Obtena.7952

> @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > Except if any of this was a barrier to playing the game, how do you explain the millions of people that have managed to successfully learn and play this game over the last 8 years? > I hope you realize that this is a very bad argument. At SOME POINT, those accounts had active players ... and without the information the OP says should be in game to learn it ... so no, I don't think that's as bad an argument as you think. You know what IS a bad argument? The argument that says people don't know the game because the information isn't being crammed in their faces every level with numerous tutorials _in game_. The reason people don't know is NOT because the information isn't available to them. It's because they can't be bothered to learn it. Even if they know it, if they truly understand it and the game ... they know they don't even need to use it in many cases to be successful in the game. >And yes, there _is_ a problem. If we get back to how many people have "succesfully learned and played this game", i need to remind you of the efficiency gap between the **average** player and a top one (10x dps) Do not assume the gap is solely due to lack of knowledge how to play. If anything, that gap exists because the game allows it for success. Your average player isn't looking to break any records if they can still win walking the track instead of running as fast as they can.

> @"moony.5780" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"moony.5780" said: > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > > @"moony.5780" said: > > > > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > > > It surprises me that when so many people complain about the game being too difficult that Anet is losing people because it's too easy. There's no way to win this debate. > > > > > > > > > > only if everyone could choose their dificulty....so like get like -3 lvl downscaled with a bit higher rewards or normal gameplay..or even +2 lvl higher with less rewards > > > > > > > > Just make a new character that you only use with your friend, what's the issue here? > > > > > > thats what i did...and the new character is even stronger sometimes than my main character..... > > > > If it is, then instead of gearing yourself, maybe help with gearing your newb friend instead. > > i did :) hes even geared better than me This sounds suspicious to me ... no new character is stronger than a main ... unless your main is untraited and running around naked.

> @"Ailuro.2780" said: > Furthermore, if not to solidify my stance, there is a recent post: > > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/124305/how-to-start-a-new-player#latest > > Which mentions extra things I have yet to cover, the need for knowledge on how important collections can be, how important is to learn how to navigate the achievements panel and the priority to the things within the achievements panel is non-existent. The lack of information on how someone gets started on fractals, and then progresses. The list of absent information for preparing the new player to end game content just goes on and on. Except if any of this was a barrier to playing the game, how do you explain the millions of people that have managed to successfully learn and play this game over the last 8 years? Something doesn't add up with the reality of the game and the things you say it needs to have for people to learn to play it. See, my problem here is that you have assumed that if you hand everything to a player on a silver platter, it's somehow more effective as a way to teach them than the way that information is already available to them. I think that's a rather POOR assumption. Making it redundantly available ingame doesn't solve the problem you are talking about. I have no doubt that the volume of new players is so low and Anet resources focused so much on new content there is no fear that Anet isn't going to waste the time to implement the information already available to players where they can all access it anyways. The whole issue is moot.

> @"Ailuro.2780" said: > > It comes up because the OP is partially complaining he doesn't get that detailed information in the game ... and I'm arguing it shouldn't need to be there. > > First of all, please don't insinuate things that I'm not claiming. My post is purely what I think would benefit new players. Clearly, you didn't understand what I said ... isn't part of your complaint that detailed information like gear stats isn't in the game? Even if it's not for you, obviously you're advocating for those you feel it should be there for ... so let's not quibble over the intended audience here. YOU are making the proposal, so YOU are claiming it should be there. > However, you're arguing against the idea of an option of it being in-game but that's purely subjective and an opinion because it suits **yourself**. Actually, I'm arguing against the idea because it's not necessary at this point for Anet to waste time to put the information ingame that you think should be there because it already exists in a reasonable manner elsewhere. That has nothing to do with what _suits_ me. > > Secondly, I've provided repeated examples of players who reach end-game content, and you haven't replied to that at all as if those kinds of players don't exist. Let's get this straight ... those people exist because they didn't take the time to learn about the game DESPITE the fact the game information IS available to them. You aren't fixing any problem by making already available information available to them again.

> @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > > > > > > > These "insignificant things" are part of what's called polish. Something I see come up a lot lately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So in your opinion, lack of polish indicates not caring? That's rather sensational considering there are more important things to deal with wouldn't you agree? > > > > > > > Nobody wants to fix/tweak older stuff because it is a drudge work. > > > > > > > > > > > > Or because it's not as important as other things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with what astralporing said. If you constantly say that there are more important things then a lot of little thing accumulate to become actual problems. > > > > > > > > Except information that is available for players to learn about the game NOT being in the game isn't a problem. Games have worked like that since the being of their existence. > > > > > > You shouldn't have to go open the wiki just because the game doesn't explain how things work well enough. And just because its a common thing doesn't mean it isn't a bad thing. > > > > Are we talking about learning how to play the game or talking about details like stats, etc??? Seems to me the OP is focused on issues about the details, not learning to play. The game doesn't teach you to play it? I beg to differ. The game doesn't provide all the details about certain aspects of the game? Sure, but that information is available, just not ingame ... just like how games have worked forever with written manuals, etc ... > > > > If the Wiki or other sources don't explain the game well enough, that's got nothing to do with whether the information is or isn't in the game itself. > > Explained well enough to play it right. Playing it optimally is a matter of knowing all the details, and those you can usually learn from other players, so no, I do not think literally every single minute detail has to be explained in the game, though for some, that would certainly be nice. > > Anyways, you brought up the context of small details = information, I'm unsure where this context even came up, but that's what I answered to. > To me personally, little details means many things, like corpses clipping into hills up to their feet and npc's floating in the air. To some people, things like that snaps their immersion, and immersion is good for any game that has a story to tell and an atmosphere to set. > > In general, details matters. It comes up because the OP is partially complaining he doesn't get that detailed information in the game ... and I'm arguing it shouldn't need to be there. There are a few reasons for that, but I think they are sufficiently covered already in the thread. The OP isn't actually complaining about 'game polish' like corpse clipping or floating NPC's ... I don't get why that's come up as it seems unrelated to the original complaint.

> @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > > > > > These "insignificant things" are part of what's called polish. Something I see come up a lot lately. > > > > > > > > > > > > So in your opinion, lack of polish indicates not caring? That's rather sensational considering there are more important things to deal with wouldn't you agree? > > > > > Nobody wants to fix/tweak older stuff because it is a drudge work. > > > > > > > > Or because it's not as important as other things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with what astralporing said. If you constantly say that there are more important things then a lot of little thing accumulate to become actual problems. > > > > Except information that is available for players to learn about the game NOT being in the game isn't a problem. Games have worked like that since the being of their existence. > > You shouldn't have to go open the wiki just because the game doesn't explain how things work well enough. And just because its a common thing doesn't mean it isn't a bad thing. Are we talking about learning how to play the game or talking about details like stats, etc??? Seems to me the OP is focused on issues about the details, not learning to play. The game doesn't teach you to play it? I beg to differ. The game doesn't provide all the details about certain aspects of the game? Sure, but that information is available, just not ingame ... just like how games have worked forever with written manuals, etc ... If the Wiki or other sources don't explain the game well enough, that's got nothing to do with whether the information is or isn't in the game itself.

> @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > > > These "insignificant things" are part of what's called polish. Something I see come up a lot lately. > > > > > > > > So in your opinion, lack of polish indicates not caring? That's rather sensational considering there are more important things to deal with wouldn't you agree? > > > Nobody wants to fix/tweak older stuff because it is a drudge work. > > > > Or because it's not as important as other things. > > > > > > I agree with what astralporing said. If you constantly say that there are more important things then a lot of little thing accumulate to become actual problems. Except information that is available for players to learn about the game NOT being in the game isn't a problem contrary to the OP. Games have worked like that since the being of their existence. Written manuals typically told you how to play or gave details about the game that weren't critical to playing it ... and that's no different with how the internet provides players with information now. You can agree with whatever he says ... but there is nothing that suggests the information the OP thinks should be in the game isn't there because it's 'drudge work'. It's simply available (and reasonably so) elsewhere.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > Nobody wants to fix/tweak older stuff because it is a drudge work. > > > > Or because it's not as important as other things. > Dungeons were not important. Duly noted. > Honestly, I think dungeons were not important because for some reason, Anet coupled them to a specific part of the leveling storyline. I mean, your point is that dungeons don't work or something? What 'tweak' do you think they need that's so important that it gets done over other things?

> @"Ailuro.2780" said: > > If it's optional, players will by and large most likely not do it. Leaving the same problem you're describing in place. > > Why would they not do it? It's the choice of between reading text and not playing the game, versus engaging in the game. I don't get this mentality ... like somehow if the information that is available outside the game isn't put IN it, people just won't play it? That doesn't make sense. No one is quitting the game because it's too much of a burden for them to read the information they want to know about the game somewhere online. Contrary to what you are saying, doing tutorials and reading information is actually NOT a very engaging aspect of gameplay, if at all. Also, what necessary skills is the game NOT teaching people? I mean, how many skills do you actually need to play this game? WASD, your skill buttons and dodging. The mechanics to actually play the game aren't hard or overwhelming.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > These "insignificant things" are part of what's called polish. Something I see come up a lot lately. > > > > So in your opinion, lack of polish indicates not caring? That's rather sensational considering there are more important things to deal with wouldn't you agree? > Nobody wants to fix/tweak older stuff because it is a drudge work. Or because it's not as important as other things.

> @"Fueki.4753" said: > As far as we know, there is no raid coming up. > I doubt there even is a team working on raids or other instanced multiplayer content. > .. with exception of the team of people that just released the recent Fractal content I guess ... :astonished:

> @"kharmin.7683" said: > If it's not enough of a challenge, you can always try zones leveled higher. Yes ... THIS. I don't get it ... if it's too easy for people, what's stopping them from going where it's harder for them to play?

> @"Trinnitty.8256" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Trinnitty.8256" said: > > > They won't do anything. ANET wants you to buy more accounts for log in rewards which makes them money and looks good on the books for active accounts xD > > > > Well, if there is a reason Anet won't do anything, it's because this isn't a problem in the first place. That logic doesn't even make sense because they give MC's away for nothing for just logging in ... if the reason Anet won't do anything is because they want revenue, they WOULDN'T be giving these away on logging in to begin with. > > > > Let's put it this way ...it's about $50 to buy a new account ... right now that's just shy of 1400G on the exchange ... so almost 700 MC's ... anyone that is simply buying a second account just to get MC's is waiting 3 years for a break even on their investment with a daily log in and year to get enough MC's to make a legendary. In otherwords ... that's kind of a dumb way to go about buying your way into MC's. > > A new Account is $15.00 when on sale. {edit} Don't forget to add in the laurel log in reward can be used to convert to gold. So you get 2 gold a day if you do 3 Dailys, mystic coins and laurels. the daily mystic forger also gives 1 mystic coin for no effort. > > The biggest problem is and has always been mystic coins being used as a currency to bypass 500 gold mail transfer limit and to bypass the trading post maximum sale price limit on poorly implemented super low drop rates on some items. Also avoiding TP tax on big gold items. OK ... that doesn't change the fact that this doesn't have anything to do with Anet wanting revenue through new account sales since it's not the way anyone wanting to 'buy' MC's would do so in the first place. Also, MC price isn't a problem that Anet needs to fix. It's COMPLETELY driven by supply and demand, EVEN if that's some use for the MC's outside of crafting.

> @"Ailuro.2780" said: > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > These "insignificant things" are part of what's called polish. Something I see come up a lot lately. > > Exactly, players who are dismissive and called it insignificant simply just learn to live with it. That's not the right attitude. A game, especially an MMORPG should always be focused on improving its gameplay, especially the minor inadequacies when they cumulate to the hundreds. Not at the expense of other activities it shouldn't. This really isn't a problem; people have been learning about the details you are talking about outside of computer games since they existed, whether it's a written manual or it's internet counterparts.

Let me guess ... anyone that plays primarily for PVP will answer no ... just a hunch :wink:

> @"Trinnitty.8256" said: > They won't do anything. ANET wants you to buy more accounts for log in rewards which makes them money and looks good on the books for active accounts xD Well, if there is a reason Anet won't do anything, it's because this isn't a problem in the first place. That logic doesn't even make sense because they give MC's away for nothing for just logging in ... if the reason Anet won't do anything is because they want revenue, they WOULDN'T be giving these away on logging in to begin with. Let's put it this way ...it's about $50 to buy a new account ... right now that's just shy of 1400G on the exchange ... so almost 700 MC's ... anyone that is simply buying a second account just to get MC's is waiting 3 years for a break even on their investment with a daily log in and year to get enough MC's to make a legendary. In otherwords ... that's kind of a dumb way to go about buying your way into MC's.

> @"Redfeather.6401" said: > Hey guys before flaming OP can we not agree that party progression for karma hearts would go a long way to making them feel less tedious and making grouping in open world leveling zones a more social experience. Maybe ... but the OP isn't complaining about 'tedious' ... considering he's going through OW for another round with his friends. Grouping for party progression on hearts actually doesn't do anything to address the OP's problem.

> @"Oxstar.7643" said: > These "insignificant things" are part of what's called polish. Something I see come up a lot lately. So in your opinion, lack of polish indicates not caring? That's rather sensational considering there are more important things to deal with wouldn't you agree?

If you CHOOSE to RESTRICT how you play by playing WITH your friends, then it doesn't make sense to complain that the game doesn't cater to your speed of play because of your slow friends. Either you slow down, or they speed up. Anet can't make the game whatever every players wants it to be. When did this idea that developers change the game because of individuals desires even start? It's rampant and it's not sensible.

> @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > > > Guys. All laughs aside, maybe the OP is simply asking for more effort being put into making every class viable in the PvE meta? I for one would quickly get bored if 60% of my classes just weren't strong enough for it. > > > > That's not a problem in this game ... you can play a very wide range of builds that AREN'T meta and still be very successful playing this game. If not being meta is a barrier for people, that's not a game mechanics issue. > > > > The "I'm bored" issue is certainly not because there isn't a large variety in playstyles available between all the classes and builds to keep people occupied. > > > > > > The part you conveniently left out says it was a hyperbolic statement to make a point. OK ... then what is the point you are trying to make here if your statement is just hyperbole? Seems to me that your view is that if you find some insignificant errors in a game that's over 8 years old ... Anet doesn't care. That's clearly not true. Am I missing an inside joke or something?

> @"Oxstar.7643" said: >I've found enough small errors in the base game to make me pretty convinced that they don't care enough to put the effort into redefining it. Or those errors are so insignificant they don't matter compared to the other issues that need to be addressed. I mean, to say they don't care ... that's pretty obviously untrue. The patch notes are pretty clear about what is fixed and they still go in and address 'base game' things. If Anet didn't care about how the game worked, they wouldn't bother patching and changing it.

> @"Oxstar.7643" said: > Guys. All laughs aside, maybe the OP is simply asking for more effort being put into making every class viable in the PvE meta? I for one would quickly get bored if 60% of my classes just weren't strong enough for it. That's not a problem in this game ... you can play a very wide range of builds that AREN'T meta and still be very successful playing this game. If not being meta is a barrier for people, that's not a game mechanics issue. The "I'm bored" issue is certainly not because there isn't a large variety in playstyles available between all the classes and builds to keep people occupied.

> @"Ailuro.2780" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > there shouldn't be SOME level of effort on the player to learn how the game works. > The point is the player learn how the game works IN the game, with both a better integration to find guildmates and just friends > AND > A better **training** system. I get the point. Training IN the game for the details you are talking about just don't make sense ... it's literally a duplication of information that is ALREADY available to review at your leisure WITHOUT going through some clunky game interface to do it. If you want to know what stats do, you can look it up outside the game, which is actually a reasonable and preferred method.

The original complaint is weird. GW2 isn't perfect, but I'm starting to think OP thinks there shouldn't be SOME level of effort on the player to learn how the game works. I learned everything I needed from GW2 Wiki. While I think that information ingame can be sparse in some places, with just a LITTLE effort from the player, they can learn what they need via other sources of information. I have YET to be unable to figure out what I want to know from either the Wiki or Youtube. Also, I think it's worth noting that there is ALSO a problem of being forced by a game to digest more information than is necessary which tends to garner complaints about having more 'reading' than 'playing' the game. Frankly, I think GW2 has a good balance ... you PLAY in the game, you LEARN technical details of the game outside of it. > @"Oxstar.7643" said: > I did the base story on one of my alts some time ago. During a cutscene where Zojja was supposed to say Durman Priory she said Vigil instead. I don't think ANet cares about the base game anymore. You think that sort of miniscule discrepancy in some storyline dialogue is proof Anet doesn't care about the base game? That's absurd considering all the changes they continue to make to improve the base game. I think at this point, while it's not perfect, refining the new player experience ship has SAILED, found the edge of the world and fallen off. It's simply not a good use of how Anet staff use their time, considering players have established numerous sources of information outside the game for the benefit of the players. Any reason for Anet to elaborate or duplicate that is HIGHLY questionable use of their resources.

> @"Virdo.1540" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Virdo.1540" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >If people kick other people right out of groups or insult them right off the bat, only for being core rev or herald, then theres clearly something wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Never seen that happen, but judging by posts on this forum, it seems everyone "gets kicked or insulted" unless they play barely few of the top meta picks. So nah, I doubt that's what you're frequently met with. > > > > > > > > > then you are a lucky one. lets call it like that: If a build (like dps herald) isnt found on something like "Snowcrows", then its not accepted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not about luck, it's about knowing how to get teams that allow you to play how you want. Not being meta isn't a sign there is something wrong and if groups are rejecting you, this isn't a reason for Anet to change something. it is a reason for you to get a different group. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but dont forget, people only want "meta" these days. Doesnt matter if they can execute meta tactics or not, just the team composition is important > > > > > > > > > > > > I didn't forget ... if people only want meta these days and you CHOOSE to play with those people, you are essentially foregoing your ability to play how you want because your criteria is playing with people that want meta. > > > > > > > > > > Yea thats the problem. Almost all pugs that can be found in the lfg section (at least to my playtimes) are meta-only. > > > > > > > > The solution to that is changing how you play and you decide to play with. > > > > > > so i decide to play something like herald & play solo? Or play smthing besides herald, but with almost everyone > > > > If you want ... I mean, the game doesn't stop you from doing that. Are you implying you can't play how you want? That's not a problem for LOTS of people so what is stopping you? Then answer is YOU. > > > > Nothing you can say will change the fact that people play Herald and get teams. Just because you can't doesn't mean there is a problem Anet needs to solve by changing the game. > > Its not only me. Its a problem for many people that want to play herald. Right and the answer is the same to those people as it is to you. Just because you and them can't get teams doesn't mean there is a problem Anet needs to solve by changing the game. The number of people this affects is irrelevant; it just shows how many people don't understand how this game works. You say you dont want to provoke an improvement for revenant, just equality for people that want to play what they want to play ...well we got that ... it's just that some people still need to learn how. >And no, its not always possible to get everything someone could want Right ... that's why it's nonsensical to continually petition Anet to change the game to do EXACTLY that for you and other people that can't be bothered to figure out how to 'play how you want'. See, the problem here isn't a game issue because if it was, people would not be able to play Herald in teams and I know for a fact people can and DO that. Therefore, whatever the problem is, it's not fixed by Anet changing the game. This is an issue with how you play the game. No response you can make will change that.