FrizzFreston.5290
-
Posts
1,337 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by FrizzFreston.5290
-
-
> @"sigur.9453" said:
> > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said:
> > > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:
> > > > @"MoriMoriMori.5349" said:
> > > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said:
> > > > > 1) source that it was mobile gaming
> > > >
> > > > Enough considerations for that be most likely the case were provided by somebody else above in this thread.
> > > >
> > > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said:
> > > > > 2) Do you have a source for what percent of profit was put into ‘mobile gaming’
> > > > > 3) close to being put into maintenance mode is your opinion, unless you can back it up with hard facts
> > > >
> > > > According to former employees of Anet, GW2 team was reduced to bare minimum needed to maintain it afloat, and release some episodes of LW from time to time, at some point. You can trust it, or trust Anet's official statements - your choice. But I know absolutely for sure that no commercial company publishing a MMO game would acknowledge anything that would hinder their ability to milk their customers - and that's exactly the case. So any official statement has no value due to this fact, they will tell you what they have to, to keep money flowing. Again, statement of former employee seems like a better source of information here.
> > > >
> > > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said:
> > > > > 4) countless people leaving and why is your opinion also, unless of course you want to back it up with hard facts.
> > > >
> > > > Yea, right - because most people just like to play the same static content for years, and not getting bored of it. That statement of course needs to be proved so I could get your official approval of my posts on this forum. That's exactly how this forum works, what was I even thinking? :D
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Considering _that_ former employee's history with ArenaNet, I would be careful how much weight I'd place in that former employee's statements. And, I think there's a bit of hyperbole, as well.
> >
> > Oh, it’s _that_ former employee? Yeah, I would definitely take any statements from that former employee about gw2 with a very large grain of salt.
> >
>
> there was another info from another former employee which pretty much confirmes what _that_ former employee told. check reddit for this, i do not want to get banned again.
To me both those pieces of information read to me like people who want more money and resources put into their own projects in the company than other company projects.
Which is understandable, but unlikely to be practical.
-
I would say that, thanks to scaling, zerging, set schedules etc, playing together in the open world is already happening, except depersonalised and automatic.
There is so little friction between layers thanks to the design, that players dont get in contact with eachother.
-
> @"Daniel.5428" said:
> > @"Biff.5312" said:
> > So you paid what you considered the game to be worth, and enjoyed the game. You have no cause for complaint.
>
> Is not a complaint. I don't want my money back. I just want them to take a stand and assure us that they plan to develop the game from now on. Like someone said above, a roadmap for 1-2 years would be enough.
They already did say they will continue development for season 5. Which, even if it would start tomorrow, would be your roadmap for the next year or so. And they did name a few other projects that are in development.
They will never release more confidential information than that.
If you want more, then youre out of luck, or patience.
-
> @"Daniel.5428" said:
> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:
> > Letting a game die of old age is effectively stop making content for it.
>
> I disagree. Look at Ragnarok online, LOTRO etc. At least 10 years behind them and still played by a substantial number of persons. There is a different about the game is too old for the modern tech, we have to move on and the game will die cuz we decided is better for us to develop mobile crates simulators.
>
Those examples is where they didnt stop stop making content for it. AND they made mobile games. And they didnt die out. Youre not making a good point.
All these 'side investment' worries are entirely baseless.
-
> @"Daniel.5428" said:
> > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said:
> > I was robbed
> >
> > /sob
>
> Well, if they come tommorow and tell you they will stop releasing content and they will put GW2 in a maintenance state or something like "Guys, GW3 is here...and it's on mobile!" then you were robbed. It's normal for a game to die at one point. But let it die because of old age, not because of greedy management.
>
>
like GW1?
Letting a game die of old age is effectively stop making content for it.
-
Afaik, i started with a gameboy, with the size of maybe 100x100 or whatever pixels and I could play for hours. Probably longer than gw2.
But i guess phones are too low tech now for all you modern gaming kids.
Saying phones arent capable of this and that clearly shows how much you dont understand about gaming.
That there are people out there to exploit it, doesnt say anything about the platform at all. That is even the case for PC games.
-
> @"Sorem.9157" said:
> ... look at the profession as a whole.
>
> I'm sure you're smart enough to do that.
True, we can't just look at a few nerfs and judge the class just on that, there's more than just nerfs. There's some buffs to signets, staff and torch too. Those are core guard too. Overall core guard got a buff, just not in the area where people wanted them.
-
I honestly wouldnt care if the mount would have had some harder wvw requirements.
Its a WvW mount, thus to unlock its full potential, I expect to need to at least play some WvW.
-
> @"battledrone.8315" said:
> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:
> > > @"judgebeo.3976" said:
> > > > @"Opopanax.1803" said:
> > > > You cut josh foreman and gaile gray. I get they were paid more, but they were also important experienced staff.
> > > >
> > > > I can no longer support ncsoft in good faith when you treat employee pillars like this.
> > >
> > > im pretty sure NCSOFT didnt choose who is getting fired from anet.
> > > Anyway, dont forget the devs come from ANET, not NCSOFT, if anet is not managing their revenue correctly, or GW2 is not getting properly developed and, cause that, got a reduction of playerbase, NCSOFT is not responsible of that... is ANET...
> > >
> > > none of us knows what really is happening there, so, blaming NCSOFT without any knowledge? whats next? a witch hunt? we all went/go to school and got brain enough to dont go mad and blaming someone without knowing anything.
> >
> > Blame or not, NCsoft is the one "restructuring" with people losing jobs as a result. No grace period, within one week, the company had to lay off people.
> >
> > At best NCsoft is mismanaging just as badly as ArenaNet is using their funding. It is not a good sign at all if NCsoft decided to take such drastic, barely planned actions. How can anyone invest securely in NCsoft if they make drastic decisions and changes in a week to week basis.
> >
> > "Oh their monthly number is down this month, lets just give them less food."
> >
> > So while ArenaNet might have been mismanaging, it doesnt seem at all like NCsoft has a structural plan of action, but rather take drastic actions in the hope of instant results, rather than cultivating a longterm stable profitable company.
>
> their plan was to reduce the payroll...they fired some people, and look and behold...they got the instant results, they wanted
> looks pretty simple to me
> and FYI, longterm, stable companies dont lie and steal from their customers
>
It is as simple as using a wreckingball to level the half-built new wing attached to your house. Especially when, per your opinion, both structures are in a bad shape.
Instant results indeed.
-
> @"judgebeo.3976" said:
> > @"Opopanax.1803" said:
> > You cut josh foreman and gaile gray. I get they were paid more, but they were also important experienced staff.
> >
> > I can no longer support ncsoft in good faith when you treat employee pillars like this.
>
> im pretty sure NCSOFT didnt choose who is getting fired from anet.
> Anyway, dont forget the devs come from ANET, not NCSOFT, if anet is not managing their revenue correctly, or GW2 is not getting properly developed and, cause that, got a reduction of playerbase, NCSOFT is not responsible of that... is ANET...
>
> none of us knows what really is happening there, so, blaming NCSOFT without any knowledge? whats next? a witch hunt? we all went/go to school and got brain enough to dont go mad and blaming someone without knowing anything.
Blame or not, NCsoft is the one "restructuring" with people losing jobs as a result. No grace period, within one week, the company had to lay off people.
At best NCsoft is mismanaging just as badly as ArenaNet is using their funding. It is not a good sign at all if NCsoft decided to take such drastic, barely planned actions. How can anyone invest securely in NCsoft if they make drastic decisions and changes in a week to week basis.
"Oh their monthly number is down this month, lets just give them less food."
So while ArenaNet might have been mismanaging, it doesnt seem at all like NCsoft has a structural plan of action, but rather take drastic actions in the hope of instant results, rather than cultivating a longterm stable profitable company.
-
> @"sephiroth.4217" said:
> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:
> > You (OP) clearly havent played Guardian that much. only 3 nerfs, none of them essential
>
> RI change will be massive for PvP...
>
Its one trait. Use another? It may have been a very good one, but its not like you cant play with a weaker version or a different trait.
Then again I never relied on a single trait. But maybe thats just me.
-
You (OP) clearly havent played Guardian that much. only 3 nerfs, none of them essential
-
As ArenaNet always has said "When its ready", my 'faith' in ArenaNet is pretty much based until I have played what they are bringing out.
I mean, I hope they create more awesome content, which I then can hopefully play and enjoy. Even if some of the more known names, at least to me, are leaving/have left, I hope new developers are equally inspired to create and communicate just as well.
If not, well, I will give them my feedback.
-
Some devs volunteered, if not all, which is why its those that have been setting and steering the major direction that are going.
Clearly ArenaNet is restructuring away from that direction.
-
I think alot of ArenaNet Devs volunteered. Considering NCsoft wants to meddle in ArenaNets structure more, those that contributed the most to the current setup and structure, are most likely the first to leave.
Usually the ones that were part of Arenanet for a long time.
Obviously, loads of the core devs have already left.
-
Well, consider that if they had put all that money on GW2 related projects the question would be: "How many longterm GW2 projects will be binned?" instead.
Whether a next expac or a gw3 was in the works, or a mobile game or a whole different game, **does it matter**? In the end all that work was for nothing, and we will never see the result. To claim GW2 would've done better, is equally pointless as they would most likely have to cancel stuff further along the line just as much.
Rather be glad they did invest on something that GW2 can hopefully do without. Not that it's equally wasteful to see that effort gone to waste either way.
-
> @"flog.3485" said:
> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:
> > > @"flog.3485" said:
> > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:
> > > > 4x Event dailies should simply focus on a continent rather than a single map. Core maps arent even made to have events repeat that often.
> > > >
> > > > That or maybe reduce the number to 1 event for the daily.
> > > >
> > > > That, or make all hearts repeatable and include those.
> > > >
> > > > Now, harvesting can easily be in one map only as the goals arent shared or 'stolen' by other players.
> > >
> > > Honestly it would just be better to buy the expansion.
> > > The daily system has never been exclusively tied to living maps nor does it force you to do your dailies, because nothing in the game is tied to do your daily x amount of time over a long period in order to acquire x unique item.
> > > Nothing in the game gives you a free glider even if you don't own HoT so obviously, nothing in the game should give you a free mount in zones that weren't designed with mounts in the first place.
> > > They were generous enough for people without PoF to offer mount rentals in festivals as well as for the roller beetle races, that is enough of a nice preview and incentive imo.
> >
> > I always skip the event daily, and I do have every mount. If the goal is to do every daily then that specific daily is flawed with or without mounts.
> >
> > The suggestion to buy PoF will help to get a mount, and the suggestion for starter players to get a starter mount, will only help so much to attain said goal.
> >
> >
>
> I really don’t understand your argument.
> I never said to do every daily. All your dailies requires you to complete 3 tasks. If one player struggles to do the daily event in one map without mount, why do it ?
> This player can play the 2 very easy solo daily with harvesting tools and vistas and then focus on a easy daily within PvP or WvW.
OP did talk about not being able to certain dailies. So i made my suggestion. You responded to my posts, so I explained.
I never claimed you said do all dailies.
-
See, no one is being laid off, everyone is just getting a long deserved vacation.
:p
-
> @"Mbelch.9028" said:
> > @"torben.1532" said:
> > > @"Falan.1839" said:
> > > I'lll just assume you're trolling, but looking at the average post in this forum it might aswell be genuine.
> >
> > I am dead serious.
>
> That's disappointing. Was hoping this was a troll thread. Long story short, Mounts don't belong in a competitive game mode.
To be fair, there's loads of competitive games that have vehicles/mounts and are just as competitive as any other. Ofcourse, usually within a different game mode all together, with maps entirely designed for it and mounts or vehicles designed for it.
I will never understand the notion that any mount or other mechanics would be "PvE" when there's literally dozens of example games that use pretty much the same mechanics in a competitive setting.
-
> @"flog.3485" said:
> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:
> > 4x Event dailies should simply focus on a continent rather than a single map. Core maps arent even made to have events repeat that often.
> >
> > That or maybe reduce the number to 1 event for the daily.
> >
> > That, or make all hearts repeatable and include those.
> >
> > Now, harvesting can easily be in one map only as the goals arent shared or 'stolen' by other players.
>
> Honestly it would just be better to buy the expansion.
> The daily system has never been exclusively tied to living maps nor does it force you to do your dailies, because nothing in the game is tied to do your daily x amount of time over a long period in order to acquire x unique item.
> Nothing in the game gives you a free glider even if you don't own HoT so obviously, nothing in the game should give you a free mount in zones that weren't designed with mounts in the first place.
> They were generous enough for people without PoF to offer mount rentals in festivals as well as for the roller beetle races, that is enough of a nice preview and incentive imo.
I always skip the event daily, and I do have every mount. If the goal is to do every daily then that specific daily is flawed with or without mounts.
The suggestion to buy PoF will help to get a mount, and the suggestion for starter players to get a starter mount, will only help so much to attain said goal.
-
4x Event dailies should simply focus on a continent rather than a single map. Core maps arent even made to have events repeat that often.
That or maybe reduce the number to 1 event for the daily.
That, or make all hearts repeatable and include those.
Now, harvesting can easily be in one map only as the goals arent shared or 'stolen' by other players.
-
> @"Obtena.7952" said:
> > @"DemonSeed.3528" said:
> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:
> > > > @"InvaGir.9158" said:
> > > > This will not promote WvW if its going to allow this mount to be used in PvE
> > > > Here is why...
> > > > if PvE players avoid pvp content for years why would they stick around now that we have a mount?!
> > > > if they suck at pvp this new mount will not make them play better and they will still die regardless forcing them to respawn at their home checkpoint
> > > > After the first few weeks when people will get their new cat mount they will leave for good...
> > > >
> > > > If that's an attempt to promote WvW i'm sorry but its a terrible one
> > > > We should've given the Alliance update instead allowing us to join other guildies and help each other out and also open some people eyes into a new content.
> > >
> > > Here is the thing ... there are PVE players that avoid WvW only because of some deficiencies they experience in it; I'm one of them. I doubt the idea is that the mount entices PVErs to come into WvW to get rekt'd while obtaining it. I hope the idea is that the mount is likely to address some of the deficiencies that make people avoid WvW so they can get the mount and experience more of what is good about WvW and less of what they don't like in it.
> >
> > They'll get rekt by the balance one way or another, with or without the mount.
>
> Maybe, but no reasonable player would except otherwise. There are PVErs that don't have a problem getting rekt'd; that's not the reason they avoid WvW. Personally, I avoid it because of the action 'downtime' ... periods of time where I'm just waiting or running somewhere; basically doing nothing. I want to be in the action as much as possible, EVEN if I'm getting rekt'd when I do it.
So true. I can spend a long time playing at a front line, where people push and pull. Until you die and have to basically take a 5 minute break walking back.
I would almost suggest that walls and doors are way easier to break and way easier to fortify or repair. I prefer a more volatile battlefield over a long and drawn out battle, which then additionally times you out for longer periods of them. Thats just very grindy with even grindier breaks.
And instead of things getting interesting at a 5v5 attack defense situation, it is only interesting if theres a larger zerg on both sides.
-
That it doesnt (further) affect GW2 is alright, but I wouldve found it interesting to see what else they could develop.
While probably not allowed by big daddy NCsoft, I would probably support a kickstarter by ArenaNet to see what they had in mind, if that even has a reasonable funding goal.
That they have less people working on GW2 for a while now, I kinda suspected already, and was looking forward to whatever they might be working on.
-
> @"derd.6413" said:
> > @"Danikat.8537" said:
> > This only happened yesterday. According to various reports and stuff I read on Twitter from Anet staff Mike O'Brien went into a meeting in the morning where he was told by NCSoft they'll need to lay off staff, he did a brief initial announcement to Anet (email I'm guessing), someone leaked the news and it was all over the internet even before Anet had meetings to explain what's happening.
> >
> > As far as I've seen they don't know exactly what's happening yet. They may not even have decided which departments will be affected - they may have just been told "you need to cut your operating budget to $X", realised that will mean losing staff and now they're trying to figure out who will go.
> >
> > For what it's worth my employer is going through a similar situation. It was announced before Christmas that we'd be losing staff, but it was only at the end of January that we found out the departments affected and then the individual jobs. We still don't know for sure what's going to happen because we're in a consultation period over the new structure so some decisions might be changed but we're not expecting the changes to actually happen until the summer. Now some of that is due to UK labour laws - we have no such thing as 'at will' employment here, you can't just call someone into the office and tell them they don't have a job any more. To make them redundant you need to follow a specific procedure to record that that the job isn't needed any more so they can't take you to court for unfair dismissal (note: not an employment lawyer, may not be the correct term) and many people will have a statutory notice period of 2 months or more.
> >
> > But some of it is also because large scale redundancies are a huge change and it takes time to get a plan in place so everything doesn't fall apart when those people leave. Even if they're doing "fluff" jobs or whatever you want to call them it's still highly unlikely they can just stop everything they're doing with no impact. It may not be immediate or obvious, but in some ways that makes it even more important that someone considers how not doing that job will affect things.
>
> we (kind) do know who gets affected since it's been confirmed that it's due to the cancellation of an unannounced project.
Unannounced project isnt the same as staff, obviously.
Summary of Warclaw Requirements, Abilities, & Other Notes from the Livestream
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Posted
> @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:
> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:
> > I honestly wouldnt care if the mount would have had some harder wvw requirements.
> >
> > Its a WvW mount, thus to unlock its full potential, I expect to need to at least play some WvW.
>
> The problem there is that, unlike gliding, there is a big difference between someone who has a mount and someone who does not.
>
> As noted above, the mount moves 30% faster than running with perma-swiftness (ooc), so while the tail of a zerg could use the mount to catch up to those on foot, a squad comprised mainly of players with mounts will be leaving players without mounts firmly back in the dust, easy prey for roamers. As that screws up group comps, amount of supply available to the raid, etc, it would result in commanders excluding anyone from their squad who didn't have a mount.
>
> So no, making them harder or longer to obtain would only fragment the playerbase more than it currently is, and it would not be positive for either the players or the game mode.
That's actually a good point. I for some reason thought putting in the one point just gave you the mount and then to fully make use of it you need to do the collection stuff. (which is why I said 'to unlock its full potential').
If I'm completely honest, I find that the point system to unlock capabilities in WvW is messy as it is, but that's another topic entirely.