Blaeys.3102
-
Posts
446 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Blaeys.3102
-
-
Here's hoping these are the last Dragon Response Mission they ever do. I have supported and loved almost every new content drop for the game since day one, and I cannot stand DRMs. They are carbon copied and way too reliant on one shot mechanics to offer any kind of meaningful experience/content.
Worst of all, they are designed for 1-5 players at the expense of content for open world (a single player story mission in this drop compounds this issue). Save that stuff for the coop games. This is an MMO - the best ever made imo - it's time to get back to giving us things our guilds - in groups of all sizes - can do.
DRMs are, hands down, the worst content Anet has ever developed - probably because they needed something fast and easy to do to fill the gap leading up to the expansion. They can, and should do better, even if it is just new dynamic events on existing maps (which they do very well, imo).
-
The Sunday after each Living Story drop, my guild gets together to enjoy the new large group (25+) open world content together. It is the thing I (and many) look forward to most. This is the first time in a long time that we will have nothing new to do together - and for that reason alone, this is my least favorite living story chapter ever. GW2 is about what I can do in large open world groups (not instanced) with my guild - without that, it really isn't appealing to me. Hopefully this isn't a new trend.
-
New maps bring large scale event content that I can do with my guild - which is the only reason I keep playing.
The heart and soul of GW2, imo, is in large group (11 -100 people) content. Every update/expansion/etc, needs to include something of that nature.
I know that doesnt necessarily require new maps, but that is where they have done some of their best work for guilds that run together (especially now that guild missions are officially ancient history.
-
> @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:
> > There is a way they could accomplish this that would ensure some level of map coordination, build in a minimal reward and make the maps more alive all at the same time.
> >
> > Right now, most open world bosses and event chains are designed for pugs - meaning they do not require any coordination whatsoever to complete.
> >
> > If they added these bosses and events in as guild missions - and allowed guilds to trigger them at times other than their natural occurrence (similar to how the guild event flag works now), they could implement special challenge versions of the fight that do require varying levels of coordination. By tying them to guild activities, they would guarantee two things - that someone is actually "leading" the event and that at least a core group will be coordinating with one another. The slight reward would be guild influence and commendations (same as it is for missions now - with some possible new guild skins to help drive it forward.
> >
> > This would further benefit those not in guilds - or pugs on a given map - by giving them access to fights and experiences that normally wouldn't be taking place - and by giving them access to the semi organization that comes with having a guild commander and core group on a map.
> >
> > I know that the guild content team no longer exists at Anet, but I still think this would be a worthy endeavor that would benefit everyone in the game - while enabling the development of more challenging open world content (that assumes a higher level of coordination is present).
> >
> I kind of like this idea. It would introduce some more challenging options without actually splitting the map population (that is already way to small on many maps). It would also give a reason to old players to revisit core maps, breathing some new life into them (much needed when thinking about retaining new players - we don't want those to get a feeling that the game is dead, and quit due to it well before getting to the most recent LS maps and seeing that yes, people are still there)
>
Not sure why this thread from 2017 is suddenly active again, but my stance on the matter remains the same. The key to content in open world requiring difficulty lies with the guilds in the game - and the easiest way to incentivize those guilds to coordinate more would be through a revamp of the guild mission system - which would, in turn, allow for more and more difficult content in open world.
It won't happen - Anet has already declared anything remotely related to guild missions dead in the water - but it would be a great addition to the game that would enhance the experience for everyone (not just people in guilds).
-
All this would do is shrink the pool of potential raiders expontentially, making the problem even worse than it is now, splitting raiders between those willing to pay and those who expect it to be a part of the base game. And how long before someone insists on unique armor stats locked behind paying for raids - the definition of "pay to win."
Raids could have been salvaged years ago, but the option people put forward at that time by a group of players was continually shot down by both other players and even a few of the developers. And, as predicted, raid content development didn't warrant the investing in the resources needed to keep up with community demands.
I am sorry to watch the game mode dwindle away, but I am far from surprised to see it happen.
-
It's already hard enough to get my guild group into WvW.
This isnt a move in the right direction - making it that much harder to play with friends.
-
It looks like virtually every instance of the new map is stuck at 00:00. Hopefully they fix it soon. It's making it hard for people just coming on to advance the story.
-
> @"kratan.4619" said:
> Lots of people feeding the obvious troll in this thread. Keep it up, I am sure they are giggling in front of their monitor at the "outrage" they are triggering.
This
-
It is easily solo-able, for those wondering. Several of my guildees did it yesterday. I did it three times with different sized groups (all fewer than 5 people) - with one group being as small as 2 people. It isnt forcing group content on anyone.
-
> @"Mewcifer.5198" said:
> The latest story requires 5-10 man instanced content in order to complete it. Anet has not required group content for story since the original Zhaitan fight which they later changed to be soloable.
>
> Making group content required for the story is a step backwards.
> I prefer my first playthrough of new story content to be done solo so that I don't have the distraction of another player. Now, not only do I need another player, but if my friends arent online and willing to do it with me I am stuck with randoms who are even more of a disruption to my enjoyment of lore and story.
>
> I know anet wants to push players into trying out strikes but this is not the way to do it.
> A chapter in my story journal should not require group content.
It doesn't have to be done in a group. This content is soloable - several of my guildees did it yesterday. I did the content three times - all with groups of 5 or fewer - the first time with just 2 of us. I think that is why the other warband npcs are there.
-
> @"Kurrilino.2706" said:
> uhmm.. yeah...
>
> Putting content like that into a story is almost a crime. Especially when part of the group wants to do archivements and the other part wants to move on.
> Keep it solo missions A-Net.
>
> And yeah... it looks like A-Net doesn't give a dang about the Caithe disaster. They repeat the same mistake.
> When i entered the mission, people were already on riot about playing other characters than themself. Especially another class.
> This won't end well
It is easily solo-able. Several of my guildees did it yesterday. Just opt into the squad rather than public group by yourself.
It's more fun with a group though - so I recommend people either group with a few friends or use the public option.
Some of the best content Anet has put out in years, in my opinion. It scales well from 1 up to 10 (I did it multiple times yesterday in separate groups of 2, 3 and 5), allows for multiple roles/methods of play and is just a fun story to follow.
Then you add in the Visions of the Past missions from season 1 (which can be done in groups of 1-5) and yesterday was a pretty awesome addition to the game.
-
> @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:
> > If you read the article, the Mike Z news is still largely unconfirmed. It's possible it is true, but we should wait for more information before accepting it at face value.
> The very fact that Anet so far refused to respond to press inquiries about it is confirmation enough. If that was a fake news, they would have had no problem saying so.
>
They almost never respond to things on the weekend. I remain skeptical until we hear more.
-
If you read the article, the Mike Z news is still largely unconfirmed. It's possible it is true, but we should wait for more information before accepting it at face value.
-
> @"Dante.1763" said:
> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:
> > > @"Dante.1763" said:
> > > > @"Blaeys.3102" said:
> > > > > @"foozlesprite.8051" said:
> > > > > > @"Blaeys.3102" said:
> > > > > > One thing about this bothers me. For those of us in guilds, our guild halls should be our activity hub. It's fine to add these things elsewhere in the game for guildless players or those that prefer not to use halls, but this content seems like it would be a perfect addition to the guild hall.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anet -please remember that the game is about more than just the shiny new thing. There are existing areas and "hubs" that could use a little love.
> > > > >
> > > > > If they were going to retouch old content as an activity hub it would likely be our home instances. As you say, not every player is in a guild with a hall, and if they used guild halls for it they'd need to place the content in three separate guild halls as well as build a new non-guild place for non-guild players to experience it in. At that point they're developing a new place AND having to retrofit three halls, so it'd be less resource intensive to just retrofit five home instances. Another problem with adding new content to guild halls is that there are already decorations everywhere in people's guild halls, so finding a way to place the new content without them being obscured by decorations and such becomes an issue. Pretty much any place you could put a new NPC, there's a guild somewhere that has a decoration literally on top of that spot. You could just move any decorations overlapping new NPCs to storage, but that runs the risk of doing things like breaking racetracks and making people mad.
> > > > >
> > > > > That being said I would love for them to build out ONE hub that EVERYBODY could use and just keep updating that with new content instead of having to come up with a new hub every season. It would have to be something core-game players could access as well, otherwise you'd run the risk of needing to go there in season X but not having access because you don't have season X-1, where it was introduced. Maybe an instanced version of Fort Trinity or something?
> > > >
> > > > This could easily be the guild hall. There is a hub for guild hall resources - without the hall - already in Lion's Arch. I forget what it's called, but it would work perfectly for those without guilds - while still letting guilds build on their halls with this kind of resource.
> > > >
> > > > I like that EOTM is coming back to the game, but I really wish they had considered guild halls when making this decision.
> > >
> > > super glad they didnt choose the guild hall.
> >
> > I respect that you do not use a guild hall - and agree that the EOTN is a good addition that players will enjoy.
> >
> > At the same time, there are many players, like myself, that center their GW2 experience almost exclusively around their guild - playing with the friends I have made the past several years. When I log on, it is almost always to meet up with those people - whether it be for open world, missions, instanced PVE or WvW.
> >
> > When they first introduced guild halls, we were very happy - finally here was a place for us to meet up - to start the day's adventures together.
> >
> > But then it was abandoned (fairly quickly actually) - virtually forgotten by developers. And now we have content that would make the ideal addition to the hall. Im not saying don't put it elsewhere - just remember that guild halls exist and maybe throw us just a little something. We would happily build portals for raids, strike missions and just about anything else they gave us. It would give us a goal to strive toward as a guild (even if those assets already existed elsewhere in the game.
> >
> > This content seem perfect for guild halls. I just wish they weren't dead and forgotten content in the developers' eyes. It really disheartens those of us that enjoy playing alongside our guildees.
>
> i -do- use GH's in my RP guild. Thats all they are and have ever been good for is RP, guilds shouldnt be a mandatory requirement, and before you say "but its in the title of the game" the Guild Wars are an in game event.
>
> I enjoy playing alongside my guildies, none of them care about the hall, and i disagree on this kind of content being "ideal" for guild halls. IMO it should be in a hub the entire open world can see, not a small portion of the game. But ive said enough on this topic in this thread.
I have never used the argument about the name of the game and am fully aware of why the game is named what it is.
Likewise, nothing in our guild is mandatory - We've always believed it is the guild that offers value to the member, not the other way around.
Putting content like this in guild halls (as well as elsewhere in the game) is about supporting the player-created communities and giving them fun things to work toward/around together. For many of us, it adds to the fun of the game and strengthens the single biggest reason we log in - the communities that we've built.
I agree it should be available to everyone, in guild or not - as well as in guild halls.
Also - keep in mind that EOTN is very likely to be a solo instance similar to the last "hub" they gave us (and like it is at the end of the last story step), so the chances of it being something the "whole open world can see" is slim (again, just speculating - I could be wrong about this point).
-
> @"Dante.1763" said:
> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:
> > > @"foozlesprite.8051" said:
> > > > @"Blaeys.3102" said:
> > > > One thing about this bothers me. For those of us in guilds, our guild halls should be our activity hub. It's fine to add these things elsewhere in the game for guildless players or those that prefer not to use halls, but this content seems like it would be a perfect addition to the guild hall.
> > > >
> > > > Anet -please remember that the game is about more than just the shiny new thing. There are existing areas and "hubs" that could use a little love.
> > >
> > > If they were going to retouch old content as an activity hub it would likely be our home instances. As you say, not every player is in a guild with a hall, and if they used guild halls for it they'd need to place the content in three separate guild halls as well as build a new non-guild place for non-guild players to experience it in. At that point they're developing a new place AND having to retrofit three halls, so it'd be less resource intensive to just retrofit five home instances. Another problem with adding new content to guild halls is that there are already decorations everywhere in people's guild halls, so finding a way to place the new content without them being obscured by decorations and such becomes an issue. Pretty much any place you could put a new NPC, there's a guild somewhere that has a decoration literally on top of that spot. You could just move any decorations overlapping new NPCs to storage, but that runs the risk of doing things like breaking racetracks and making people mad.
> > >
> > > That being said I would love for them to build out ONE hub that EVERYBODY could use and just keep updating that with new content instead of having to come up with a new hub every season. It would have to be something core-game players could access as well, otherwise you'd run the risk of needing to go there in season X but not having access because you don't have season X-1, where it was introduced. Maybe an instanced version of Fort Trinity or something?
> >
> > This could easily be the guild hall. There is a hub for guild hall resources - without the hall - already in Lion's Arch. I forget what it's called, but it would work perfectly for those without guilds - while still letting guilds build on their halls with this kind of resource.
> >
> > I like that EOTM is coming back to the game, but I really wish they had considered guild halls when making this decision.
>
> super glad they didnt choose the guild hall.
I respect that you do not use a guild hall - and agree that the EOTN is a good addition that players will enjoy.
At the same time, there are many players, like myself, that center their GW2 experience almost exclusively around their guild - playing with the friends I have made the past several years. When I log on, it is almost always to meet up with those people - whether it be for open world, missions, instanced PVE or WvW.
When they first introduced guild halls, we were very happy - finally here was a place for us to meet up - to start the day's adventures together.
But then it was abandoned (fairly quickly actually) - virtually forgotten by developers. And now we have content that would make the ideal addition to the hall. Im not saying don't put it elsewhere - just remember that guild halls exist and maybe throw us just a little something. We would happily build portals for raids, strike missions and just about anything else they gave us. It would give us a goal to strive toward as a guild (even if those assets already existed elsewhere in the game.
This content seem perfect for guild halls. I just wish they weren't dead and forgotten content in the developers' eyes. It really disheartens those of us that enjoy playing alongside our guildees.
-
> @"Palador.2170" said:
> Guilds are abandoned content.
>
> Sorry to be blunt, but we're all thinking it.
I am painfully aware. The entire point is that they shouldn't be.
-
Again, not saying JUST the guild hall - just that the guild hall should have been considered alongside a hub for those who choose to be guildless. I respect that there are people who do not like to play with guilds.
-
> @"foozlesprite.8051" said:
> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:
> > One thing about this bothers me. For those of us in guilds, our guild halls should be our activity hub. It's fine to add these things elsewhere in the game for guildless players or those that prefer not to use halls, but this content seems like it would be a perfect addition to the guild hall.
> >
> > Anet -please remember that the game is about more than just the shiny new thing. There are existing areas and "hubs" that could use a little love.
>
> If they were going to retouch old content as an activity hub it would likely be our home instances. As you say, not every player is in a guild with a hall, and if they used guild halls for it they'd need to place the content in three separate guild halls as well as build a new non-guild place for non-guild players to experience it in. At that point they're developing a new place AND having to retrofit three halls, so it'd be less resource intensive to just retrofit five home instances. Another problem with adding new content to guild halls is that there are already decorations everywhere in people's guild halls, so finding a way to place the new content without them being obscured by decorations and such becomes an issue. Pretty much any place you could put a new NPC, there's a guild somewhere that has a decoration literally on top of that spot. You could just move any decorations overlapping new NPCs to storage, but that runs the risk of doing things like breaking racetracks and making people mad.
>
> That being said I would love for them to build out ONE hub that EVERYBODY could use and just keep updating that with new content instead of having to come up with a new hub every season. It would have to be something core-game players could access as well, otherwise you'd run the risk of needing to go there in season X but not having access because you don't have season X-1, where it was introduced. Maybe an instanced version of Fort Trinity or something?
This could easily be the guild hall. There is a hub for guild hall resources - without the hall - already in Lion's Arch. I forget what it's called, but it would work perfectly for those without guilds - while still letting guilds build on their halls with this kind of resource.
I like that EOTM is coming back to the game, but I really wish they had considered guild halls when making this decision.
-
One thing about this bothers me. For those of us in guilds, our guild halls should be our activity hub. It's fine to add these things elsewhere in the game for guildless players or those that prefer not to use halls, but this content seems like it would be a perfect addition to the guild hall.
Anet -please remember that the game is about more than just the shiny new thing. There are existing areas and "hubs" that could use a little love.
-
Anet is touting the Eye of The North as a new hub location for activity. Many of us already have that - our guild halls.
Instead of pulling people away from guild halls, they could/should have given us the ability to build the scrying pool in the area that is designed specifically for bringing groups together (guild halls).
Im not saying dont have the EOTN there for guildless players and those that want a new place to hang out (and it could even have the pool), but we really need new content like this to take guilds and guildhalls into account.
I dont like the direction this decision portends. If anyone from Anet sees this, please think about adding things like this to guild halls.
-
It kind of bugs me that they are putting things like the Strike Mission portal and other group features in a new hub in Eye of the North with the next update. Those seem like perfect additions to guild halls - which should serve as rally points for groups in game (not saying don't put them in EOTM - just that they should be guild hall features).
It's one of those things that makes sense to customers/players the second they see it. I think part of the problem is that Anet has forgotten how to look at the game from the player's perspective.
-
I love GW2 and am still enjoying the game a lot, but I have to agree with this sentiment. Guild Races are another example. They have been bugged since the launch of HOT (they will often end prematurely when the first guild member crosses the finish line - but not always).
I think the reason is developer turnover and Anet's general tendency to do something awesome and then forget about it as they move on the next new and shiny thing.
The best example of this is the shooting gallery mini-game in Divinity's Reach. Since the BETA WEEKENDS (7+ years ago), an npc in Divinity's Reach will give you directions to a minigame that doesn't (and HAS NEVER) existed, going so far as to put an indicator star on your map to lead the way. That NPC is still there today - still giving directions to something that has never been in the game.
Anet is great at coming up with great ideas - they aren't so good at supporting those ideas long term.
-
I was very happy to see most players in game yesterday taking the changes in stride - and even enjoying many of them. It looks like the great game destruction many expected to occur with this patch never really did. In fact, the opening sentence of my OP above now seems a little silly. The vitriol has really been confined to the forums - most likely from many who haven't even played since the new patch dropped.
Yesterday went over well with almost everyone I saw in game.
That said, I am wary of the direction they are taking with ccs and removing most of their damage in competitive modes (that is a major deviation from how the game has played since launched), but Im willing to give it a chance and see how gameplay shakes out. Outside of that, there were some really interesting little tweaks that I am actually enjoying (the explosives traits on the engi being at the top of the list).
-
> @"Dami.5046" said:
> people will hate regardless.
Definitely - and we will see a lot of it today. It is inevitable.
My point in making the post is that a lot of usually levelheaded people can tend to get caught up in that wave. Im just hoping to remind those more levelheaded people that we are at the start of changes - not the end - and to go into today looking for the good - and what can be improved - rather than immediately tunnel vision on any issues that arise.
Boss fights.
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Posted
> @"Randulf.7614" said:
> I think some of them are excellent.
>
> - Shadow of the Dragon
> - Hounds of Balthazar
> - Caduceus
> - Kralkatorrik
> - Joko
>
> Those are amongst my favourite instanced boss fights and flashing effects don’t really interfere and the mechanics are interesting and fun to me
>
> In terms of open world
>
> - Marionette/Vinewrath
> - Gerent
> - Tequatl
>
> Because the mechanics are all undisturbed by flashing effects by spreading players about
>
> Some bosses are just ruined by the excess of effects.
>
> - The final boss of S4 E2 is a ridiculous amount of fireworks. _*edited due to wrong ep mentioned_
> - Death Branded Shatterer is shrouded in too many effects. Which is a shame because Shatterer is well animated like most bosses
> - I don’t think I’ve even seen the in game model of the hydra queen pirate boss because Taidra is so covered in players and effects
>
> I can’t comment on raids
I would add Shadow Behemoth (for a low level fight), Serpent's Ire, Kralkatorik, Dragon Stand and all of the canopy fights in Verdant Brink to that list. Im sure there are a others as well.
I also hate that they stopped making bounties like the ones from the POF maps. They can be a lot of fun as well (until they added the Joko's ambush silliness in the LS story steps).
Most MMOs make boss fights artificially hard by sticking them in an instance and forcing players into very specific playstyles/patterns. That isnt fighting - it's choreography (which can be fun, but it is hardly what I expect in an MMO now - and really doesnt allow for much variety in gameplay). I love the chaos and epic feel of GW2 boss fights - where it isnt just about using a calculator (or, in most cases, a template website) and memorizing the dance steps to match to the boss you know youre going to fight before you ever get there.