Leo G.4501
-
Posts
1,216 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Leo G.4501
-
-
Many posters seen very confident in the detail about Anet working on unrelated side projects. It's this confirmed somewhere?
-
> @"ScottBroChill.3254" said:
> > @"AlexxxDelta.1806" said:
> > > @"ScottBroChill.3254" said:
> > > > @"AlexxxDelta.1806" said:
> > > > > @"ScottBroChill.3254" said:
> > > > > Maybe NCsoft is trying to save the game? Most of their newer games died off and maybe they saw guild wars 2 was heading downhill or on a similar path to those other games, especially if Anet was mismanaging seeing as they weren't focusing enough on this game and instead on other projects that never saw the light of day. Maybe the decision to skip the expansion was enough for NCsoft to stop it because investors will see a lack of sales hike at the usual time and it won't necessarily look good if its just small price hikes from living story episodes and gemshop sales, which those gemstore sales will eventually decline because of the lack of substantial content. The living story is neat and all, but they all have to be made individually, they divide the playerbase, become obsolete fast, and they lose the ability to make grand big content that all works together like the expansions do.
> > > > >
> > > > > We can't really say whether this is a bad or good thing yet. But I honestly wouldn't be opposed to the game going in a different direction if it doesn't mean a new microtransaction and p2w scheme.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I seriously doubt that NCsoft's way of "saving" the game will be of any benefit to the average GW2 player. Having experience with other NCsoft titles it is likely they will double down on short term profits while the game is on its last legs, meaning more microtransactions, lootboxes, tampering with in game economy/gem exchange etc. Anyone looking could see increased signs of this even before the layoffs, with Anet focusing more on gem store monetization than ever before over the past year. The pressure on them by the parent company for increased profits is pretty clear.
> > >
> > > I mean before this merger wasn't Anet responsible for the focusing more on gem store monetization? I mean you gotta take what JP says with a grain of salt but if you were to believe its true, Anet bumped up gemstore monetization to basically decieve NCsoft and investors to avoid the knowledge of how much resources they were pumping into other projects. And secondly, GW2 is a very western mmo, it would be ridiculous for NCsoft to try and use a korean or asian market strategy for this game. Now, they could be completely stupid like they have in the past with CoH, but we can almost see a change of heart in terms of how they handle western games by how they let wildstar basically linger for a long time without making any profits holding on to hope that it would succeed. If we are judgin by what they have done with wildstar, then they will let the game run until its in the red and then some more. Furthermore, maybe they were seeing similar management trends between the failing games and the currently successful GW2 franchise.
> > >
> > > In terms of listening to the community or at least having an open dialogue with us in terms of game direction, Anet of has been pretty silent as well as almost completely ignoring the communities wants. It wouldn't be such a problem if they discussed the game direction and what kind of substance they would bring to it, but they never did. The last big thing they announced was the WvW restructuring and we still know nothing about it.
> > >
> > > Maybe I'm looking at it glass half full because I'm on the other half who hasn't been digging the game direction for awhile.
> >
> > Of course Anet's management decisions played a part in all this but when it comes to monetization it's all about NCsoft's targets. Don't forget we are talking about the same NCsoft who reportedly considers GW2 profits underwhelming because they are not on par with their exploitative money milking machine that is their mobile games. Yes, the focus will be back on GW2 and on paper it's a good thing, but in what form now that NCSoft is fully at the helm?
>
> I just highly doubt NCsoft truly believes the same strategies can be applied to a western mmo as they are to asian mobile game market. All mobile games are microtransaction p2w clusters of nonsense with very little actual content. If they do and you're right, then the games doomed because it just wont succeed here.
Funny thing is, this viewpoint is exactly why many proponents of classic MMOs are so confused and belligerent toward the shift in markets. Sure, some mobile games are cash-grabs and low concept, but the roots and staying factor of MMOs has always been simplistic. It's why games like GW1 or WoW or Runescape or even FFXI are still relevant despite what the louder MMO purists will tell you. The high-action, twitch combat is moving toward online fighting games and arena combat but classic MMOs are likely going to reformat to work better on improving mobile tech.
Sure, there will be still be PC MMOs for the forseeable future, but you people really need to get with the times and look at the market shifts objectively rather than as some sort of war of PC vs mobile or some such.
Basically, I'm saying whether the mobile market will advance to encapsulate those classic MMOs doesn't automatically mean they will be Candy-crush baby games or cheap lootbox peddling copy-ware. MMORPGs have been in a cruddy place for almost a decade and the financial blackhole they have become is why shifts must happen.
-
> @"Mourningcry.9428" said:
> > @"Ulyssean.1709" said:
> > > @"ilovegw.1258" said:
> > > > @"Ulyssean.1709" said:
> > > > Why is it NCsofts fault?
> > >
> > > Because they sent the lay off message to Anet initially when this storm started?
> >
> > So if you do not perform to standard and get fired, it's your manager's fault?
>
> To seriously believe this is the main reason for layoffs during a restructuring, one would have to be even more ignorant than such belief would indicate.
Considering you're on the outside looking in with no actual information with the gall to call someone else out on their ignorance...why not just accept that we don't know exactly what's going on and your outbursts are based on emotion?
-
> @"ilovegw.1258" said:
> > @"Ulyssean.1709" said:
> > Why is it NCsofts fault?
>
> Because they sent the lay off message to Anet initially when this storm started?
Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance.
-
> @"Cerioth.7062" said:
> > @"Leo G.4501" said:
> > Also, rather than suggesting to others unhealthy purchasing practices, how about this:
> >
> > 1. You log into the game and look at the Gem Store
> > 2. Oh, that's something I might want.
> > 3. And the price is good.
> > 4. Buy gems
> > 5. Get item
> >
> > The end.
>
> There is a difference between unhealthy purchases and wanting to support a company. If you have extra money and feel like spending it on gems to help support arenanet run their game, there's nothing wrong about that, nor unhealthy. This is of course assuming that your money usage is, generally speaking, healthy. If it is unhealthy in other areas of life, unhealthy spending in this game is likely not the only problem and not related to GW2 whatsoever.
I was speaking more in terms of suggesting to others what they should do with their money. What I outlined is basically what Anet expects you to do, which is just normal capitalism. I don't know what the OP is going on about...
Also, I don't really know what "extra money" is. I guess if someone else offers to buy me gems, that's kinda extra money. But if I find $20 in the yard or something, that's gas money lol If I get a bonus, that's going in my savings. If Anet puts something I want for sale and I already spent my games budget, I'm now spending my food or entertainment money.
-
> @"Wubbbi.8172" said:
> > @"Leo G.4501" said:
> > > @"Wubbbi.8172" said:
> > > > @"Mikali.9651" said:
> > > > sry but I am not charity. I will gladly pay for the real content which is not just a new LS chapter or gem store "content".
> > >
> > > This comment is making me angry! You got 5 LS4 episodes for free so far and haven't paid a dime for it. And yet you have the audacity to say "I will gladly pay for the real content which is not just a new LS chapter"? Shame on you! I would gladly pay for a new LS chapter. $5 is a good price for a chapter considering the content we get. Do you even think about how much work goes into 1 chapter? The textures/models, the map, voices, quests, story, events, network, one came out with a new mount, new legendarys (and even more). ... These people get PAID to do that work. And you get it for FREE! And yet you sit own your comfortable behind and say this? ... As I said, shame on you!!!
> > >
> > > In my opinion Living World, especially LS4, reached expansion quality! I am still suprised that ANet is giving it out for free! While I do not want to jinx anything, I want you guys to think about it.
> >
> > You trying to guilt players into paying Anet money? Extortion, maybe?
> >
> > If you're so willing to buy the new LS chapter, just make a new account and buy it. But you're getting it for free because you log in for it. So shame on you for not practicing what you preach.
>
> Hahaha, don't turn things around the way you like! Your comment does not refelect what I wanted to say. Not at all! You just interpreted my post and moved things around in a way to counter me. Read again and think about it (or don't, I don't care). I am not going to get into your statement because it is not what I said and not what I meant. This is just ridiculous. You didn't get it, I am sorry ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Did you not twist someone's post into shaming them for not donating money in exchange for content Anet gives away for free? For one, you should really reassess ever shaming anyone for something so trivial. For two, think about attaining some self awareness so you understand the double standard you try to hold others to but not yourself.
-
> @"Wubbbi.8172" said:
> > @"Mikali.9651" said:
> > sry but I am not charity. I will gladly pay for the real content which is not just a new LS chapter or gem store "content".
>
> This comment is making me angry! You got 5 LS4 episodes for free so far and haven't paid a dime for it. And yet you have the audacity to say "I will gladly pay for the real content which is not just a new LS chapter"? Shame on you! I would gladly pay for a new LS chapter. $5 is a good price for a chapter considering the content we get. Do you even think about how much work goes into 1 chapter? The textures/models, the map, voices, quests, story, events, network, one came out with a new mount, new legendarys (and even more). ... These people get PAID to do that work. And you get it for FREE! And yet you sit own your comfortable behind and say this? ... As I said, shame on you!!!
>
> In my opinion Living World, especially LS4, reached expansion quality! I am still suprised that ANet is giving it out for free! While I do not want to jinx anything, I want you guys to think about it.
You trying to guilt players into paying Anet money? Extortion, maybe?
If you're so willing to buy the new LS chapter, just make a new account and buy it. But you're getting it for free because you log in for it. So shame on you for not practicing what you preach.
-
Also, rather than suggesting to others unhealthy purchasing practices, how about this:
1. You log into the game and look at the Gem Store
2. Oh, that's something I might want.
3. And the price is good.
4. Buy gems
5. Get item
The end.
-
> @"Goettel.4389" said:
> > @"Mikali.9651" said:
> > sry but I am not charity. I will gladly pay for the real content which is not just a new LS chapter or gem store "content".
>
> To me it's not "charity" to support things I love.
That's practically the dictionary definition of charity.
-
> @"Ashen.2907" said:
> > @"Leo G.4501" said:
> > > @"Swagger.1459" said:
> > > To the naysayers... I challenge any of you to come up with better ideas to increase revenue so the game can grow and prosper years to come. I'll be more than happy to discuss them, so let's see what y'all got!
> >
> > This is one reason I harshly criticize these forums, because people are very willing to *literally* try to silence people for posting ideas or suggestions. It's one thing to criticize a suggestion as bad, it's a whole other thing to dismiss it and tell people to go away, stop posting or report your posts. I mean, quite a few posts in this thread should be reported as not constructive or off topic.
> >
> > Derailing a thread is against the forum rules and I've had my posts deleted for that very reason. It's not even that hard to protect your post from being off-topic. Just make part of your post about the topic.
> >
> > As for monetizing their game better, I'd say simply asking players what they want to see or at the very least, look at some low-hanging fruit and get some bucks out of it. People have asked for capes since the beginning. Figure that kitten out and put some backpiece capes in this game (might give me a reason to use those bulky shoulder pieces if they hang from them properly). And this isn't me suggesting something to counter some new financial trend, I've been suggesting stuff that I'd buy for ages.
>
> Agreed.
>
> I think a solid approach to continue to make money as a business is to produce things that people want to buy.
But would you buy a cape? Your answer is, yes you would, if it's of a reasonable price lol
-
> @"Swagger.1459" said:
> To the naysayers... I challenge any of you to come up with better ideas to increase revenue so the game can grow and prosper years to come. I'll be more than happy to discuss them, so let's see what y'all got!
This is one reason I harshly criticize these forums, because people are very willing to *literally* try to silence people for posting ideas or suggestions. It's one thing to criticize a suggestion as bad, it's a whole other thing to dismiss it and tell people to go away, stop posting or report your posts. I mean, quite a few posts in this thread should be reported as not constructive or off topic.
Derailing a thread is against the forum rules and I've had my posts deleted for that very reason. It's not even that hard to protect your post from being off-topic. Just make part of your post about the topic.
As for monetizing their game better, I'd say simply asking players what they want to see or at the very least, look at some low-hanging fruit and get some bucks out of it. People have asked for capes since the beginning. Figure that kitten out and put some backpiece capes in this game (might give me a reason to use those bulky shoulder pieces if they hang from them properly). And this isn't me suggesting something to counter some new financial trend, I've been suggesting stuff that I'd buy for ages.
-
> @"Gehenna.3625" said:
> > @"Ashen.2907" said:
> > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:
> > > > @"Ashen.2907" said:
> > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:
> > > > > > @"Randulf.7614" said:
> > > > > > How they spend your money is largely not our business since you get a return already for it. I totally get people thinking it helps guide the business but the reality is it is t that simple.
> > > > > I think that people who dropped a lot of cash on gems do have a fair reason to ask this question since the return is a lot less for them than what they put into it. But even the whales will have to realize that their investment into the game, doesn't actually make them an investor. So that should be food for thought.
> > > > > > This isn’t an Anet or NCSoft thing either, businesses owned by others often move investments around subsidiaries. Profits from other games no doubt funded gw2 which seems to be acceptable?
> > > > > That's pretty much true in my opinion as well.
> > > > > > If you are hoping for full transparency then I wouldn’t hold my breath to be honest.
> > > > > Agreed. That will never happen
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Everyone who spent money, large amount or small, on gems got 100% of what they paid for.
> > > Not really. It is fair comment that people got what they paid for when it comes to the box game and some minimal purchases. The only people who paid more than they got for are the whales. But even then it's fair for them to ask the question but not realistic to expect an answer. I limited my spending on purpose so I get what I paid for. Some expenditure is fair on a game without a sub, but I got what I paid for. So I don't feel I have the right to ask them how they invested their surplus that came from whales and not myself. I understand they might ask the question but as I said, I do not think they should expect an answer.
> >
> > Can you provide a single example of someone who, for example, spent real money on a set amount of gems and didnt get those gems?
> No and that's irrelevant. Getting your money's worth is that the money you spend gets you something of value that is represented by that money and that is NOT the case. Just because ArenaNet asks those prices does not mean you get a fair value for it. That's the cool thing for them because they have a monopoly there.
>
The part that you forget is that the value of something is determined by the customer. How that translates to cash monies is going to shift from person to person. Someone who has a salary of $80,000 a year is going to value the $100 gem package differently than the person who makes $24,000 a year and those people are going to value that same package differently than someone who makes $200,000 a year but runs multiple small businesses and has their money invested in specific ways.
Fair value is subjective. The above guy who makes $200,000 a year might feel paying $100 dollars for in-game fluff is a rip-off despite him having far more money while the guy with $80,000 might feel it's a bargain as he could easily part with some pocket change in exchange for 10+ hours of in-game farming. Someone who sees enough value in a product to part with their money is agreeing that the product has value enough to buy. That means it *IS* fair value *to them*.
> Don't even act like asking exorbitant prices for products is a fair and ethical business practice.
If it's not fair or ethical, then do not spend money on it.
>In this discussion you represent the letter of the law and I represent ethics. We're not going to agree unless I abandon my sense of ethics or you abandon the idea that laws are ethical by default.
>
No. There's a difference between arguing from an ethics standpoint and arguing from a subjective standpoint. Ethics don't play a part in this because no service that is necessary for the upholding of ethics is being withheld. It's actually *UNethical* to make the argument you're making, saying that you deserve more for what amounts to a choice of entertainment so someone else should work *HARDER* or for *LESS* pay to adhere to your subjective viewpoint.
-
> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:
> Yet, no one complained when other NCSoft games' revenue was used to finance the creation of Guild Wars 2....
> I suppose what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander, nowadays.
I'm glad there are some people that understand what a publisher does. Do people honestly think that development studios just have money to make their dream games? Or that the loans they take out are just paid back the day the game is put on the market? Or that there aren't obligations when you loan people millions of dollars for years and years?
-
> @"Randulf.7614" said:
> I think it’s rather unfair to ask us to be kept in the loop when people’s jobs are on the line and they are waiting for communication
>
> I don’t really consider it much of our business either.
>
> Having been through this myself multiple times. I know how disrespectful and upsetting it can be having it discussed by all and sundry with wild speculation all over the place, especially when employees aren’t fully in the loop.
Cannot agree more. As a consumer, your job is to support the stuff that interests you. Rather than demand beyond your financial support for more and faster content/info, just go play something that has the content you want and leave the advertisement of new content to them.
But then I may be biased. I was never a fan of this hype culture with sneak peeks and leaks and crap. If it's not something that needs player beta tests, it only needs to be announced when it's ready.
-
> @"Ashantara.8731" said:
> > @"Leo G.4501" said:
> > I like to consider the tonic a part of my Asura. He's one of the few Asura that is as tall as an average Human.
>
> With a creepy big head. :o The head sizes for Asura are already too big as is on most characters (I always select the smallest option, but just look at NPCs like Taimi and "Bug Boy"), you don't need to make it even creepier by running around with a human-sized Asura. ;)
They also have bigger feet and thicker arms/legs. And he's still shorter than humans because a lot of humans that aren't female choose taller frames. And unlike you, I chose the smallest head for that asura, which is still large but not "creepy". He literally just looks like an enlarged asura. If you like your asura small, then scroll closer with your camera and that is literally the same thing the tonic does.
-
I like to consider the tonic a part of my Asura. He's one of the few Asura that is as tall as an average Human.
-
My own spin on the subject. Arranged from <-Strongest to Weakest->, slash "/" denoting a tie.
**Warrior:**
Norn/Charr, Human, Sylvari, Asura
Summary - It's obvious that the Norn are the embodiment of in-your-face ferocity only matched by the visible characteristics of the same in Charr plus their pension to fight in packs. Humans are in the middle because, from my non-GW1 perspective, humans are more aimed to be the jack-of-all-trades which is usually the most popular in MMOs. Sylvari and Asura seem more quiet/persevering and small/calculating respectively that are not the strongest aspects of a warrior...fyi, I made an Asura warrior particularly because he's out of the ordinary, theme-wise.
Bonus - Ettin/Jotun because they are non-magic types but Kodan and Tengu also feel like they would be their own brand of warrior, like a whole other elite spec.
**Ranger:**
Norn/Human, Sylvari/Charr, Asura
Summary - For Norn, it's all about the reverence to the animal spirits. For Human, it just feels more iconic for them as humans have been the type to train and domesticate animals and internalizing nature and spirituality. Sylvari aren't far off from the previous two with the whole aspect of being a literal part of nature but I still end up getting the vibe they would kind of compete for being the bottom of the food chain. Asura, I feel, would just build their pet rather than tame one but that's just me.
Bonus - Ogre obviously, by a country mile. It almost feels like that race is only ever meant to be rangers. Centaurs are also great rangers and feel like they have a good command of their rock dogs. I think you could also squeeze in Quaggan for those aquatic creatures that seem neglected and fill in that Aquaman niche. Hylek also feel like they would be the type to tame huge beasts and ride them...beast-riders, if you will.
**Elementalist:**
Human, Asura/Charr, Sylvari, Norn
Summary - It just feels right to have a human elementalist with the whole aspect of clerics and gods having elements attached. A good argument could be made for Charr fire elementalist being first though. For my Asura elementalist, I always assumed he used the magic for experiments or even building devices that straight up augment these things which could be devastatingly efficient. There isn't really a bad argument for Sylvari or Norn in this department, I just feel the other races have their own niche that fits with ele.
Bonus - Grawl, for sure (not going to include the Djinn). I'd almost say their blind faith in nature and superstition could be a powerful tool to evoke a different type of elemental tool/power beyond the standard level. Something primal that a more knowledgeable elementalist might not consider or refuse to use based on ethics.
**Guardian:**
Human/Sylvari, Norn/Asura/Charr
Summary - I feel this one's very close. The nature of Humans and Sylvari feel to embody aspects of faith and purity, with the latter seeming more ignorant and innocent which could be a trade-off if you consider their origins. The other races feel rather based in other faculties like pride, knowledge and wrath but these could just be vices that the individual has to work past which makes for a richer character.
Bonus - Probably off base here, but the Dwarf seems like very noble and selfless types which fit perfectly for a Guardian. Another easy fit are Kodan as they seem very spiritual and their strive for balance could be a virtue right alongside justice.
**Thief:**
Charr/Human, Asura/Sylvari, Norn
Summary - What can I say, I dig the whole predator stalking and pouncing in. Really apt for Charr. Humans embody the tricky pickpocket type that gives the profession its name (not sure how Charr pick pockets with those long claws). Asura seem like they can easily hide and move in unpredictable ways and fit well with the sniper theme. Sylvari practically have built in camo and seem most llthe and agile. Norn feel rather counter to all these aspects, however.
Bonus - Skritt all the way. I mean, come on...Also Largos because they are bloody assassins, and Hylek because of their crafty archery and poisons.
**Necromancer:**
Asura, Sylvari/Human, Charr/Norn
Summary - Necro always felt more surgical and objective when it came to the subject of death and that just fits Asura to a tee. Their flesh minions are merely golems, after all. Sylvari and Human feel like a good fit too, particularly Sylvari since they wouldn't have any aversions to dead flesh (no bark off their backs). Not sure about Charr or Norn, really. I've never actually played Necro but when I do, I want to make a Tengu necro...
Bonus - Hmmm, Krait? Not sure but I always got the vibe they'd take the crueler aspects of death and weaponize it.
**Revenant:**
Norn, Human, Charr/Sylvari/Asura
Summary - Considering how Norn value legendary feats and making historical waves, it seems logical them to idealize and weaponize this fixation. Humans, seem like they are great recorders/studyers of history. The others...I dunno. I only had a good consideration for Norn Revenant, really.
Bonus - Hmmm, Tengu maybe? I suppose you could put in an elder race but why would they revere or seek knowledge from some guy who lived but a fraction of their own existence?
**Engineer:**
Charr/Asura, Norn/Human, Sylvari
Summary - Unpopular, but I think the Engineer fits Asura the worst...BUT the Holosmith does fit them the best. A lot about the Engineer fits well with the steampunk nature of the Charr and almost as close to the Norn, who I feel would have some cunning inventor-type that would make such contraptions and machinations. Humans as well but their angle seems more aimed at magic and religion rather than technology and science. There are no plant machines, which is what Sylvari build things from and so, seems odd that a Sylvari would build machines from metal and chemicals rather than natural materials.
Bonus - Easily the Dredge and the Skritt. Dredge have their whole steampunk geothermal drilling tech which could be its own type of engineer spec. Skritt are all about the scrap-works, figuring out how junk works and piecing it together which is what Engineer stuff looks like.
**Mesmer:**
Human, Sylvari, Asura/Charr/Norn
Summary - Human because Human. Sylvari because butterflies. The other 3 have their own flavors but I'm not sure it meshes quite seamlessly with the fabulous-ness of a mesmer.
Bonus - Hmm, I'm not sure. But I could picture a Harpy using illusions to lure males to them, use misdirection with clones, etc. I don't think it exists but I can certainly picture it. Perhaps the Krait if you take the whole snake-charm vibe. I dunno.
-
It shouldn't be "profession" unique DoT, it should be "skill" unique DoT.
-
> @"DanAlcedo.3281" said:
> > @"Ol Nik.2518" said:
> > > @"MUDse.7623" said:
> > > DPS meters do help anyone to optimize. unless your running with 5x full support minstrel builds in fracs, you will invest something into offense. no matter how little that something is you can optimize it and DPS meter helps there.
> >
> > > @"yann.1946" said:
> > > The dps meter mostly used in gw2 also shows boon uptime etc so it will be usefull for everyone wo wants to optimize their playstyle
> >
> > I am sorry, but both of you still see it from a min/max point of view. It does not work for those of us who optimise their playstyles for our physical limitations. For example, I play what my son calls 'afk ranged tank summoner' builds. My priorities are exactly in this order:
> >
> > 1. minimal stress on my hands (mice and keyboards are not very friendly to carpal tunnel), aka 2 buttons combat mode (preferably, no more than one key/button for each hand)
> > 2. minimal movement during combat
> > 3. stay alive
> >
> > I will do my best to notify you of my limitations. But I am not going to change the way I play for you. Your frustration, no matter how understandable, is no reason for me to suffer pain or aggravate my condition.
> >
> > DPS meters are not only useless in this situation, but they can make things worse for everyone. The numbers show that someone is 'underperforming' despite the fact that they are doing their best to last through a physically painful and exhaustive fight.
>
> This is the equivalent of a man with a disability joining the Olympics and then QQing that he lost because his speed was masured.
>
> What you want to join are the Paralympics but with only participatin trophys.
>
>
But are we even competing against each other? To my knowledge, the Olympics isn't a group event vs some standardized ai with participation loot at the end not is GW2 a hotly recorded historic event that gives actual cash for the highest ranked players.
Oh, wait. Is esports still a thing? Lol
-
From reading the first page of the thread: lol you guys talk as if GW2 has failed. So there's a lull in sales across the board (except Lineage 2. not sure what happened this quarter with them). It happens.
But I guess this is the time to micro-analyze everything you feel is wrong with the game now. Not going to criticize that since I haven't even played the game for nearly a year now. I still hold out hope that they'll put out some content that will bring me back and spend money on all the stuff they've been putting out (hinthint: new race & build templates).
Until then, don't sign of Anet yet lol. I'm sure they can keep the ball rolling like they did with the mounts.
-
Regarding projectile finishers, how about a unique kind of piercing mechanic that both enhances the attack and gives it an effect for each kind of field. For instance:
Projectile Finishers = All projectiles bypass other targets, striking the intended target only (unless the projectile's trajectory allows piercing multiple targets) and cause a unique based on the combo field.
Demonstration: You're a warrior that uses Dual Shot through an ice field. If you target the furthest enemy, your dual shots will bypass any non-obstruction targets and hit the individual you have targeted if it's a combo and all targets that projectile passes + the actual target are chilled.
-
> @"Khisanth.2948" said:
> > @"Dreamy Lu.3865" said:
> > DPS meters are a subject repeating again and again. As long as no acceptable solution is available, it will remain the same. I do not want to repeat same than I did in all other threads about the point already. I just tell short version of my thinking: I am one who first hated it and now love to use them, if they are used correctly. I find that:
> > - DPS meters are good when working together as a team to ensure optimized DPS out (agreed by all), for example in raid (not limited to).
> > - They are very helpful for self when learning a DPS class, to see when best to cast skills and check if we perform as should be.
> >
> > Unfortunately, aside of this - like any other tools - there are those who misuse them. Personally, if I agree that as are now, DPS meters are not perfect, I don't believe that that they are the root cause of the problem. Think about it: Generally, in or out of games, whatever tool you take, no matter how good it is, there will always be someone who will achieve to misuse it for unwanted purposes.
> >
>
> Recently several people were murdered with a hammer. :/
>
> Why does society still allow such horrible tools to continue to exist?
One could point to a similar example: Why don't we have flying cars?
Because people can't be trusted with them even though we have the technology.
-
> @"yann.1946" said:
> > @"Zaklex.6308" said:
> > > @"Shivvies.3921" said:
> > > I honestly believe all games should have incorporated combat replay, dps meter and boon / condi uptime information.
> > >
> > > I never kicked someone for underperforming. I would kick someone who thinks they are entitled to THEIR OWN THING when it is a group activity without thinking twice about it.
> > >
> > > Cheers...
> >
> > I think GAMES should include none of those things, if you want it to be like work, then get a job...if you want to PLAY a GAME, then play the game, but don't worry about all the incidental stuff(imo, the information you get from a DPS meter is incidental). A game is something you do to relax, forget about the rat race and just have fun...I really don't care if people think doing speed clears is fun, or any other kind of content that you have to do max DPS to be taken into a group, it actually isn't from a psychological perspective.
>
> Do you like chess? Or in general a strategy game. A major part of that entire genre is minmaxing.
>
> Serious question are you trying to troll or just have a weird opinion?
I'd argue the majority of players of chess don't minmax but rather evolve and learn. To minmax in chess is to pull up a chess AI and wade through the many possible moves and try to predict what your opponent will choose...I don't think it's fair to play chess like that. You should rely on your own experience and learned strategies and observations, not on an AI to tell you your moves for you.
...unless you're talking about competitive chess tournaments, which I have zero experience with so have no idea what minmaxing involves there. I'd still argue that most games of chess that occur are not professional level but rather tutorial and to build experience...or for fun.
> @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:
> > @"Ol Nik.2518" said:
> > I think this is exactly it. You do not want to be told how to play your game. But it goes the other way, too. People should not be telling others that meta builds and super-optimised rotations are the only way to play. Unfortunately, people use DPS metering data to talk you down if you are not following meta.
> >
> Except people are not "telling" others that meta builds are superior, math does. If the same player does 18K DPS on a particular fight and 14K DPS on the same fight but running a different build, what logical or rational reason would there be to run the second build, *provided your primary motivation is to kill the boss quickly.*
Oh! That earns credence to my previous observations. I'd take that example one step further and say that, if a player sees their 18k DPS build can do 2k extra damage if they alter certain aspects of their build thanks to the DPS meter, they likely will change their build. However, player preference playing a role, if those aspects that need to be changed also offer a level of entertainment (i.e. it's their favorite part of their character), what outcomes could occur?
One might be that player and a subset of those that support her could appeal to the devs to improve those aspects they enjoy to make them remain competitive. That could have other repercussions though.
Another is the player might just begrudgingly alter their build and complain how there aren't enough build variety or build flexibility.
Yet another is the player just dismisses the improvements and accepts the lower performance so they can keep enjoying the aspects of their character. Might have a snowball effect as performance is emphasized more and more throughout the community who are constantly sharpening their performance to the bleeding edge. I think this is likely what people in this thread complain about. Those mediocre builds are being highlighted ever more as power creep and expectations continue to narrow because many more players resort to the previous option and just go rank and file with the minmax builds. Are those rank and file groups also taking their begrudging attitude out on those not willing to conform? Probably not, but that doesn't change what the dynamic might do.
Again, these aren't arguments against the DPS meter, just observations. I'm sure there are other aspects of the situation I'm overlooking which is why I'm still reading the thread.
> @"yann.1946" said:
> Now, that was on one particular fight - what about the next one? Perhaps on that one the 1st build does more damage?
[EDIT] Oh, another aspect I think could be highlighted. I believe people have, in the past, taken issue with the lack of variety of encounter being the symptom of lack of build variety. I'd push it one more step further and highlight how limited the build outputs are, build output relating to what a build actually does. Healing used to not be a thing but that has changed some but is it enough? There's also DPS which breaks down into conditions and direct damage. Then there's boon generation. The only build leg left is CC which is more a vestigial anemic type of build output only facilitated by breakbars. That's about it. And as performance is being narrowed, those legs of build output are being specialized. Like, the field of pet-oriented DPS is going out of style because it's not "active" enough. Buffing roles are not only passive but rely on giving as many types of boons, condensing many roles into 1-2. Condis is just a button-mash of pile on all your condis...there's no distinction of what they actually do. CC is held back because of PvP. etc etc.
In other MMOs, these various legs are exaggerated to the extreme. In GW2, they are downplayed to the extreme. This is reflected in the encounters which rely more on timing, dodging and reading the enemy, none of which have anything to do with build.
-
> @"Hoover.6394" said:
> > @"Weindrasi.3805" said:
> > > @"Hoover.6394" said:
> > > > @"nanomidgy.9180" said:
> > > > asura with charr fur and tail :)
> > >
> > > Ausua mother give birth to a Charr baby would be deadly....
> >
> > If she survived the mating process....
>
> lol, that's my point, no one seems getting it
Then go the other way around.
Discussion Thread: ArenaNet News of 21 February 2019 [Merged]
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Posted
> @"Neural.1824" said:
> > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:
> > On the topic of mobile vs PC:
> >
> > The shift to mobile is one of those blindsides that as a community we could have seen coming as the technology has been developed over the years... Don't misunderstand, I don't enjoy the idea, but as many have mentioned, mobile gaming is simply easier for more people to get into. Think of the hardware, even a mediocre smartphone today can run the vast majority of games available to the mobile platform. Some can be as cheap as $150 give or take. Compare that to a monitor, a desktop, headset if playing multiplayer, perhaps a sound system if no one else is on... you get the picture. The bar to entry is so much higher for PC games.
> >
> > Speaking for myself, I hold the entire idea of mobile gaming under extreme contempt. If people thought console/PC in-game transactions were bad, so many of the mobile apps and games inundate the consumer with so many little bits and bobs that can fill even a moderately strong-willed consumer with the temptation to make a purchase. That leads to a purchase, and so on. The presence of Loot boxes in the larger gaming industry completely aside, and using GW2 as a base, there's nothing in the store I felt I absolutely needed to have to progress further.
> >
> > These are only a few of the problems I have with mobile being as big as it is. Not to mention, the very last and most important one to us and even the folks at Blizzard, Bethesda and so on: it makes the community that upheld the original medium feel like they're being left behind. **DISCLAIMER**: that last line is not what's 100% happening here of course, but it may have something to do with the development heck for some of the other Anet projects. I don't know, we might never know what those were. I'm just speaking from the observations with the Diablo mobile fiasco and the super lukewarm reception to the Elder Scrolls: Blades mobile game.
>
> Mobile gaming and MMORPG's are not a natural fit.
>
> When a new Marvel movie comes out, does everyone rush to watch it on a 4" screen? No. They head to a theater where the screen is larger than any wall in their house. Field of vision is key to the immersion factor. I get it, mobile games are popular, but MMORPG's are about immersion, and that simply isn't going to happen on a phone. Games like Candy Crush, etc. do well because that is a format that works really well for mobile.
> Game companies see mobile as this fountain of money that they can dive into, and perhaps it is, but they are going to have to stop with this fantasy that people who want immersion are just going to run over a cliff like lemmings to buy their new product.
> If you want to see what MMORPG and similar genre gamers feel about mobile, just search for Bizzard Diablo Mobile Announcement on youtube.
>
>
Rather a false equivalency.
A 4" screen doesn't preclude the option to watch it on a large screen or distributing it on other types of devices but an mmo limited by bloated operating system requirements does limit you. On the other hand, you can indeed, play a mobile game on your large screen devices such as a desktop or laptop.