knite.1542

I don't like the amount of dialogue and unskippable RP in some of the new fractals. Another thing I don't like is when the same fractal is a daily and a rec. Besides that I don't really mind the new fractals. The aquatic fractal rework though, I absolutely despise that.

That sounds interesting but I don't think it would be very popular. Mixing PvP and PvE does not seem to be a very popular idea (from what I've seen) in this game's community.

I agree. The game needs this.

> @"kharmin.7683" said: > Need and Want are two separate things. I would prefer resources be spent on other things more likely to impact a larger portion of the player base than something so niche as this suggestion. thanks for clearing that up

Goodness. People too lazy to watch a 10 second video and just talk shit instead lol

For the most part yes. There will be some areas of the game that are more difficult without other players (for example, completing some hero challenges for hero points) There is some content you will miss out on if you dont wish to play with others (such as raids, fractals, and pvp) but there is definitely a ton of content you can do from a solo player perspective.

> @"kharmin.7683" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > > > @"mindcircus.1506" said: > > > > > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > > > > > @"mindcircus.1506" said: > > > > > > > Reality is a spoiled "Open World PvE" playerbase will not accept any activity that has a fail condition and that they cannot be completely carried through. > > > > > > That's a bit cynical, no? You assume this statement holds for every player who enjoys OWPvE? Perhaps in your experience, but let's not paint an entire community with such a broad brush. > > > > > I could sit here and dispute you but... > > > > > >I disagree. If Anet were to add more incentives to particular content, then in order for players to achieve them, they would have to play the content; otherwise, they would not be able to achieve those incentives. That's why I felt it would be forcing. > > > > > You yourself play semantics over the word "forced" and just prove the entitled nature of the vast majority of OWPvE players better than I ever could. > > > > > > > > Entitled? How? Please explain, because I really don't get it. > > > > > > Nothing in what you said indicated a sense of entitlement. This is just another example of someone throwing around a catchphrase without really understanding it. > > > > Like the word ‘forced’. ? > > I don't know what else to call it when the OP wants Anet to add "incentives" for content with which players aren't engaging enough for the OP. If players want the additional "incentive", they would then be forced to do the content. > > I can't make this point any more clear. If some can't wrap their mind around it, then I can't do anything more. I don't get this mentality. You are not being forced, you are making a choice. If you don't want to do the content, don't do it. If you choose to do something even though you don't like it, you are still making a choice, regardless of the reason.

> @"Ashen.2907" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"mindcircus.1506" said: > > > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > > > @"mindcircus.1506" said: > > > > > Reality is a spoiled "Open World PvE" playerbase will not accept any activity that has a fail condition and that they cannot be completely carried through. > > > > That's a bit cynical, no? You assume this statement holds for every player who enjoys OWPvE? Perhaps in your experience, but let's not paint an entire community with such a broad brush. > > > I could sit here and dispute you but... > > > >I disagree. If Anet were to add more incentives to particular content, then in order for players to achieve them, they would have to play the content; otherwise, they would not be able to achieve those incentives. That's why I felt it would be forcing. > > > You yourself play semantics over the word "forced" and just prove the entitled nature of the vast majority of OWPvE players better than I ever could. > > > > Entitled? How? Please explain, because I really don't get it. > > Nothing in what you said indicated a sense of entitlement. This is just another example of someone throwing around a catchphrase without really understanding it. Such an ironic statement.

> @"Veprovina.4876" said: > I don't see what this has got to do with mesmers... > Ah, cool. :) So basically most professions could do something like that. Then that means that no single profession is really at fault, more like the structures are glitchy, no? Most professions can't create portals for the teammates to use (in WvW).

@"Dawdler.8521" Not exactly related to the OP, but what is a combo whombo weaver.?

Thanks for the guide mate.

I don't have any actual data but I wouldn't say "heavily" populated, just populated. I suppose it depends on what aspects of the game you are interested in (and your time zone as well). Most open world content that I've done lately still has plenty of people. You might have trouble with some areas if you are playing in off hours. Instanced content is definitely less populated than it has been, but you will probably still be able to find groups. WvW seems decently busy (at least in my matchup, Blackgate). PvP scene is dwindling a bit, plagued with bots, but there are people.

Is the trapper runes that are the problem or the speedhacks that he is apparently using

> @"RangerThings.9810" said: > The roaming food I want is **fall damage reduction**. Being able to use cliffs to avoid impossible outnumbered situations _was_ clutch. > > Part of the reason this was removed from the game was not every profession has access. This would solve that. > > I would take no other stat on the food for this functionality. This would not be that useful with the whole gliding thing. I guess there would be some instances were it could save you though.

Yeah I hate that garbage. Thief should have longbowed the clones and played it safe. Crazy how busted some downstates are compared to others. (looking at you underwater pet rez)