FrizzFreston.5290

> @"Squirrel.6318" said:

> i played gw1 for story and lore....... and i thought i could do the same thing in gw2. but it fails in that aspect. like idk... the 3 campaigns, factions, nightfall, and prophecies, are waaaaaaaaaaay better than every storyline plot so far in gw2. i just log in i guess when the story's are free like now lol well there's quite a waitfor the living story episodes.

>

> i'm not sure why arenanet doesn't try something different. the metas and events all feel the same now. i mean well it's been the same since the beginning. the metal band one was pretty good though.

>

> idk. there's not much they can do to make it interesting anymore. they waited too long to bring out cantha. when cantha is released nobody is going to want to go back to tyria because tyria isn't interesting anymore... it's the same environments. it actually looks worse than gw1 lol. i remember maguuma jungle in gw1 was awesome.

It's the different style. First, you're not playing in a personalized instant where just you and your party are doing each quest. Second, in GW2 you are basically trained to ignore going and talking to NPCs and just joining in to any event on the minimap. They wanted the actions NPCs did and the events going on be the story and presenting the lore. This is partially why NOW alot of the actual lore is in book objects and achievements or even outside of the game rather than in any dialogue.

Also, by keeping the UI small and envisioned as unimportant, it makes players focus on just that what is available, the minimap that shows you where to go next. Which got enhanced even further by the content guide which just guides you to the next piece of content that is active, or not done yet, not caring whether the player wants to go there by attraction through subtler tells, which were envisioned earlier to be the guiding line players should follow.

Since this was the basis of GW2, I personally believe they went on a hit and miss, sometimes (especially with PoF at times) forgetting to add the subtleties (probably because of budget?) and had alot of simple events that sometimes seemed much more copypasta than the original GW2 intend is.

GW1 presents the story much more traditional and clear cut, where it becomes more deeper much easier, whereas in GW2 creating a believable world, with believable cultures and believeable lore is much harder when it's not straightout spelled it out for the player.

In the end I would say why ArenaNet isn't trying something different is because the system isn't made to handle it and making every event make sense and into a memorable story is alot more costly than altering the quest text and having basically the objectives pretty much the same.

If Anet can do something entirely different would be to throw the system they have overboard, or to go crazy with it (something crazy like Dynamic events would turn into Dynamic Maps, like in HoT but then over the span of a month going through the different timelines or something crazy like that), But I feel like either of those is really costly, and I haven't seen that innovative courage lately, which probably is for the best if they want to deliver actual content to us, rather than inventing a new wheel.

it's personal, on many levels. :P

> @"MithranArkanere.8957" said:

> * Changing PvE guild missions so they use existing events instead having events done specifically for them. This way Guilds will be able to have way more varied missions without having to make any more missions specifically for them:

I would give guild more power to start events(chains) in general. While probably not all of them are suited, player/guild generated events sound pretty cool to me. Of course I haven't seen all too many uses of the world event starters so maybe the popularity is limited, but since that's a daily thing there probably is very little need for it, vs the cost for it. I dunno.

I think the guild missions would or could be more like broad stories that tie a guild to a certain area with a certain (broadly covering content) task, like for example, helping the Kodan, or supporting the Lionguard, or fighting against the inquest. Which probably would need additions to content, additional achievements, maybe even additional events, but could make guilds alot more compelling, goal oriented and maybe coming with an (temporary) identity or goal for themselves.

Basically instead of Guild Missions being fairly meaningless small chores or tasks, it could be a Guild's Mission to help with a bigger objective with more permanence or roleplaying factor.

EDIT: I suppose it could tie in with the monthly achievements for guilds I guess, but I personally don't like the need to come back every month to "farm guild montlies or whatever, time constraints seem unnecessarily limiting usually.

Why would they have waypoint unlock packs in the gemstore to then shoot their income on that and make them accountwide?

Why would I play any other characters if I don't even have to map on them anymore? What's the point?

I still believe alot of content should be more character bound (or replayable) to increase replayability. (like repeatable achievements or masteries)

> @"Aridon.8362" said:

> > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said:

> > maybe this helps

> >

> > https://www.datanami.com/2019/08/29/data-analytics-streamlines-gaming-industry-heres-how/

> >

> > "Enhancing Game Design

> > Data analytics also helps gaming companies boost game design. Building interactive and complex scenarios for games requires a large stock of creativity, but it also needs a proper understanding of what works well for the audience. Here’s where data analytics can lend a helping hand.

> >

> > **For instance, analytics helps companies detect problematic gameplay moments for users. Indeed, data can show that some levels might be too dull, some might be too challenging,** and some might simply contain bugs that don’t let users move forward.

> >

> > By the way, this is what happened to King Digital Entertainment. This famous game developer once bumped into an unforeseen problem with its most popular game, Candy Crush Saga. Users were massively abandoning level 65, reasons unknown. With 725 levels in total, for Candy Crush Saga such a tendency was quite a trouble. **King turned to data analysts to reveal that most people were abandoning because of a particular gaming element that didn’t let users make it past level 65**. After certain magic in the development department, the element was deleted, and user retention got moving again."

> >

> > not only is analytics necessary, it can be critical to long term success. Guess that answers OP. /thread.

> >

>

> That's Candy Crush, a mobile game in which you swipe on your phone screen with one thumb. We're playing a game with much much more complexity in mechanics, scenery, and overall design than some mobile board game on a timer.

>

> Also the approach taken by Candy Crush does not answer raiding in gw2 **because people who are arguing that raiding is too hard have never actually tried raiding**. Whereas in candy crush people actually **did encounter** level 65. Hence why they nerfed level 65 in candy crush but they haven't nerfed raids in gw2.

>

That Candy crush game metrics don't clarify GW2 problems should be pretty obvious. That doesn't mean that analytics aren't an important tool in game design.

I doubt there's any MMO developers out there not using analytics to alter the direction of their games.

And most of the analytics, we won't hear about, as these complex analytical models are usually company secrets.

> @"Speak.1065" said:

The grind just stalls to a resounding "Why?".

If you play GW2 long enough, then this question repeats itself in other games just the same. Why grind, when you can play. Ofcourse, a downside is that you feel lost and directionless when you're not guided to the next thing. This is something this game can definitely improve on.

Another downside is ofcourse, the content isnt crutched by this grind anymore, making it painfully obvious when it is lacking. In other games you can get hyped up for the next big thing, to the point it doesn't need to be as good. Not bad either ofcourse, but just not as good. I have found myself grinding meaningless tasks more often than not, realising much later than I would in GW2 I'm just going through this cycle rather than playing a game. Maybe just my experience.

But yes, in other games they artificially made grinding important by requiring you to do it, in this game it's entirely and ultimately optional.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Dante.1763" said:

> > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > On a more serious tone. Since you use analytics, care to answer the question asked in the previous page, which exactly type of analytics/data can be used to tell if one piece of content is more enjoyable than another. I never got an answer to that but since you know about them you might have an answer. All I got was "quick achievement completion"

> >

> > Tbh the only way i could see that kind of data being gathered is through surveys(which they do send out sometimes.)

> >

> > Me having(for example) a few PVP and Raid achievements doesnt mean i enjoy those modes. Me having almost all the achievements in the story doesnt mean anything either. So if they are just using that data....oof...but i doubt thats all they use.

>

> I know, and I said so multiple times already. But there are so many gurus on these forums that claim to know so much about analytics that disagree with that. And when asked to provide which type of data can do the same job as a survey/poll or reading social media/forums, they simply vanish.

I think what is happening here, is mostly miscommunication, rather than disagreement. If you're reading carefully enough, no one is actually saying enjoyment is measured by analytical data, rather that analytical data backs up whether people are enjoying themselves, or hint at enjoyment. (Edit: Although reading back, I did phrase it terribly at one point, saying analytical data does show enjoyment but not 100%, by which I didn't mean show as in prove , but more show as in hint at or shine a light on.)

> > I wouldnt be surprised if they can track which maps have the most players, what maps are played the most, what activities get done on those maps the most etc.

>

> Of course they do, back in the beta weekend event they posted "Heat maps" that showed where most players were during the beta. Bright colors meant lots of players were at one place, no colors at all meant there were no players in that area. Popularity is very easy to track with proper data, and they do have that kind of data and have shown that they do. It's when it comes to enjoyment and quality that no such data can measure it properly, other than actual community interaction.

In fact, enjoyment isn't perfectly measured by social media surveys and the like either. People are incredibly biased and easily influenced. One time they have one favourite, and the other time another. Often enough the newest thing (or one of those newer things). And getting behind the meaning and reading what the community is really saying is a whole job in and of itself. The same way quality and enjoyment also don't always go hand in hand either. A game can be of the highest quality but simply not be enjoying to a person at all.

(to talk a bit about WoW, maybe WoW was never that good to begin with, and game metrics have little to do with it. :p)

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Hypothetically speaking, there will be more players that completed it fast than that completed it slow.

>

> Which brings the other question, what is fast and what is slow? A player rushing through the episode, ignoring all dialogue will count as someone that "enjoyed" it, while a player that didn't go to play the story the moment it was available because he was role playing in LA will appear as "not enjoying it". I guess I didn't like Long Live the Lich story at all, because to this day I haven't finished the Dexterous Dodger achievement, or is it only very specific achievements that "count" for enjoyment?

>

Thats all the right questions you should be asking while analyzing the data.

> > But the point is that data can be taken as a meassure of overall enjoyment. But its more complex than high number x means high enjoyment. And maybe thats why you dont seem to get it and we fail to provide meaningful examples.

>

> Maybe. I still believe the only way to get some "enjoyment analytics" is by either polling the community directly, forum posts or responses on social media and it's not something that can be done by statistics gathered in-game. Those can show popularity, but popularity and enjoyment can be very very different.

I believe its both. Polls forum social media are also just an abstract of the more passionate people taking time to share their experience and don't account for the majority that doesn't. If looking at only either or the other, you ignore valuable information. Its necessary to social data s with ingame statistics to see if they match up with eachother.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Psientist.6437" said:

> > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > @"Psientist.6437"

> > > > That being said, there is likely a difference between how you behave in an episode you like vs one you don't.

> > >

> > > Right so behavior can be quantified. Care to give an example of a metric that shows that?

> > >

> > > > For the average player, how quickly episode achievements are completed will strongly predict how much the player enjoyed or was stimulated by the story. Analytics work, that is why the analyzers philosophy is so important to the analyzed.

> > >

> > > I'm not sure what quick completion of achievements has to do with enjoyment of a story.

> >

> > Facebook. I am not going to argue the position that analytics can achieve perfect resolution of mindfulness. I am not going to argue with someone who claims there aren't countless examples of successful analysis of behavior.

> >

> > If the average player is engaged or stimulated with the story they are more likely to sit down and play. Thereby completing achievements faster. I hope you are not taking positions just for the sake of arguing.

> >

> >

>

> So finishing achievements faster means you like content more. I suppose the not finishing them quickly means you didn't like it? That's a ridiculous metric and i think you know it. Not to mention not all achievements are actually quick to complete in the first place. I wonder if all those that posted above claiming they play for fun if they agree that finishing achievements quickly means they enjoyed it

Dude, everything in statistical data is a bellcurve, I'm sure you know. Pointing out the edge cases where something isnt true doesnt disprove it.

Hypothetically speaking, there will be more players that completed it fast than that completed it slow.

Ofcourse there is always those players that do complete it slow, but, again hypothetically speaking, they would be like 5-10% or something.

Ofcourse I'm just making those numbers up, ideally it would be compared with other datasets, the numbers could be somewhere else entirely and depend on so many variables which can also be filtered and sorted.

But the point is that data can be taken as a meassure of overall enjoyment. But its more complex than high number x means high enjoyment. And maybe thats why you dont seem to get it and we fail to provide meaningful examples.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > But it doesnt have little to do with the argument at hand at all. It just means that while certain data can show player enjoyment its not a 100% picture.

>

> I'm still confused as to how some form of data/statistic can show player enjoyment, without actually asking the player, but whatever, maybe I'm missing something.

In limited amounts, by observing what players are doing and under which conditions, how popular something is, taking into account what the rewards are, how old the content is, how long people take breaks.

Ofcourse, it will be more based on statistical guesses without actually knowing that every single player is enjoying themselves, but broad lines are definitely visible through data alone.

Ofcourse, paying attention to forums reddit facebook etc is also hugely important.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Enjoyment isnt absolute. Do you eat the same food every day because its your favourite? Do you rewatch your favourite movie over and over, or do you only read one book because not reading it would make you abandon it? Such nonsense.

>

> Not really sure why people keep posting the obvious but let's try one more time. That has very little to do with the argument at hand, that analytics/data show player enjoyment.

>

> > A map in this game can be your favourite or the one you find the most fun, even if you dont ölay it continuously.

>

> And that map won't appear as your favorite in any kind of data/analytics if you do that. It's impossible for data/statistics to put weight on the time spend on anything.

>

> edit: in one phrase, data/analytics show quantity, not quality

But it doesnt have little to do with the argument at hand at all. It just means that while certain data can show player enjoyment its not a 100% picture.

In GW2, not everything is repeatable, and some things are more rewarding when repeated and thus more alive. This does not in any way mean that "dead content" is less favourable necessarily, but instead just lacks replayability.

Like living story for example. I bet lots of people mostly play through it once or twice. Andonce played through, how many do return to it? I doubt that many. Yet Arenanet has been expanding on it and spend loads of resources on something that essentially always will be dead content at some point.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > > @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> > > > Case in point: I haven't been to either Draconic Mons nor Tangled Depth in ages, but those two still are my absolutely favorite and most enjoyable maps in this game.

> > >

> > > Well, something is keeping you from going to your most enjoyable maps then, it's a matter of priorities.

> > That might well be the key difference in our way of thinking: I don't **have** any priorities when playing this game other then wasting my time in an enjoyable way. It's entertainment time. I know there are pieces of content in this game I find much more entertaining and enjoyable than others, but I don't make it a priority to choose the content I play at any given time for any particular reason, including weighting the enjoyment I get out of each map at any given point of time.

>

> But you do have priorities if you choose to spend your entertainment time on one part of the game and not another one.

>

> To go back to what you said initially and I responded to:

> > The numbers are able to show what people enjoy, as well as what people see rewarding.

>

> This is about comparison, that's what analytics allow. Compare content that is being played with content that is not played. If you choose to not play what you actually enjoy that's gonna hurt what you actually enjoy in the end. When it comes time to cut loses and reduce/remove some form of content what do you think should be prioritized to remove? Content that players "enjoy" but **not** play, or content that players actually play? Which kind of number/analytic shows that you enjoy Tangled Depths more than let's say Bloodstone Fen if you play more on Bloodstone Fen than Tangled Depths? Regardless if you say you "like Tangled Depths" more?

Enjoyment isnt absolute. Do you eat the same food every day because its your favourite? Do you rewatch your favourite movie over and over, or do you only read one book because not reading it would make you abandon it? Such nonsense.

A map in this game can be your favourite or the one you find the most fun, even if you dont ölay it continuously.

> @"Taril.8619" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Doesn't this thread miss the whole point of: Difficulty is subjective, fun is subjective, where analytics show what people enjoy

>

> That's a misnomer.

>

> Analytics will not show what people enjoy.

>

> It will only show what people deem suitably rewarding.

>

> This doesn't only include things that people enjoy, but also happens to include things that people don't enjoy but which gives a reward that outweighs the lack of enjoyment.

>

> A good example is Daily Quest grinds in WoW. Lots of people did Daily Quests for Reputations in WoW because Rep vendors gave considerably good rewards (It used to be things like enchants for shoulder armour and the like, with this being the only source for such an enhancement). But it did not mean that the same people enjoyed doing this. In fact, the majority of people **HATED** it. Eventually Bli$$ard listened and removed such items from Rep vendors so people weren't enticed into grinding out Daily Quests to get them (But at the same time, they implemented other reasons to force people to do them because Bli$$ard is dumb and makes dumb decisions...)

>

> It however, highlights something that developers need to keep in mind, that high activity =/= high enjoyment. You need to listen to feedback to determine enjoyment, otherwise the high activity can be simply be due to the rewards being high enough to draw people in despite the lack of enjoyment.

Yes, sorry, good point.

Doesn't this thread miss the whole point of: Difficulty is subjective, fun is subjective, where analytics show what people enjoy, but don't show what they might enjoy.

No game is made solely based on analytical data, but to throw away one tool of feedback because it might make ArenaNet favor to create content you personally believe is not entertaining or enjoyable is just silly. It's basically saying please ignore the world for me, because what I find fun is clearly superior to what others might find fun.

That some seem to believe that development on GW2 is not based on some analytical data is cute though.

I don't know any person that doesn't want these Arena Additions. But it's a guild thing, and I don't know if the new? anet crew has rethought their plan of leaving guild content die out rather than improve and expand on it. I seriously hope they bring more life into the whole guild hall idea or just guild idea in general.

The only thing they really did add is decorations.

> @"Dante.1763" said:

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

>

> > All of us put in the effort to cap the daily/monthly AP. I don’t see why you think that you’re different and shouldn’t have to.

>

> My original comment still stands. There is not enough AP(Non daily, Permanent only) currently obtainable in game to reach 30k AP for the very first chest piece unlocked through achievement rewards, which is why i think anet should reorganize the rewards. One full set should be obtainable by 18k AP, the second by 36k, leaving the backpacks after that. It is a reasonable suggestion, wont ever happen though, ill still make it.

But this only is applicable to you personally. Youre basically asking ArenaNet to reorganize rewards based on your personal playstyle and personal preference specifically.

It is achievement rewards so reorganizing would mean devaluing rewards for those who did achieve what they did. And while I would agree 2-3 years of dailies is a terribly boring thing to look forward to, I dont see the reason that a full armot set from just permanent achievements should be available.

Back in the day there were only a few pieces available... wasnt a problem at all it was unachievable.

One thing I can see as a solution is making daily achievement points vary over time in order to make it more interesting or something. Like if you did 7 dailies in a row you get x extra daily AP, or making daily AP reward more in the beginning (for example 20 ) and slow it out towards the end (only 1 or 2 as youre nearing the cap), but still taking the same amount of time to max out.

Something like that, that is fair to those who put in the effort, but also motivating those just starting out.

> @"Daddicus.6128" said:

> No. There are not enough AP in the various parts of the game. That's completely the opposite. See it through your own eyes if you want, but if it's impossible to achieve a full radiant set playing THE dominant part of the game in 8 years, there's something wrong with the game.

"THE dominant part of the game" is subjective, theres all kinds of players.

Meaning, by what youre saying, theres always something wrong with the game.

> @"Daddicus.6128" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Daddicus.6128" said:

> > > > @"Taygus.4571" said:

> > > > I came back to gw2 for SAB. And spent almost all my gold on the new SAB raptor skin. *shrugs*. They dont design the game just for what interests you.

> > >

> > > I'm not asking for a change. I'm asking -- PLAYERS -- what the point is. It doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't use any of the skills I've learned in the main game (except maybe dodging). I just don't get it.

> >

> > There are other parts in the game which use other different skills, why is SAB confusing you? What do you do when the game throws new or alternative skills at you?

> >

> > Because in SAB walking around is still the same and hitting stuff is still the same. Everything else is extra.

>

> But there doesn't seem to be any point to hitting things. No XP-equivalent, no loot, not even death wails.

Well the ambient creatures are just there to annoy you to varying degrees (from barely noticeable to plain annoying to you need to kill them to proceed) while you're on your way to save the princess and anyone else being captured by Lord Vanquish and his henchmen. Ofcourse, SAB only has two worlds so far, and the story doesn't go as far actually saving the princess, but you do save some villagers. :P

I dont understand why they didnt simply update the achievement like the hundreds before.

What I want from a third expansion is twofold:

I want that they build on existing structures, expand them (elites, skills, story, raids fractals strikes pvp maps wvw additions.. etc) and blow me away with something we havent seen before in previous parts of the game that could potentially change the game across previous releases, or have an addition that just really fits in so well that you cant imagine what the game was without it (things in GW2: like mounts, gliding, masteries, in GW1: Alliance battles, hardmode, dungeons, EotN)

Personally prefering: Guild restructuring, making guild halls, missions, pvp teams and such more impactful or relevant or more central to the game.

Would be surprised if: they reworked sPvP or WvW or parts so that sPvP or WvW become more popular again. (Standing updates, if or when those come could maybe do it, but I have my doubts)

Would be not even expecting: underwater content . Its something I really want, but I havent seen any game system ever that did it completely right, so thats probably stays a dream.

We already have Ogres, Jotun and Ettins. Whatever Orcs possibly have can be found in those races.

I personally dont mind a completely new race, but would question what could orcs have that would make them interesting as a race.

I suppose it does add alot of furniture coins to your hall if you really need them. Every bauble bubble is like 10 of them, if you have master of decor anyway.

While I probably wouldn't mind if they did add a (maybe more expensive (idk for 100 baubles? I don't particularly care)) way for buying furniture coins, I did like that I earned my "right" to buy furniture coins with baubles as an extra for finishing the achievement.

Another option is to ask people perhaps selling them. (through letting them donate them)

> @"Daddicus.6128" said:

> > @"Taygus.4571" said:

> > I came back to gw2 for SAB. And spent almost all my gold on the new SAB raptor skin. *shrugs*. They dont design the game just for what interests you.

>

> I'm not asking for a change. I'm asking -- PLAYERS -- what the point is. It doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't use any of the skills I've learned in the main game (except maybe dodging). I just don't get it.

There are other parts in the game which use other different skills, why is SAB confusing you? What do you do when the game throws new or alternative skills at you?

Because in SAB walking around is still the same and hitting stuff is still the same. Everything else is extra.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Mortifera.6138" said:

> > > Sorry but yours is a vague and uneducated question. What is the point of anything?

> >

> > Arent all questions uneducated?

> Rhetoric questions are a thing, you know?

>

Yeah, I wanted say something totally different, but failed. ?

> @"Mortifera.6138" said:

> Sorry but yours is a vague and uneducated question. What is the point of anything?

Arent all questions uneducated?