. something automatic can be dynamic. Dynamic means its always in motion, it doesnt mean its evolving, or altering itself.
A car going in circles is dynamic.
Any how, regardless dynamic quests are fundamently different from regular quests no matter what you call them. The fact they repeat doesnt really change this.
You are also ignoring that some of them are branching, and some of them will never repeat depending on what players are doing. In a small way, the events are somewhat driven by what the players are doing/have done. This is a fundamental difference in design.
Also, while dynamic events may be old hat the Nth time you see them, they still generate a different experience for the user, especially the really well designed ones. For example, lets say a bridge is down because people lost an event, that changes your experience the next time you are in the area, even if you dont particularly care about or even do the event.
unfortunately, i think anet is trying to limit the scope of dynamic events, and bring them close to just being automatic events.(which is still dynamic, but it doesnt use that fact to its full potential).
I’m pretty sure that the guys who were the first dungeon team who people got rid of didn’t make the best dungeons in this game.
As far as I can tell the dungeons that were made by the second group who made dungeons were better received than the original dungeon team.
Saying that they got rid of one guy so they’ll be no more dungeons is like saying we got rid of one political party so there’ll be no more senate.
I’m pretty sure there are devs at Anet working on 5 man instanced content.
he worked on the second group of dungeons as well.
but it is true he is just one guy on the team
Asmodeus, please, enlighten me: how is doing events in which there are 1 massive legendary mob with 2-3 players fun?
hmm it actually is kind of fun. not effecient, but its fun
Anet’s going to eventually introduce Precursor crafting on patch day without telling anyone, making all those precursor hoarding trading post barons scramble to sell off the precursors they got to get any kind of profit. The economy is going to crash, making precursors cost less than 100 gold again, and when that happens, I’m probably going to spend an entire day just /laughing at anyone in-game who complains about the price drop.
there will probably be some pushback, but most likely whatever type of work required/time gate or whatever will likely be high enough that the current prices arent that bad.
However, people will have a choice, and will be able to work towards it (depending on design) So might be an initial sell off, but it would probably still be pretty expensive. Prices will probably normalize a bit, with super expensive ones going slightly down, and other ones staying the same.
But its all just guess work at this point
Agree eithinan. He reminds me of the diplomat whose conversation was analyzed with symbolic logic and it proved he spent 5 days saying absolutely nothing. phys’s use of flowery vocabulary and word play reminds me of how a psychiatrist would prompt a patient to discuss something while appearing not to lead the conversation.
For example he turned my simply yes/no questions about exploitation into a discussion about intent and believe. If you believe you are charging or buying an item of what you think is fair value then there is no exploitation. Which means two people offering the same price for an item, one can be exploiting while the other isn’t which changes it from a black/white issue to gray. And if the answer is gray then there is no right or wrong. Thus turning the question back at the questioner.
phys would make a kitten fine black hat on a TV series. Ranks right up there with Raymond Reddington.
it means one is knowingly exploiting while another one is unknowingly exploiting. In which case the reality doesnt change, however the philosophy at play would change.
just like a person who accidently runs over someone and never realized is still in reality a killer, however he may not philosophically believe in murder/killing.
As for when JS asked for proof, he actually quoted my post as an example of a logical proof, he said that based on investigations he already had, that he didnt see the results that were showed him anything definitive, so uh yeah, not me bro.
I think I may have gotten your posts from that thread mixed up with Essence Snow, and for that I apologize. However, the gist of the conversation I’m thinking of is:
This is spiraling. Let’s stop discussing possible “solutions”. Before discussing a solution you must first prove a problem. I have yet to see any evidence internally or externally that there is a problem.
Speculation on player wealth is not evidence of a problem.
An anecdote is not evidence unless it demonstrates a systemic problem.No one has yet demonstrated there is a problem. Yes, I read the post JS made in response to your post, and while you did make an effort, he already had your concerns on his radar and they were unfounded. But that doesn’t seem to have stopped you from insisting that these alleged problems exist when you cannot actually prove there is a problem.
you are conflating unrelated discussions.
That was a discussion on the problems of wealth distribution and its possible effects on prices.
This thread is actually a discussion about differing philosophies behind the design/or a result of the design of various game modes.
I will be the first to agree that it has unfortunately meandered and even though some of the discussion is relevant, its not being presented in the context of the main idea.
See the reason i asked the question how to identify this type of problem, because it isnt like the other one. You can apply logical reasoning, and observe data for some possible problems. But this one? this is tricky, the OP is presenting an idea of cognitive dissonance and differing game philosophies effecting player satisfaction, or separation. After discussing it, i agree that they are governed by different philosophies, but is that a problem for players?
This is a real question, how would one try to tell if this was an issue and a source of friction? Or what problems such a situation might create, What would the warning signs that one would look out for be?
short version that issue and this one are not the same issue.
I don’t believe that is your motivation. Nothing in your posts suggests an attitude of curiosity, understanding or cooperation. All you do is constantly insist that the established methods of doing something are wrong and that it should be done better, without offering any concrete evidence that this is so, let alone being able to suggest how to improve it.
When JS asked for evidence that there was a problem, you made no attempt to provide this, you just insisted that there was a problem and he should be able to see it without being provided any evidence. Even though he said that he sees nothing wrong, essentially you claimed that you knew more about the TP than an educated professional who was in charge of it, and who has vastly more information about how it works than you do.
In short, I think your purpose here is to stonewall discussion and enjoy the attention as other players continue to try to explain the same concepts over and over. I have not seen you come to any kind of understanding over several months of posts that never go beyond “there is a problem because I feel there is a problem.”
just because you dont believe something, doesnt mean you are right, The reason you percieve me a certain way is because based on your preconcieved notions, you always interpret everything i say with a certain bias or color.
I say how does one determine there is a problem, and you interpret it is as me saying there is a problem.
I say how could one design an economy that is fulfills XYZ and you start talking about the mechanics of this economy.
you are always looking for a fight, or thinking everything is about being on one side or another. Im not on anyone side. Im actually evaluating things based on real actual things rather than being a fan or an anti-fan.
You’re like a seasoned politician. You’re really good at debating, and know how to spin questions to hide the true intents. On the outside, your questions may seem harmless, but when you take your posting history into account, your motives are quite clear. Take the following recent post you made:
I mean, millions of players quit the game, how many quit due to an unsatisfying economy? .
You took a grossly negative and misleading comment, and then coupled it with valid question. It’s like someone saying to me “Congrats on your PhD, Penguin. Bet it was easy since your grandfather left an endowment to the university.”
whether something is negative or positive is irrelevant to its truth. There is nothing misleading about saying millions have quit, the game has sold like 3-4 mil in US and EU and even more China, millions quitting is understandable
What you are saying is that is not anything i have said, but how it makes you feel. Its not about what i say, but what you think i mean. Look not at how something makes you feel, or what you think my intent is, but what is actually said.
and what exactly is my motive?
(edited by phys.7689)
just because you dont believe something, doesnt mean you are right, The reason you percieve me a certain way is because based on your preconcieved notions, you always interpret everything i say with a certain bias or color.
It doesn’t mean I’m wrong, either. You aren’t discussing things with the intent to come to an understanding, when asked to back up your opinions with facts you evade the question and keep insisting that just because you can’t back up your opinions with facts that doesn’t mean that there isn’t something going on.
When JS asked for proof you asked how you were supposed to provide proof. When he told you how to do it you asked how you were supposed to provide proof. You never did give him anything that he asked for, only more opinions and evasions.
You have never said anything that comes remotely close to a fact, just a bunch of opinions and feelings, while insisting that the fact that someone has these opinions and feelings is in itself proof that something needs to be done about these problems you can’t be bothered to prove exist.
This is not my biased opinion, it’s what you have been doing in thread after thread for several months now. And none of your statements have gotten any closer to proving a fact or creating understanding between yourself and others.
i always back up my opinions with facts. In fact i usually give way too many facts. Show me one time i evaded someone asking for facts on anything, when facts are even possible with the situation?
As for when JS asked for proof, he actually quoted my post as an example of a logical proof, he said that based on investigations he already had, that he didnt see the results that were showed him anything definitive, so uh yeah, not me bro.
Point out one post of mines that is an opinion, that is not presented as an opinion
I actually like when people have well thought opinions, or different facts to present, or a different take on something. When people ask me to prove something i go out of my way to show my reasoning, cite evidence, so that people can look at what is said and make their own descions.
the history is there
It’s never been clear to what phys’s problem is with the economy.
Is it the TP defaults to a passive player mode with sell to the highest bidder, buy from the lowest seller thus allowing players who take an active approach to earn more money from those players?
Is it the wealth disparity that keeps highly sought after items at an ever increasing price?
Is it the RNG reward system that all but pushes players onto the TP to get the items they want?
Is it the lack of certainty that doing X will yield Y (or an item suited to your character) as a reward?
It’s all generalities. It’s Morpheus from the Matrix with him.
“You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world. You don’t know what it is, but it’s there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I’m talking about?”
well bellegah, i will say that out of the pro tp guys, you seem to actually try to understand things from multiple perspectives, even though you dont really agree with the conclusions they may make.
you also tend to have a better grasp on the realities of the situation, even though you have a different take on them. Some other people here just say whatever is the opposite of what someone who disagrees with them says, or tries various propaganda/sensationalist techniques to dismiss everything they disagree with.
I don’t believe that is your motivation. Nothing in your posts suggests an attitude of curiosity, understanding or cooperation. All you do is constantly insist that the established methods of doing something are wrong and that it should be done better, without offering any concrete evidence that this is so, let alone being able to suggest how to improve it.
When JS asked for evidence that there was a problem, you made no attempt to provide this, you just insisted that there was a problem and he should be able to see it without being provided any evidence. Even though he said that he sees nothing wrong, essentially you claimed that you knew more about the TP than an educated professional who was in charge of it, and who has vastly more information about how it works than you do.
In short, I think your purpose here is to stonewall discussion and enjoy the attention as other players continue to try to explain the same concepts over and over. I have not seen you come to any kind of understanding over several months of posts that never go beyond “there is a problem because I feel there is a problem.”
just because you dont believe something, doesnt mean you are right, The reason you percieve me a certain way is because based on your preconcieved notions, you always interpret everything i say with a certain bias or color.
I say how does one determine there is a problem, and you interpret it is as me saying there is a problem.
I say how could one design an economy that is fulfills XYZ and you start talking about the mechanics of this economy.
you are always looking for a fight, or thinking everything is about being on one side or another. Im not on anyone side. Im actually evaluating things based on real actual things rather than being a fan or an anti-fan.
He’s referring to the conversion rates of gem and gold within the gem store most likely.
Ah, I see.
As a note, while RMT is accurate, it is generally used to refer to third party traders, hence my confusion.This is not a returned volley:
Thank you John Smith for asking for clarification, thank you Ayrilana for providing clarification, pardon me not clarifying myself in a timely manner.
The RMT label is accurately applied to Arenanet et al. ‘You’ have collapsed the traditional third party responsibilities of RMT into the responsibilities of Arenanet et al.
Question
Have you as a game theory economist ever considered partnering with other game theory economists to create the backbone for a third party neutral RMT company that would provide RMT services to participating game worlds?
I have thought of it, I think it would be very interesting to have new worlds to work inside constantly and honestly more games need to start using economists. I also have extremely negative feelings about third party RMT because I watch them steal and destroy what players have created and it sickens me. Competing them out of business would be worth it alone.
how could you compete them out of business without having similar effects, and employing similar tactics?
Essentially how can you compete with people who operate above the laws, in a completely self interested fashion?
JS explained how to provide evidence there is a problem – even in the absence of hard data – a while back in one of these long, pointless rant threads. Only one person even attempted to do so, and gave up halfway through. Everyone else has offered nothing but opinions mislabeled as facts and incoherent rants because they don’t “feel” rewarded.
You need more than rants and opinions to show there is a problem that needs to be examined. On the pro-TP side, it has been explained many times that the TP was designed to work the way it does, and does its job very effectively and efficiently. There is no reason to change this to suit a few players feelings when hundreds of thousands of players have no problem using it.
Well this is more a question of how does anet diagnose its problems with game design/economy, and how reliable is that.
That’s JS’s job, and he posted instructions on how to convince him that there is something going on that he needs to look at.
If you cannot demonstrate, to his satisfaction, that there is a problem requiring his attention, then how do you expect him to come to the conclusion that there is a problem requiring his attention?
You have been beating the same drum for months, and JS and other people have told you that there is no problem with the TP or the economy as a whole, and that the problem is that you have a problem with the economy.
So, the only reasonable conclusion is that you have a problem with the way the game’s economy works. The game doesn’t have a problem with the way it’s economy works, you do. JS cannot fix you.
you are too focused on me, the question wasnt about me, or if i am right or i am wrong. Its more procedural or theoretical.
Its not about how i can prove to JS there is a problem. Its, how does JS determine there is a problem, or is not a problem.
you are always way too focused on where you think a question is going, or what its purpose is, or what is the opinions of the person behind the question. Not every thing i say is about proving some point or being right, sometimes its just a question to gain knowledge and understanding, or provide a better framework for problem solving in general.
Even though i usually have an opinion, i am actually here to explore and challenge my hypotheses, and gain a greater understanding, At times, through discussion, logic, etc, i have gained deeper understandings of systems at play here, and psychology. I can apply some of these things to other problems/etc and come up with better designs to solutions in other things.
I dont actually believe that anything i say here will change the game, its more an excercise in reasoning/problem solving/design and understanding people/motivations.
JS explained how to provide evidence there is a problem – even in the absence of hard data – a while back in one of these long, pointless rant threads. Only one person even attempted to do so, and gave up halfway through. Everyone else has offered nothing but opinions mislabeled as facts and incoherent rants because they don’t “feel” rewarded.
You need more than rants and opinions to show there is a problem that needs to be examined. On the pro-TP side, it has been explained many times that the TP was designed to work the way it does, and does its job very effectively and efficiently. There is no reason to change this to suit a few players feelings when hundreds of thousands of players have no problem using it.
Well this is more a question of how does anet diagnose its problems with game design/economy, and how reliable is that.
Its also not about the TP, but the economy as a whole. The tp is just the machine for trading
but suffice to say, if people only diagnosed problems based on what you can logically identify, most problems wouldnt even be realized until it is too late. Which honestly does happen a lot.
Still its something one should avoid.
as far as hundreds of thousands of people having no problem with the economy, thats kind of a false assumption. Everyone who plays has to interact with the economy, even selling to npc is interacting with the economy. Just the fact that a lot of people use something doesnt mean they like it, and wouldnt use something else if they had a better option. It also doesnt show the people who opted out due to said thing.
I mean, millions of players quit the game, how many quit due to an unsatisfying economy? (game feels rewarding item/gold/currency wise would be an economic issue)
How would they even track this? at what point is it just impossible to please everyone, and at what point is it a design flaw?
these are questions designers of the economy would probably have to attempt to answer.