FrizzFreston.5290

This polls question is terrible. Should they ? I dunno, theres alot of things involved. Better let some else with more info make that decision.

Do I want to see it at some point? Definitely.

So I voted yes.

Every book, movie, tv series and game has an ending.

The only way is to stop creating interesting things to experience.

They created a world and have episodes of story. I feel like they could technically keep going forever as long as they keep things interesting for me.

Thanks for everything to Mike O.

Imo. It's the only decision he can make if he isnt allowed to grow beyond GW2 or even simply put creativity in other projects.

It could be the last half year would've been a transitional period. From the lay offs until now. But it doesn't really matter. What matters is what happens moving forward.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Except those systems are paid for. People with cars... pay tax.

> What do you think income from mount skins etc is being used for?

Or this feature. Or income from any form of extra storage space or character slots.

> > Legendaries cost a considerable amount of effort.

> That doesn't pay for the system.

Indirectly it does. Giving players something initially unattainable makes them more likely to spend money to circumvent it, or at least keep them busy and invested in yhe game so they might buy something alongside it. Bored players don't spend money.

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > The fact is this system isnt just meant for players who see the use now, but also those that will use it in the future, that maybe only played one build all this time.

> Currently, it isn't meant for anyone. I wasn't being sarcastic when i said before that it definitely isn't meant for players that would need it most. It's way too lacking for that.

That may be your opinion, but that doesn't change who its for or not.

> > It would be a waste to design just for those that want it. They also design it for those who haven't thought of using it, or those who would use it for other uses. (Like storage)

> It's even more of a waste to design it in a way it's _not_ for those that want it.

Just because you were expecting more doesnt mean its not designed for you. In fact, you wouldnt want more if its not for you.

> > Considering you can share builds, i doubt its really all that hard to store infinite amount of builds locally.

> I doubt that as well. But hey, that would be really hard to monetize, so better release a version with a very limited build storage space. Even if that cripples the system's functionality.

I'm fairly sure its limited because its not locally stored. We'll have to see how it works in practice first.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > > > > Those are definitely not average player amounts. The average player is fine with 1 or two builds per character.

> > > > > Yes, the average player is fine with 1 build per character. They also _won't use the build templates_. Because they _won't_ be using more than one build.

> > > > > Build templates were never meant for average players - they were meant for exactly the kind of players like me. And i can tell you my numbers are very tame compared to those that really do care about their builds.

> > > >

> > > > I'm fairly sure build/equip templates are made with every player in mind. Not just the Astralporings of players.

> > > Yes, i am sure they are made with an average player in mind. You know, that player that uses only one build, and often doesn't even care or know what build it is.

> > > And they definitely weren't made for players that were running multiple builds and cared about those builds, that's for sure.

> > >

> >

> > With that in mind, then the three build templates per character is almost excessive. Since average joe only needs one build.

> Average joe doesn't need this system at all. This system is not being made for him. Among those that _do_ need it the average _will_ be more than 3.

>

> Seriously, It's like saying that since an average joe has no legendaries, there's no reason to have any legendaries in this game. Or saying that since an average inhabitant of the world doesn't have a car, we don't need highways.

>

Except those systems are paid for. People with cars... pay tax. Legendaries cost a considerable amount of effort.

The fact is this system isnt just meant for players who see the use now, but also those that will use it in the future, that maybe only played one build all this time.

It would be a waste to design just for those that want it. They also design it for those who haven't thought of using it, or those who would use it for other uses. (Like storage)

Considering you can share builds, i doubt its really all that hard to store infinite amount of builds locally.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > > Those are definitely not average player amounts. The average player is fine with 1 or two builds per character.

> > > Yes, the average player is fine with 1 build per character. They also _won't use the build templates_. Because they _won't_ be using more than one build.

> > > Build templates were never meant for average players - they were meant for exactly the kind of players like me. And i can tell you my numbers are very tame compared to those that really do care about their builds.

> >

> > I'm fairly sure build/equip templates are made with every player in mind. Not just the Astralporings of players.

> Yes, i am sure they are made with an average player in mind. You know, that player that uses only one build, and often doesn't even care or know what build it is.

> And they definitely weren't made for players that were running multiple builds and cared about those builds, that's for sure.

>

With that in mind, then the three build templates per character is almost excessive. Since average joe only needs one build.

> @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said:

> > @"yoni.7015" said:

> > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said:

> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > > I don’t see what the issue is as we’re getting three free character slots. Well, technically it’s six as they’re giving us three more for free for a limited time. Not sure if those three are character bound or account bound.

> > >

> > > Before this we had free unlimited build templates. After, our templates are paid-for and limited to 6.

> >

> > No, only people who used obscure third party programs had them. No everyone can have them directly from Anet.

> >

> >

>

> Except it wasn’t obscure, it was incredibly popular and almost everyone I meet in game uses it. People like you are a minority. Good that your ignorance is now paying off, but the majority isn’t happy about this.

>

People you meet =! majority of people.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Those are definitely not average player amounts. The average player is fine with 1 or two builds per character.

> Yes, the average player is fine with 1 build per character. They also _won't use the build templates_. Because they _won't_ be using more than one build.

> Build templates were never meant for average players - they were meant for exactly the kind of players like me. And i can tell you my numbers are very tame compared to those that really do care about their builds.

I'm fairly sure build/equip templates are made with every player in mind. Not just the Astralporings of players.

There's space being made across the whole game for the builds and templates of all the players, not just a certain kind of player you think is the intended audience.

So arenanet has to find a balance between whats comfortable for most players, with some incentive to buy more if youre really interested in saving your builds.

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Randulf.7614" said:

> > **Community for 7 years:** Give us build templates - you can even monetise it with extra slots through the gemstore!

> > **Anet:** Sorry its late, here we are.

> > **Community**: How dare you

> >

> > It's fine for them to monetise extra slots on this in my opinion. I'm just glad it's here after such a ridiculous wait

>

> Pmuch, if the community *should* be mad at anyone then that should be themselves. We had a great free alternative but ppl are stubborn and wanted an official feature and fully supported the idea of them being monetised.

>

> If you want something extensive for free in a game, an mmo nonetheless, let ppl make addons for it. Dont demand a profit driven company to make it.

And you think that it would make any difference if people didn't specifically ask for it? If it's making them such a profit, then surely it would have been made regardless.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Obviously I'm not addressing the functionality of banktabs but the availability. The function of banktabs and these templates is hard to compare.

> So am i. Account-wide unlocks, that are bought once and useful for all characters, both current and future, are of much higher quality than per-character unlocks that you need to buy for each char and lose if you happen to delete said char.

> (yes, as you can probably guess, i am also not very fond of bag slot unlocks)

> In this case, they key unlocks (for gear tabs and build tabs) are per characer, not per account.

>

>

With availability I meant how you can obtain them not how they are accessed by multiple characters as thats their function, at least thats how I see it...

As in 1 banktab is very limited, you probably want/need to buy more. The same way you could argue these templates or slots are limited, you need to buy more.

You could call both money grabbing. But you also get a certain amount free.

I agree that a bankslot is more universally useful over your whole account than a character enhancement. Of course, with each character having that base amount.

Why I wouldnt compare bankslots is: You also get more free. You only get 1-20 (40?) space bank slot over your whole account. Not per each character.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Tanner Blackfeather.6509" said:

> > > @"ProtoGunner.4953" said:

> > > It was so clear they monetise this... 3 (+3 limited) ACCOUNT WIDE is just a joke. I play all classes and then you need at least 18 templates...

> >

> > You get

> > 3 Build templates **per character**

> > 2 Gear templates per character

> > 3+3 Build Storage (account wide "bank" of Build templates) **for the account**

> >

> > Do you need more than 3 *per character*?

> Yes

> > How many characters do you need 4+ build templates for?

> > Note - I do not expect 0 to be the answer, just like I don't expect people to keep playing for long with only the 1 free Bank slot.

> Mesmer and necro, definitely (necro has currently 6 builds with 5 different gear sets, mesmer has too many to count, definitely way more than just mere 6, and that's even after considering i have 2 of them).

> Ranger has 7 different builds, across 3 characters (notice, that the total is actually higher as some builds were duplicated - i do have a power dps soulbeast, but also a SB power dps build for my druid healer character for example, so it can do story content)

> Guardian has 5 on one char, 2 on another.

> warrior, ele, rev and thief have 3 (but i have no wvw version for them yet - i was planning to get to it at some point)

> that leaves only engi with 2 pve build sets (and no wvw one)

>

Those are definitely not average player amounts. The average player is fine with 1 or two builds per character.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"kiranslee.4829" said:

> > >

> > > > @"fewfield.7802" said:

> > > > > @"LaFurion.3167" said:

> > > > > So you only get 3 per acc on release and have to buy more if you want to be able to use more than 3 builds??

> > > > >

> > > > > Is the 3 build slots per class?? So 3 ranger builds and 3 warrior builds etc, or just 3 across the whole acc??

> > > > >

> > > > > Because.... gem store for build slots seems kind of money grubbing. I'm grateful for the system though sigh...

> > > >

> > > > Ofc it's money-grabbing. Anet is doing BUSINESS not a charity. I dont wanna lose money neither but it's understandable.

> > > >

> > >

> > > I would argue running what u call business, in this manner, leads to shutting down, but hey thats just me.

> >

> > I guess getting some free and buy more is money grabbing. Might as well complain players are being screwed over by limited bank space.

> At least bank tabs are account wide.

>

Obviously I'm not addressing the functionality of banktabs but the availability. The function of banktabs and these templates is hard to compare.

With chatcodes you can save endless amounts of build templates.

Since you can freely and actively switch between them its a logical thing they are limited. (Think gw1 weaponsets, but for builds)

Furthermore this equipment system essentially is extra inventory space. Why wouldnt it be paid for? Considering how much it costs to get bigger bags, more bag slots or shared inventory slots how is this suddenly different with this system?

> @"kiranslee.4829" said:

>

> > @"fewfield.7802" said:

> > > @"LaFurion.3167" said:

> > > So you only get 3 per acc on release and have to buy more if you want to be able to use more than 3 builds??

> > >

> > > Is the 3 build slots per class?? So 3 ranger builds and 3 warrior builds etc, or just 3 across the whole acc??

> > >

> > > Because.... gem store for build slots seems kind of money grubbing. I'm grateful for the system though sigh...

> >

> > Ofc it's money-grabbing. Anet is doing BUSINESS not a charity. I dont wanna lose money neither but it's understandable.

> >

>

> I would argue running what u call business, in this manner, leads to shutting down, but hey thats just me.

I guess getting some free and buy more is money grabbing. Might as well complain players are being screwed over by limited bank space.

> @"Dante.1763" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > > Considering we can have a whole discussion on one character and how we like/dislike his place in the story and seeing how diverse the opinions are...

> > > >

> > > > I would say Braham is a pretty good character.

> > > I heard that argument used about Scarlet as well. Didn't make her a good villain.

> > >

> >

> > In your opinion.

>

> All the villains in this game have been terrible.

>

> You know who was a good villian? just about any of the villians we had in the personal stories, because they didnt get overplayed or overused or given god like powers that make them comedic.

>

> I do agree with Astralporing about Braham. I didnt like him in 2013, and i still dont like him, hes a terrible representation of the Norn and honestly i wish they would have kept Eir, and got rid of Braham.

I think its nonsense that a character in our party needs to be some representative of their race.

Also I cant recall any villains that were only used one or two times. Theyre that forgettable.

The only thing that makes a good character, imo, is their ability to change and evolve along the story. To learn from mistakes and be allowed to make them without everyone getting angsty about the mistakes.

The worst character in the game, is the commander, really.

But Krytans don't use the latin alphabet for their words either, there's no reason dredge would use Cyrillic.

Wait, hold on...

Can we have New Krytan support?

I wouldnt mind if Dredge then use their own Dredgabet.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Considering we can have a whole discussion on one character and how we like/dislike his place in the story and seeing how diverse the opinions are...

> >

> > I would say Braham is a pretty good character.

> I heard that argument used about Scarlet as well. Didn't make her a good villain.

>

In your opinion.

Considering we can have a whole discussion on one character and how we like/dislike his place in the story and seeing how diverse the opinions are...

I would say Braham is a pretty good character.

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> The majority of gem store items can be sent as gifts. Look for a little box symbol in the top right corner when you hover the mouse over the item.

>

> Some items can't be gifted, I think because it's things which can only be used a fixed number of times, like bank slots or crafting licences. If you want to give one of those to someone you know the best way is to give them the gold or money to buy it. Or if you're able to be in the same real life location have them log into their account and then you put your card details in (making sure you don't save them) to buy the gems.

I wouldn't suggest people to put their payment details in a third persons computer, as a solution.

Not to mention, within GW2 communities and friendships and such are international and being physically at a friends place isnt practical when there's a few hundreds if not thousands of km in between.

A different option could be buying gemcodes on the GW2 website, rather than a physical gemcard or buying gems ingame, in order to buy things on the gemstore.

Whats quitting a game? I always come back to gw2 when i have something to do thats either continuing the story or a new goal or feature to play.

I'm stuck at whether I consider myself a raider or not. I mean, I don't actively raid, but I would if I had the time and a group to do it with.

Plus it doesn't really affect my opinion on whatever this new feature is, will be or whatever. If it's something I can join in on easily enough it might be very interesting for me. Unlikely to make me raid though. I still don't have time to wait for hours to form a group I actually want to play with.

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > > > Mostly satisfied. I didn't expect this to be for us, I expected it to be more for new players. To get them into the game. Which is good for me.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I'm wondering how useful it is to be looking for new players after your game turns 7 years old.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > And if i think about it, I fail to see how this was for new players. The only thing that new players would be interested in was that HoT and PoF are now under one package. Which is only part of the announcement. And would only make sense if you know about GW2 and it's expansion packs and monetization plan.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The majority was about continuation of the story. A story a new player couldnt even follow. And then an advert for items clearly made for people who are already a fan.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > If you meant returning players or free to play players, at least already a bit in the know with GW2, that would make more sense.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Really? New players see a new trailer. They see they can get one expansion and get the other free. They see they can get the cool new prologue free, which Anet said was sort of a restart, and suddenly boom, hundreds of hours of play at least for the price of one single game. This announcement had new player written all over it. It's our way of starting over, which means they can start too. They even said it.

> > > >

> > > > I didn't say it wasnt for new players at all, just that it's not >mostly< for new players, because a large part of it isnt aimed at them. (Meaning also, I thought obviously, some part of it is) Which also makes sense, it's not worth it to be just for new players,

> > > >

> > > > Especially as large part of is aimed at existing or returning players who havent gotten any expansion, because they stopped playing because of lack of content or other, or even more sensible, are free to play accounts.

> > > >

> > > > Which both, I suppose, could be considered new players by a stretch (not new new, but new to HoT/PoF) if we're not looking too critically at the announcement.

> > >

> > > Nope, I don't agree. They didn't reveal anything in this they haven't already told us. We knew swiss tourmaments were coming. We have the "road map" that was already provided. I really do believe Anet was trying to get people to play the game with this. This would obviously have been structured differently if it was for us.

> >

> > I don't consider myself a returning nor a free to play player? You seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying, somehow maybe hell-bent on disagreeing rather than actually trying to understand where I'm coming from? I dunno seems like you're not really into this.

> >

> >

> >

>

> I find it a bit presumptious on your part. You think I'm not paying attention because I don't agree with you. I understand what you're saying. I don't happen to agree. People can understand and still not agree. However, in the interest of peace, I'll just leave it here. No point in beating a dead horse. I've expressed my opinion. It hasn't changed.

I didnt presume anything. Hence the way i worded it "it seems..." and questioning style. Your argumentation didnt followup with anything I had said and seemed to disagree with something completely unsaid, by me. Which is fine, if you just want to disagree with whatever strawman youre spawning to make a point then fine. But that doesn't mean you're actually disagreeing with me.

In fact im not too insecure to say I actually agree that it wasnt for us super informed people. At least it didn't really add much new things we didnt already know

So why or what are are you disagreeing with? You're quite right that to be at peace with yourself you probably should stop beating your self-spawned dead horse.

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > Mostly satisfied. I didn't expect this to be for us, I expected it to be more for new players. To get them into the game. Which is good for me.

> > > >

> > > > I'm wondering how useful it is to be looking for new players after your game turns 7 years old.

> > > >

> > > > And if i think about it, I fail to see how this was for new players. The only thing that new players would be interested in was that HoT and PoF are now under one package. Which is only part of the announcement. And would only make sense if you know about GW2 and it's expansion packs and monetization plan.

> > > >

> > > > The majority was about continuation of the story. A story a new player couldnt even follow. And then an advert for items clearly made for people who are already a fan.

> > > >

> > > > If you meant returning players or free to play players, at least already a bit in the know with GW2, that would make more sense.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Really? New players see a new trailer. They see they can get one expansion and get the other free. They see they can get the cool new prologue free, which Anet said was sort of a restart, and suddenly boom, hundreds of hours of play at least for the price of one single game. This announcement had new player written all over it. It's our way of starting over, which means they can start too. They even said it.

> >

> > I didn't say it wasnt for new players at all, just that it's not >mostly< for new players, because a large part of it isnt aimed at them. (Meaning also, I thought obviously, some part of it is) Which also makes sense, it's not worth it to be just for new players,

> >

> > Especially as large part of is aimed at existing or returning players who havent gotten any expansion, because they stopped playing because of lack of content or other, or even more sensible, are free to play accounts.

> >

> > Which both, I suppose, could be considered new players by a stretch (not new new, but new to HoT/PoF) if we're not looking too critically at the announcement.

>

> Nope, I don't agree. They didn't reveal anything in this they haven't already told us. We knew swiss tourmaments were coming. We have the "road map" that was already provided. I really do believe Anet was trying to get people to play the game with this. This would obviously have been structured differently if it was for us.

I don't consider myself a returning nor a free to play player? You seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying, somehow maybe hell-bent on disagreeing rather than actually trying to understand where I'm coming from? I dunno seems like you're not really into this.

> @"Kelly.7019" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Mortifera.6138" said:

>

> > With free movement throughout the water, players find it harder to orient themselves,

> that's why it's easy & fun to kill players that are bad at x-y-z axis fighting!!! loved that pvp map!

>

>

> >devs need to fill 10 times the space,

> they have already made some pretty beautiful places UW that could be revamped with new hidden treasures & sea cave areas!

> I can see a new Xpac map having secret sea caves that lead to entirely new levels of that map that are hidden until discovered and these levels would not have to be filled with water.

> or

> BIG SCARY SEA MONSTER bosses (the krakken) to scare the kitten out of you as they swim up from behind :D UW maps could be mostly empty like they are with semi-rare spawns of these special loot creatures.

>

> >has a second set of unoptimized imbalanced skills, that can easily require double the effort to develop and balance.

> well they started it, they should finish it :D

>

> > Which simply makes it require more effort and resources than they have available and get less in return making it less cost effective.

> they have all those people now NCSoft made them pull off other projects and focus on GW2 like they should have been doing! With the multiple teams working on GW2 they should have plenty of resources.

>

Definitely agree, but if the persons with the power to aim in that direction see it as too risky and too much effort and/or lack that vision, whatre we gonna do.

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > Mostly satisfied. I didn't expect this to be for us, I expected it to be more for new players. To get them into the game. Which is good for me.

> >

> > I'm wondering how useful it is to be looking for new players after your game turns 7 years old.

> >

> > And if i think about it, I fail to see how this was for new players. The only thing that new players would be interested in was that HoT and PoF are now under one package. Which is only part of the announcement. And would only make sense if you know about GW2 and it's expansion packs and monetization plan.

> >

> > The majority was about continuation of the story. A story a new player couldnt even follow. And then an advert for items clearly made for people who are already a fan.

> >

> > If you meant returning players or free to play players, at least already a bit in the know with GW2, that would make more sense.

> >

> >

>

> Really? New players see a new trailer. They see they can get one expansion and get the other free. They see they can get the cool new prologue free, which Anet said was sort of a restart, and suddenly boom, hundreds of hours of play at least for the price of one single game. This announcement had new player written all over it. It's our way of starting over, which means they can start too. They even said it.

I didn't say it wasnt for new players at all, just that it's not >mostly< for new players, because a large part of it isnt aimed at them. (Meaning also, I thought obviously, some part of it is) Which also makes sense, it's not worth it to be just for new players,

Especially as large part of is aimed at existing or returning players who havent gotten any expansion, because they stopped playing because of lack of content or other, or even more sensible, are free to play accounts.

Which both, I suppose, could be considered new players by a stretch (not new new, but new to HoT/PoF) if we're not looking too critically at the announcement.