Linken.6345 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Hypnowulf.7403" said: > > So this leads us to the only question that truly matters here: _Does Guild Wars 2 have a profitability problem?_ > > Yes. Yes it does. This is something they're trying to figure out as an ongoing process. I wonder if it would help them by removing the ability to convert gold to gems, I think that it might. Either that or perhaps have some kind of fee involved. I appreciate the generosity but they're just too small for that kind of generosity. It means that not enough people will spend money. I've sometimes spent beyond my means as I know that NCSoft is eyeing ArenaNet due to this, they've done managerial reshuffles in order to try to make Guild Wars 2 profitable. > Just want to answer this mate, gold to gems also entice people to buy gems with cash. Since if alot of people buy gems with gold the gold that other players can get for gems increase as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mil.3562 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Shadowmoon.7986" said: > I feel like it wont be enough because there is no xpac selling feature. Gliding, especs and challenging group content were the selling points of hot. Pof was mounts. I have a scary feeling DRM were going to be the feature, replayable story missions. Ls2 had progressively more difficult encounters both in the solo story instances, but also in map wide DT and SW. Ls3 ditched mapwide metas for more explorable maps, similar to PoF. ^This. 1st Expansion, HoT... We have a huge map, new Elite skills, new game feature, Gliding. 2nd Expansion, PoF... We have a huge map, new Elite skills, new game feature, Mounts. 3rd Expansion, EoD? Well, so far we only see a short CG video of Cantha, and the same Cantha image being posted over and over again, with the same usual disclaimer, " we are still working on it ". A new huge Cantha map is expected but what about new Elite skills? New game feature? Too early to even mention them? If so, when will EoD come? End of 2022? Or in 2023? I hope they are not selling EoD with just a new Cantha map and new fractals, raids, strike missions, dungeons and new weapon and armour skins. And of course, more same old frustrating and disappointing LW stories. And more game breaking nerfs. And DRM is a joke which is not even funny. I hope EoD is not a big LWS chapter trying to be sold as an expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashantara.8731 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > > The leveling process itself should be looked at as well. In my opinion the leveling process is worse and less meaningful than it was at and near the launch of the game. It wasn't perfect but it made you try things out. Noting other aspects of the leveling process I'd personally lock the player out of the PoF mounts and gliding until they reach level 80. I'd suggest a leveling mount that was, say 50% faster than player speed, maybe less that had no flashy abilities that was available to level 1-79 players so they could get that mount fix new players crave. Could even be used as a part of the advertising campaign. > > > I cannot disagree more. GW2 is so very alt-friendly, that locking out mounts that are currently account-wide would (IMO) detract from one of the more significant attractions to the game. What is the actual purpose that you are trying to serve with this suggestion? It almost seems as if it is another veiled whine about mounts in core zones. I don't _know_ what the OP meant, but can imagine that it was a general complaint about how new players aren't learning the game mechanics properly with the current leveling system. They can use a level 80 boost on their very first character, and after that have it very easy to level additional chars to 80 without improving, as they never go through a real learning curve. The core content is too easy and doesn't prepare you for the later level of difficulty, and base mechanics like CC are not explained anywhere, either, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundabolt.8541 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 After everything that has happened over the past two years, I really cannot fathom what in the world compelled you to write this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linken.6345 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Ashantara.8731" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > > > > The leveling process itself should be looked at as well. In my opinion the leveling process is worse and less meaningful than it was at and near the launch of the game. It wasn't perfect but it made you try things out. Noting other aspects of the leveling process I'd personally lock the player out of the PoF mounts and gliding until they reach level 80. I'd suggest a leveling mount that was, say 50% faster than player speed, maybe less that had no flashy abilities that was available to level 1-79 players so they could get that mount fix new players crave. Could even be used as a part of the advertising campaign. > > > > > I cannot disagree more. GW2 is so very alt-friendly, that locking out mounts that are currently account-wide would (IMO) detract from one of the more significant attractions to the game. What is the actual purpose that you are trying to serve with this suggestion? It almost seems as if it is another veiled whine about mounts in core zones. > > I don't _know_ what the OP meant, but can imagine that it was a general complaint about how new players aren't learning the game mechanics properly with the current leveling system. They can use a level 80 boost on their very first character, and after that have it very easy to level additional chars to 80 without improving, as they never go through a real learning curve. > > The core content is too easy and doesn't prepare you for the later level of difficulty, and base mechanics like CC are not explained anywhere, either, etc. They dident learn the system in the old days pre new player experience either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lily.1935 Posted December 29, 2020 Author Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Ashantara.8731" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > > > > The leveling process itself should be looked at as well. In my opinion the leveling process is worse and less meaningful than it was at and near the launch of the game. It wasn't perfect but it made you try things out. Noting other aspects of the leveling process I'd personally lock the player out of the PoF mounts and gliding until they reach level 80. I'd suggest a leveling mount that was, say 50% faster than player speed, maybe less that had no flashy abilities that was available to level 1-79 players so they could get that mount fix new players crave. Could even be used as a part of the advertising campaign. > > > > > I cannot disagree more. GW2 is so very alt-friendly, that locking out mounts that are currently account-wide would (IMO) detract from one of the more significant attractions to the game. What is the actual purpose that you are trying to serve with this suggestion? It almost seems as if it is another veiled whine about mounts in core zones. > > I don't _know_ what the OP meant, but can imagine that it was a general complaint about how new players aren't learning the game mechanics properly with the current leveling system. They can use a level 80 boost on their very first character, and after that have it very easy to level additional chars to 80 without improving, as they never go through a real learning curve. > > The core content is too easy and doesn't prepare you for the later level of difficulty, and base mechanics like CC are not explained anywhere, either, etc. That's part of the issues. But it's not the only issue I'm concerned about. It's not just PvE I'm considering but PvP akd WvW, I just don't have the proper voice to Express those communities issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashantara.8731 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Linken.6345" said: > They dident learn the system in the old days pre new player experience either. That's the point: this system needs improvement. In the old days, you didn't necessarily need to know all that, you could get through the game just spamming 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lily.1935 Posted December 29, 2020 Author Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Hypnowulf.7403" said: > Let's look at a few key points, here. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] Guild Wars 2 has a retention problem [...] > > What a point to open on. It invites two very important questions. > > _Does Guild Wars 2 have a retention problem?_ That'd be the first one. The thing is though is that the answer to that mightn't really matter. So a better question to ask then is: _If Guild Wars 2 has a retention problem, does that matter?_ > > This isn't a subscription MMO. The number of overall players doesn't really matter so long as those players are profitable, I think that ArenaNet shot themself in the foot by being too bizzarely kind with allowing one to convert coins to gems. That was a silly move from an economic standpoint. I appreciate it for its kindness because empathy is awesome, it's just that in a world like this where so many people are self-interested, you'll find that far too many won't spend money if they can grind and get the same result, or better. > > So this leads us to the only question that truly matters here: _Does Guild Wars 2 have a profitability problem?_ [snip] Cutting some things out as these feels like the meat of your first point. I wont be able to respond to every detail but I'll do my best. The longer players want to spend in the game the more they will spend. Your concern is money which, sure. However play retention is the biggest issue when talking about this. Why you want to shift the focus on more ways to squeeze money out from the existing playerbase rather than retaining new players is opposite to my general philosophy. A locking out the gold conversation for gems wouldn't do anything but upset players. You could lose players that way too. It's not recommended. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] the constantly shifting priorities and inconsistency of the developers [...] > > This is, again, to do with the attempt to make ArenaNet profitable before NCSoft gives them the boot. I think they're on a good path right now, though. I certainly haven't lost any confidence in them. Like I said, I think that Cantha to draw in a Chinese audience is very much a clever choice. It could be the shot in the arm that Guild Wars 2 needs. Arena net already tried to get into the Chinese market and the game didn't do all that well. Cantha isn't for the Chinese market, it's for the long time fans of the game. Cantha has been a meme for years and the core player base has been beginning for for a better part of 8 years. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] or new players coming in. > > I'm not convinced of that, really. I've never seen a game where new players coming in have any sense of the economics or internal politics of the game itself, nor will they until they become a part of the old-guard. It's only really a certain facet of the old-guard that gets embroiled with this. You cut out a whole sentence without context which confuses your response. To put it simply, all games have a learning curve where they can build on complexity and teach the players either all at once like some poorly designed tutorial or teach the players as you progress in the game. But the statement you're clipping is more about abandon content which sees no support. Specifically there it would be Dungeons for my perspective and for someone else it would be the capture game mode for PvP. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] capturing very little imagination [...] > > Speak for yourself. > > [snipped the rant about you loving the story currently] > > It's a strange desire, I think, to want to be frozen in time and yet to also want more content. What is this content to look like if it doesn't evolve and change? Times change, and both ArenaNet and Guild Wars 2 changes with them. Strawman argument. I never mentioned that I wanted the game to stay the same or that people who are critical of the game want that. Stick to the arguments at hand and don't get off track with baseless accusations. As for the story, I'm glad you enjoy it. The consensus that I've seen is that it's a bit rushed and overshadowed by End of Dragons. Where people just want it to end so they can get into Cantha. And the story beats are a bit all over the place in my opinion which does sour the experience for me and I'm not the only one who shares that sentiment. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > The situation to me looks like End of Dragons is a desperate move by the developers to retain what they have of the community. > > Strong disagree. It looks like an attempt to expand the Guild Wars 2 audience by attracting Chinese players. [snip] It's not but I'm not going to repeat that point. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Don't mistake me. I'm excited for EoD as much as anyone else but I can't help but feel it just wont offer enough. > > What are you looking for? I mean, what are you actually looking for? What desire or need have you, so strong, that must be sated? What is it you really seek? I worry this is going to come down to raids or PvP, which have historically proven to be unprofitable, toxic, and even unhealthy in the case of raid addictions. > > Of course, I might be barking up the wrong tree. So let's read on... What I want is irrelevant. I don't need to be convinced to buy EoD, jump back into the game after a long hiatus or pick up the game for the first time. You seem far more concerned with profits than if the product itself is good. I'm the opposite. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [New content is] one thing [...] > > I'm confused by what you're saying here. The edit is mine to illustrate this point. New content is new content, a lot of players are going to have fun running a number of their characters through this content as it's going to be, well, new content. When you buy a new video game, that's new content. It's going to be about PvP or raids again, isn't it? The gap between new and old players is massive and only growing. New content is great for us. Doesn't do much for new players when the playerbase is so isolated from each other. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > 2Arena net needs to do some major work for the players in all game modes and this is a monumental task I'm skeptical of arena net's ability to deliver on that. > > What does this actually mean? What is it you want? You aren't actually saying anything. I mean, you've said a lot but I can't ascertain what it is you actually seek. I mean, yes, you've made it clear a number of times now that you fear ArenaNet's ability to deliver "it," but it's like you're almost afraid to tell us what "it" is. > > Which game modes? In what way? How would they achieve this? Details are very important. Retooling some old designs to a better understanding of the game and refine the systems or design new ones in order to better fit with the evolution of the game. Getting too specific isn't great as what I think might solve the issue, say the issue in that the game is bad at teaching players important mechanics as they level. I could say a few things about this problem but my solutions to this might not be correct or nuanced enough. I have the ability to point out these problems but to solve them is a different story. And it's not my job to solve the issues for arena net either. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > I feel as if the company of Arena net need to shift their philosophy of the game from their new toy in old toy forgotten and really go back and take a long hard look at the systems and modes of play they have now and really buckle down to refine those to a silver polish. > > What does _that_ actually mean? This is very political. I mean, it's words! It's a lot of words! What does it mean? You aren't really asking questions or posing solutions. It's just a lot of oration with no real goal. > > Why is it a toy now? Why was it not a toy before? Which systems? Which modes of play? Old toy like Dungeons or soon to be strikes. Abandon maps and dungeons which languish with issues unsolved for years and shifting their focus to the new toy, or new game modes. I'd have hoped that metaphor was obvious. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Arena net has been so quick to abandon content [...] > > _What content?_ Dungeons, living world maps, world metas, pvp modes. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > We have a fairly fragmented experience with guild wars right now [...] > > Do we? How so? Can you explain that? How is it "fragmented?" How could it not be so? I don't see it as fragmented. It might not be what you want, but that doesn't mean it's fragmented. This is really just a lot of words. Living world seasons are locked out by a paywall, core maps and leveling dungeons aren't run often for veteran players but run all the time for new and free players. Except for dungeons. In NA at least they're rarely run. Veterans are always chasing the next new thing while new players wouldn't organically get a chance to play with old players through the game's incentives and mechanics. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > The game not only does a poor job of bringing new players in but the high level of convenience it drops into their lap outright distorts and breaks the experience of the new players. > > What does _that_ mean? [snip:elaborate please] Made the response a bit more polite and less rambling. You mentioned it teaching dodge roll, well it doesn't do it through gameplay but rather its tucked away and not that noticable. Forcing players to interact with important mechanics like combo finishers, stunbreaks, dodging, special action key through emergent gameplay would be better. Giving players a starting item of a hand book which shows pictures and gives a brief description of what each of the mechanics do and how to play with them would be helpful. Heck, if that book acted as almost a quest log that could be filled and turned in for a reward after completing it it would be better than what we have now. But these mechanics aren't taught very well if at all. You need to go outside the game to learn them. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [i want PvP] > > That's basically all the next section says. I'm sorry, it isn't a popular mode. It isn't a profitable one. They tried. It failed. It was a failed effort. It's entitled to expect them to devote resources and manpower to something that only a tiny minority of those who're playing the game actually engage in. What have you for recompense? What amount can you offer commensurate to what they would have to do to meet your desires? Are you willing to fund this new PvP revitalisation out of pocket? > > All of this just to get to where I had a strong suspicion it was going to—I knew it was going to be about PvP or raids, and the entitlement that some players feel toward that which just doesn't bring in any money. I'm sorry, but ArenaNet is a business. I know it sucks. I'm socialist, so I get it. I know capitalism sucks. So we're faced with the very inevitable and unavoidable truth that they have to do what's profitable. > > If they don't, NCSoft—their owner—will eat them alive. > > Do you want a repeat of City of Heroes? Complete misrepresentation of my argument then an emotional manipulation response. I actually hate PvP. But it's not about my feelings for that or WvW. Its about what can be done for those who enjoy those modes. I don't even come close to having a solution for that, as what the issues are for them would be better served to be expressed by them. There are glaring issues with it, such as cheating. Other issues are the abandoned PvP game mode that doesn't have a proper tournament system. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [i want harder content] > > I discussed this in another thread. This can't happen. Operant conditioning chambers—also known as Skinner boxes—never work out. It's because this addiction is a drug, and like with any drug you're always going to need a bigger hit. Today it's harder content, but what does that mean? It means bigger numbers. You want the enemies to have those, which in turn means that to get your dopamine buzz you'll want bigger numbers to reward you for your efforts. Another Strawman. I'm satisfied with the difficult if the end game content. But that's irrelevant if the difficulty curve spikes so hard. It's a 0-80 almost literally. The rest of the statement isn't worth responding to as its built on a false premise. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [i want the game to coach players into joining our operant conditioning chamber] > > That's never going to happen for the reasons I just went over. I can see your angle now so at this point I'm just spelling it out. It was a lot of noise and empty words to get to this point, but this is your angle. You want your dopamine hit, via PvP or raids, via haves and have-nots. It's not popular! It's not profitable! You have to accept this. Strawman into ad hominem attack. Not sure what you're trying to say here other than to attack my personal character. Which nothing you said is true either. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] weaving strikes into the leveling process where they would serve the players best, > > Except strikes aren't popular. The only ones that get played regularly are the easiest ones that can be soloed. It was the last gasp from the voices in ArenaNet who're ardent raid fans. Yes, ArenaNet has raid fans amongst its number but the undeniable truth is is that this content is not popular. Hard strikes aren't played. Try to find a strike group for any strike that can't be soloed! Strikes are supposed to be the bridge for casual players to get into raiding. They're not that popular because of the location they are in the game. If they were weaved between the dungeons and had level appropriate strikes they could serve to prepare new players for group content. This could also be used to explore old stories as well as. I wouldn't suggest the strikes we have no be put into the leveling process. Oh no. New strikes for that. They're not popular because their rewards aren't there and they're tucked away in a rather isolated and remote part of the world. As a leveling tool you could get a prompt at level 40 that says "you've unlocked the Karka Defense of Lion's Arch" and ping it on the map so players starting at level 40 can do that and possibly get rewards. It prepares them for group content if they want to do it. Using the same Strike tokens for them and offering daily rewards to completing a set of them could act as a bridge for new and old players especially if it had a random group finder. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [the old levelling process] made you try things out. > > No... It really, really didn't. It just forced you to find a cookie-cutter build that was best suited to grinding through it. If you really want to try things out... _Try things out!_ You don't need an impetus. You have an imagination, use it. There are myriad madcap builds hardcore players have left untapped that would give them more challenge, variety, difficulty, and whatnot. Find the solution with the least resistance. This is what all creatures do, humans included. The players can and will unintentionally sabotage their own experience for convenience. This is a well known phenomenon in the world as well as gaming. A trap on a tree that looks like an easier climb to the top can fool a squirrel I to falling into it because they want to conserve energy. Humans too fall Into this behavior. Take the berserker meta for PvE for example. Worst and most toxic meta in gw2 history. You all wore Zerker gear and stacked in a corner tricking the ai to walk into your groups burst while ignoring all the mechanics. This sabotaged the player's experience and prevented many of them from learning vital mechanics such as dodging or proper team positioning. The players will sabotaged their own experience for convenience unless the consciously and actively seek to ignore the convenience or easy solution. When I say to force the players to engage with the game and its mechanics, it's not to strip their agency but to aid them Into problem solving, critical thinking and learning what the game has to offer to enrich their experience. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] no flashy abilities that was available to level 1-79 players [...] > > Which is just another appeal to being a have and forcing other players to be have-nots to feed your addiction, to get that dopamine buzz of social superiority. Not only is this unhealthy for you, it's unethical, it's unfair, and it's _not profitable_. More ad hominem attacks. A free mount for new players without having to buy PoF that you get at level 1 or level 10, that you could use until getting to level 80 would be fantastic for Free players especially to entice them to get to PoF for the superior mounts. I also don't have a need to feel superior to new players. Not in my character. Especially since I would refuse to use a mount unless I fell behind my friend in a map when starting a fresh character with them. Or if they got the raptor I'd only use the raptor and nothing else. > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Advertising is another major weakness of the game. > > Everyone has to be told what to think by advertising. That worked out well for CD Projekt RED. I'd rather a game stand on it's own marits but the truth is that's not usually how it works. Advertising reminds people of the game and helps to get people interested. You keep complaining about profits but you're adverse to advertising? > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > I want EoD to succeed. > > Do you? Do you really? I don't know if you know what you want. That's the problem. You have this weird disconnect and you don't seem to realise how unprofitable all of your demands are. The sad truth is is that End of Dragons would have a greater chance of success if it did the opposite of everything you've said. Your strawman of me, probably. Considering you've misrepresented me multiple times, attacked my character and motivation, it would seem that way of the strawman you've constructed of me. If you don't understand something, its much easier to ask me to elaborate. Don't make up what you want me to mean in order to fuel your strange crusade. > How will any of that "save" End of Dragons? Never said anything about saving end of dragons. > Really though, what you want doesn't benefit new players in the least. It's actively detrimental to their health since you want to get them addicted to your drug. > > I think I'll leave it at that. Great. I cut out a lot that I felt was completely unnecessary to the conversation or pointless fluff. I do pointless fluff to so no condemnation for that, however the person attacks and strawmen are where I have a problem and why I felt I needed to respond. If you don't understand something, there is no shame in asking for clarification. I do it myself on the forums from time to time. Of the strawman you created, yeah I sound awful. Strawlily sucks! What I want, which you didn't pick up, is for the game to be polished up and the learning curve be fixed for the new players to aid them. I want the gap between old and new players closed. My explanations might be clumsy at times and I'm aware my method of communication might not fit well for everyone. Asking for clarification for one point at a time would have been more productive than a wall of text where you attack my character and intentionally strawman my positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inculpatus cedo.9234 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Hypnowulf.7403" said: > Let's look at a few key points, here. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] Guild Wars 2 has a retention problem [...] > > What a point to open on. It invites two very important questions. > > _Does Guild Wars 2 have a retention problem?_ That'd be the first one. The thing is though is that the answer to that mightn't really matter. So a better question to ask then is: _If Guild Wars 2 has a retention problem, does that matter?_ > > This isn't a subscription MMO. The number of overall players doesn't really matter so long as those players are profitable, I think that ArenaNet shot themself in the foot by being too bizzarely kind with allowing one to convert coins to gems. That was a silly move from an economic standpoint. I appreciate it for its kindness because empathy is awesome, it's just that in a world like this where so many people are self-interested, you'll find that far too many won't spend money if they can grind and get the same result, or better. > > So this leads us to the only question that truly matters here: _Does Guild Wars 2 have a profitability problem?_ > > Yes. Yes it does. This is something they're trying to figure out as an ongoing process. I wonder if it would help them by removing the ability to convert gold to gems, I think that it might. Either that or perhaps have some kind of fee involved. I appreciate the generosity but they're just too small for that kind of generosity. It means that not enough people will spend money. I've sometimes spent beyond my means as I know that NCSoft is eyeing ArenaNet due to this, they've done managerial reshuffles in order to try to make Guild Wars 2 profitable. > > So what else can be done to make Guild Wars 2 profitable? > > You could appeal to another audience. There's one country out there with a very large audience for online gaming that's quite economically stable: China. Isn't it interesting that the next expansion is going to Cantha? That's a very intelligent choice. I applaud it. It's not a setting I'm personally interested in as I'm more drawn to characters of the non-human persuasion, but I understand that they need money to stay afloat and NCSoft can be a greedy, bloated thing of a thing. > > So long as I'm able to interact with dragons, I'll be happy at the end of the day. I'm easy to please in that regard, I suppose, but then how many games have we had of late where we've been able to interact with intelligent dragons? I mean, you could count Skyrim from 2011, but there were all of one in that that you could hold a very short conversation with and that dragon was Paarthurnax. > > Plus, I prefer six-limbed dragons. I know there's a shortage of those in Cantha but I'll make do. So long as I can have Jorms and Aurene about, I'm happy. Aurene at a push, I suppose... We'd have to see, as I am very fond of Jormag. As I said, I'm easy to please and I've spent a lot of money on this game. I know though that what I offer is a drop in the ocean compared to what would appease NCSoft so... Cantha for China! > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] the constantly shifting priorities and inconsistency of the developers [...] > > This is, again, to do with the attempt to make ArenaNet profitable before NCSoft gives them the boot. I think they're on a good path right now, though. I certainly haven't lost any confidence in them. Like I said, I think that Cantha to draw in a Chinese audience is very much a clever choice. It could be the shot in the arm that Guild Wars 2 needs. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] or new players coming in. > > I'm not convinced of that, really. I've never seen a game where new players coming in have any sense of the economics or internal politics of the game itself, nor will they until they become a part of the old-guard. It's only really a certain facet of the old-guard that gets embroiled with this. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] capturing very little imagination [...] > > Speak for yourself. > > The current storyline, from LWS4 onward, is the most interested I've been in Guild Wars 2 for quite, quite some time. The intrigue, mystery, and shenanigans surrounding the Elder Dragons and the torment is quite compelling for me. > > I know this is divisive—but that's what it is, divisive. There are those who loathe the current storyline, and those who see it as the best ArenaNet has ever written. Again, the former tends to be of a certain facet of the old-guard that doesn't want anything to ever evolve or change. Everything must remain in absolute stasis. It's a bizarre behavioural quirk I've seen in many a certain kind of MMO player. > > It's a strange desire, I think, to want to be frozen in time and yet to also want more content. What is this content to look like if it doesn't evolve and change? Times change, and both ArenaNet and Guild Wars 2 changes with them. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > The situation to me looks like End of Dragons is a desperate move by the developers to retain what they have of the community. > > Strong disagree. It looks like an attempt to expand the Guild Wars 2 audience by attracting Chinese players. It's a smart move. It also doesn't do anything to alienate most existing players, either. So that it can work to appease most of the existing community whilst expanding into a new audience? I'd say that's a good move. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Don't mistake me. I'm excited for EoD as much as anyone else but I can't help but feel it just wont offer enough. > > What are you looking for? I mean, what are you actually looking for? What desire or need have you, so strong, that must be sated? What is it you really seek? I worry this is going to come down to raids or PvP, which have historically proven to be unprofitable, toxic, and even unhealthy in the case of raid addictions. > > Of course, I might be barking up the wrong tree. So let's read on... > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [New content is] one thing [...] > > I'm confused by what you're saying here. The edit is mine to illustrate this point. New content is new content, a lot of players are going to have fun running a number of their characters through this content as it's going to be, well, new content. When you buy a new video game, that's new content. It's going to be about PvP or raids again, isn't it? > > I have this sinking feeling... > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > 2Arena net needs to do some major work for the players in all game modes and this is a monumental task I'm skeptical of arena net's ability to deliver on that. > > What does this actually mean? What is it you want? You aren't actually saying anything. I mean, you've said a lot but I can't ascertain what it is you actually seek. I mean, yes, you've made it clear a number of times now that you fear ArenaNet's ability to deliver "it," but it's like you're almost afraid to tell us what "it" is. > > Which game modes? In what way? How would they achieve this? Details are very important. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > I feel as if the company of Arena net need to shift their philosophy of the game from their new toy in old toy forgotten and really go back and take a long hard look at the systems and modes of play they have now and really buckle down to refine those to a silver polish. > > What does _that_ actually mean? This is very political. I mean, it's words! It's a lot of words! What does it mean? You aren't really asking questions or posing solutions. It's just a lot of oration with no real goal. > > Why is it a toy now? Why was it not a toy before? Which systems? Which modes of play? > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Arena net has been so quick to abandon content [...] > > _What content?_ > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > We have a fairly fragmented experience with guild wars right now [...] > > Do we? How so? Can you explain that? How is it "fragmented?" How could it not be so? I don't see it as fragmented. It might not be what you want, but that doesn't mean it's fragmented. This is really just a lot of words. > > If you're upset that people don't play the unpopular forms of content, you would be better served by just saying that and exploring why those forms of content are unpopular in the first place. If the content you want to have more players in it doesn't, that means that it has no audience and it isn't profitable for ArenaNet to develop. > > I'm just taking shots in the dark here though as this is all very vague. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > The game not only does a poor job of bringing new players in but the high level of convenience it drops into their lap outright distorts and breaks the experience of the new players. > > What does _that_ mean? You say these things but you don't extrapolate upon them. I mean, for the first part, we have to examine whether the game does do a poor job at introducing itself to new players. I wouldn't say it does in my opinion. I was actually surprised upon returning to the game to find out that the beginning is a much more structured, guided experience. They don't overload you by letting you into the city immediately, and they even teach players how to dodge-roll now. > > What's actually so bad about it? You'll need to cover your thoughts and positions as to where the introduction is lacking in any given way. > > The only barrier to entry that I can think of right now is that engineer is a bit complex if a player chooses that as their first class. I'd give you that, but beyond that I'm really at a loss as to what there could be that negatively impacts new players. > > The next statmenet is a truly bizarre one to me. A high level of convenience is bad? It pains me a little as it sounds almost like saying that accessibility is bad—accessibility is never bad. It's almost like you're saying that you feel that those coming into the game have too much, that they're allowed to do whatever they like to enjoy themselves... and that this is somehow bad? Why is being able to play a game your way bad? > > I'm sorry if you feel misconstrued here but I'm trying to understand. The vagueness really doesn't help you. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > I have my own philosophies on what would make Guild Wars 2 a much better game, but all my ideas start with fixing the core game and the foundational game modes. > > Okay: _What are your philosophies?_ > > It'd be nice if you could tell us how to fix the things that are wrong with Guild Wars 2. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [i want PvP] > > That's basically all the next section says. I'm sorry, it isn't a popular mode. It isn't a profitable one. They tried. It failed. It was a failed effort. It's entitled to expect them to devote resources and manpower to something that only a tiny minority of those who're playing the game actually engage in. What have you for recompense? What amount can you offer commensurate to what they would have to do to meet your desires? Are you willing to fund this new PvP revitalisation out of pocket? > > All of this just to get to where I had a strong suspicion it was going to—I knew it was going to be about PvP or raids, and the entitlement that some players feel toward that which just doesn't bring in any money. I'm sorry, but ArenaNet is a business. I know it sucks. I'm socialist, so I get it. I know capitalism sucks. So we're faced with the very inevitable and unavoidable truth that they have to do what's profitable. > > If they don't, NCSoft—their owner—will eat them alive. > > Do you want a repeat of City of Heroes? > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [i want harder content] > > I discussed this in another thread. This can't happen. Operant conditioning chambers—also known as Skinner boxes—never work out. It's because this addiction is a drug, and like with any drug you're always going to need a bigger hit. Today it's harder content, but what does that mean? It means bigger numbers. You want the enemies to have those, which in turn means that to get your dopamine buzz you'll want bigger numbers to reward you for your efforts. > > What happens then is that the game becomes too easy for you. Why do you think that they haven't added new armour tiers? It's because they seem to understand this, they have that awareness. Whenever an MMO does this, it gets to the point where they're unable to increase the difficulty or the rewards enough to sate the addicted. This makes their addicted players angry, so they end up stuck between putting ever-increasing resources into this problem or appealing to new customer demographics. > > The more you get the game that you want, the less that new players can play it because it becomes inaccessible. This is why your prior statement was confusing, you talk as though you want it to be inaccessible. I think you'll find that most don't want that, that's why it isn't profitable. I'm sorry that it isn't, but it isn't. > > They can't fix the "power creep," because no hardcore group out there wants just harder content. If they did? They could fix it themself! It's easy! Use weaker armour, use very odd builds which are unlikely to succeed. It isn't difficulty you seek, it's difficulty that implies better rewards. This becomes a cycle of difficulty and reward that's unsustainable. Every MMO developer has had to come to this conclusion. > > ArenaNet has chosen to break this cycle. Heh. Sorry. It's true, though. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [i want the game to coach players into joining our operant conditioning chamber] > > That's never going to happen for the reasons I just went over. I can see your angle now so at this point I'm just spelling it out. It was a lot of noise and empty words to get to this point, but this is your angle. You want your dopamine hit, via PvP or raids, via haves and have-nots. It's not popular! It's not profitable! You have to accept this. > > ArenaNet isn't coaching new players to get addicted to operant conditioning systems because it just isn't profitable. World of Warcraft was the flash in a pan magic that worked all but once, and only because people believed it had to be that way. > > Now we all know better. The MMOs that have survived are those which are very friendly to both solo/small group and casual play. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] weaving strikes into the leveling process where they would serve the players best, > > Except strikes aren't popular. The only ones that get played regularly are the easiest ones that can be soloed. It was the last gasp from the voices in ArenaNet who're ardent raid fans. Yes, ArenaNet has raid fans amongst its number but the undeniable truth is is that this content is not popular. Hard strikes aren't played. Try to find a strike group for any strike that can't be soloed! > > This has _nothing_ to do with players needing to be coached and _everything_ to do with how it just isn't popular. The majority don't like it. As I've said and I'll say again: The only MMOs that have survived are those that have become friendly to solo/small group play and casuals. You don't have to like it, you're not obliged to give ArenaNet your patronage, but you're also not entitled to be entitled. You're not profitable. > > If you were profitable, the game would be all about strikes and raids. The evidence can be found easily, here. Like I said, there are people like you within ArenaNet fighting for this, but it's not profitable, and they're having to face that too. Raids and strikes would sink ArenaNet. We'd all just go elsewhere if that was the only option and the game would lose 99 per cent of its audience overnight. > > Please let me stress one more time that this isn't hyperbole or exaggeration: If these could be successful, they would've been successful. If they could be profitable, they would've already been profitable. They're not. > > The harder strikes will be retooled to be soloable soon too, and they'll be quietly dropped as a failed experiment. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] forcing the players [...] > > _Noap._ Stop right there. You aren't entitled to demand that other players be forced to do what you like. Yes, that's how MMOs used to work, but to say this until I'm blue in the face—_that isn't profitable_. If it were, there'd be loads of operant conditioning chamber MMOs still alive, still addicting you, still trying to give you your dopamine hit. > > It's not ethical or empathetic to try to get others hooked on your addiction either, by the way. "Force the players" is the number one way any game will fail. I was confused ealrier about why you'd demand that people not be able to play as they want to, and here we are. Addiction. It's always addiction. It's unhealthy, you know? And it's unfair to expect others to join you in that addiction. It's wrong. I'm very passionate about this. > > I'm passionate about this because in chasing this magical unicorn, World of Warcraft resulted in suicides, loss of life, and even mothers letting their children starve. This is what an addiction does. An operant conditioning chamber is no different than any horrible drug. You lose sight of your life, your friends, your family, nothing matters beyond the addiction. No one should be "forced" into that. > > I'd say more, but I'm afraid I'd have stronger words than I'd be permitted to use here. I don't like encouraging addictions, especially not by force. Please just accept that these addictions need to die. > > I mean, all of the games that catered to these addictions have either moved on or died. Have you played WildStar recently? > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] if they do they should be rewards to dedicated players. > > Everything should be for the haves, nothing for the have-nots. That's going to be very profitable... Well, not really. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [the old levelling process] made you try things out. > > No... It really, really didn't. It just forced you to find a cookie-cutter build that was best suited to grinding through it. If you really want to try things out... _Try things out!_ You don't need an impetus. You have an imagination, use it. There are myriad madcap builds hardcore players have left untapped that would give them more challenge, variety, difficulty, and whatnot. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] I'd personally lock the player out of the PoF mounts and gliding until they reach level 80. > > _To what end?_ What would this accomplish? This is about dopamine again, isn't it? This is just more haves vs. have-nots. You want to prolong the status of the haves as long as possible in order to feel social superiority. That'd give you a dopamine buzz. The thing is? Feeding these addictions? It's not profitable! You talk a lot of empty words about the ongoing survival of ArenaNet, yet you want them to do everything that would alienate thier most profitable demographics. This is manipulative entitlement, it's framing the unprofitable desires of a minority as everything but. > > This would actively hurt the game. What about those new players you mentioned? Oh, they'd all be happy, would they, if when they started playing all mounts and gliding were shunted up to 80 and locked there? Oh yes, that'd make them happy. I'm being very sarcastic here if that isn't obvious... It would alienate them, they'd leave. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > [...] no flashy abilities that was available to level 1-79 players [...] > > Which is just another appeal to being a have and forcing other players to be have-nots to feed your addiction, to get that dopamine buzz of social superiority. Not only is this unhealthy for you, it's unethical, it's unfair, and it's _not profitable_. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Could even be used as a part of the advertising campaign. > > How do you imagine this would go? Let's try... > > "As a part of its new initiative... Guild Wars 2 has locked everything fun behind the highest level of the game! You could glide at a much earlier level before, you could also have mounts with cool traversal abilities earlier too! Now you can't. Because hardcore players don't want you to. And we think that hardcore players know what you want!" > > That'd go down well with new players, I'm sure. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Advertising is another major weakness of the game. > > Everyone has to be told what to think by advertising. That worked out well for CD Projekt RED. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > I want EoD to succeed. > > Do you? Do you really? I don't know if you know what you want. That's the problem. You have this weird disconnect and you don't seem to realise how unprofitable all of your demands are. The sad truth is is that End of Dragons would have a greater chance of success if it did the opposite of everything you've said. > > From an empathetic perspective? I don't like anything you've laid out. > > Enforcing a system of haves vs. have-nots so a minority can feel socially superior? Forcing players to wait arbitrarily to get things you have? Forcing players to get addicted to operant conditioning chamber schemes? Forcing players to group when they don't want to? Spending money on PvP systems that only a minority play? > > How will any of that "save" End of Dragons? > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Arena net has broken promises before [...] > > ArenaNet has been a lot of different people. Execs, artists, writers, programmers, janitors, you name it. A number of reshuffles and big firing events have occurred. I was actually surprised that a certain exec whom I was never that fond of got fired too... So if they made those promises, you can't hold ArenaNet accountable. That's not how that works. They may not even know of the promises you think they've made. They're going to do whatever's best for the company. > > Hopefully that aligns with that I want from the game—but even if it doesn't? That's fine. I mean, I'll just stop playing and giving them money. I won't demand that they develop the game I want. I mean, I want the narrative to play out in a way where Jormag—and even Primordus, if possible—are okay. I like dragons. Even if they kill Jormag, though? It'd hurt me. I'd say that, yes. What I wouldn't do is demand that they tell the story that I want. > > I may not agree, but I wouldn't demand. That's the difference. I don't feel entitled to demand that they do what I want. They have to do whatever keeps them afloat. There are people at ArenaNet who have fairly stable jobs. I'm fond of a good number of them, especially on the creative team, so of course I want it to stay that way regardless of my feelings. I'd rather they have jobs than spare my feelings. That's more important. > > I've been told, in a roundabout way, that I needn't worry about the upcoming story. I won't hold them to that though because they might not have the authority to stay true to it if they get an executive mandate to change things. If there's a reshuffle, it may just entirely change the story. I can't make demands. They do what they think is best. > > That's the thing. I've seen promises too but I understand this. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > There are problems in all game modes across all content in those game modes. > > Repeatedly stating something doesn't make it true, especially after coming clean with what you mean by that. > > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > Glaring problems. And like it or not those problems are going to be some of the earliest things new players are going to face. > > Repeatedly stating something doesn't make it true, especially after coming clean with what you mean by that. > > I'm being a little tongue-in-cheek by repeating myself. Really though, what you want doesn't benefit new players in the least. It's actively detrimental to their health since you want to get them addicted to your drug. > > I think I'll leave it at that. What an enlightened post. Five thumbs up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konrad Curze.5130 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 If the last LW is anything to go by, GW2 will be dead before they release EoD. Hell, even if by some miracle we get there it still does not bode well, if what we are getting now is what we can expect from GW2 devs moving forward. If GW2 doesn't die _before_ EoD, it'll die _because_ of EoD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teratus.2859 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Lily.1935" said: > With the Current Living world story capturing very little imagination from the players as the expansion announcement has just Blown anything it can offer out of the water, or at least it seems that way. The situation to me looks like End of Dragons is a desperate move by the developers to retain what they have of the community. > I feel I have to disagree with this bit. I don't feel like this new expansion is an act of desperation, rather I think of it more as Anet are finally giving us old Gw1 players one of the biggest things we've been asking for since Gw2 came out.. to go back to one of our favourite places in Tyria.. The much loved and beautiful region of Cantha. I also don't think the announcement has cheapened the Icebrood Saga content either.. if anything it's made a number of us very curious as to how the current story is going to lead into a Canthan expansion.. specially when tied into theories about the Sea Dragon etc. It's got a bunch of us really excited and thinking up some crazy theories lol I've had a lot of fun with that myself and i'm still really hoping for a big 4 way Elder Dragon battle in Cantha :D Another point I think I should note here too is that there is a decent population of Gw2's playerbase that really is sick of the whole Elder Dragon story and they have long wanted to move away from it and do something else. Unfortunately that just wasn't possible due to how this games core story was designed.. but if End of Dragon does end up being the finale of the Elder Dragon Storyline which there is a good chance it very well might be, then those players will finally get to see this game move on to new stories and directions that don't involve Elder Dragons. Gw2 doesn't have to end with the Elder Dragon story and i'm pretty sure I recall Anet saying that this game will continue on after EoD as well so all that tells me is that there is still a future for this game and personally I am hoping it's a long one. We don't need a Gw3 any time soon and I think most Gw2 players feel that way. > Don't mistake me. I'm excited for EoD as much as anyone else but I can't help but feel it just wont offer enough. After HoT and PoF I do have some concerns in this area myself however I am hopeful Anet are taking into account that some of us are still asking for a large content dump expansion in Gw2. We want this Canthan expansion to be massive.. lots of maps, long story etc. Not another here's 4-5 maps and a story you can rush through in 24 hours.. that's largely what disappointed us about the last two expansions.. although we were more forgiving about HoT considering how many new enhancements and systems that brought to the game like Masteries etc.. it was understandable that the expansion ended up being quite short as a result.. not as much with PoF although i'll admit mounts were a very good distraction from it. > Elite specializations and new Maps and story are one thing, but if that's all it would offer that could have been offered in a Living world pack(or saga), although with less fanfare. I don't agree with that at all.. New maps sure, we see that a lot with living world. But I completely disagree with and am 100% against the idea of release Elite Specializations as living world content.. I've been very vocal about this in the past as well but I still believe that Anet releasing new specs as living world content would be a complete *disaster for this game. Not just because it would cause a balancing nightmare but the workload required to make 9 of them for one release would likely (in my opinion) result in either broken OP specs.. or complete garbage ones that nobody would use.. Either way I expect the result to be a lot of disappointed and angry players who feel like these new specs were rushed and untested. I think it very unlikely there would be much positive feedback.. so I really hope Anet never does new specs as living world content. That said Elite Specs are also one of the few things left in Gw2 that at the moment remain expansion exclusive content.. so they act as incentive to buy Gw2 expansions. I personally think they should stay that way. > Arena net needs to do some major work for the players in all game modes and this is a monumental task I'm skeptical of arena net's ability to deliver on that. I feel as if the company of Arena net need to shift their philosophy of the game from their new toy in old toy forgotten and really go back and take a long hard look at the systems and modes of play they have now and really buckle down to refine those to a silver polish. Arena net has been so quick to abandon content and to not keep old content up to date that content like WvW and PvP become stale while PvE is fragmented into a thousand different directions across dozens of maps. > > We have a fairly fragmented experience with guild wars right now and that's not the only issue. The game not only does a poor job of bringing new players in but the high level of convenience it drops into their lap outright distorts and breaks the experience of the new players. I have my own philosophies on what would make Guild Wars 2 a much better game, but all my ideas start with fixing the core game and the foundational game modes. Alliances, Guild vs Guild, revitalization of old PvP game modes that have been mostly abandoned, updating core maps to better compensate for the power creep of character, updating the dungeons to act as a teaching tool to aid players to getting used to end game content and offering something new for veteran players to return to them. On this I am completely in agreement with you. I have long been a vocal advocate for fixing up old content and improving the base game experience, specially in regards to Orr being upgraded in difficulty to serve as a proper endgame region to prepare you for Heart of Thorns which still has a significant difficulty spike over the core game. Although as far as powercreep goes the core world should mainly be balanced for Core classes. Dungeons are one thing in particular I have often complained about as well, namely the story mode elements and how they should be balanced but still somewhat challenging for solo players. This would be a good content to use for teaching players the benefits of break bars and dodging mechanics as well as the still fairly recent build and equipment swapping templates. Anet could even add in some temporary dungeon builds and gear sets for each core profession which are designed for those specific dungeon story modes allowing them to become optional tutorials for various class mechanics and playstyles which players can learn from and incorporate into their open world builds if they wanted to later. Of course you could always just run though with your own build too if you wish so it would be a win for pretty much everyone imo. The competitive game too needs a lot of TLC I agree though this isn't my area so I don't have much to offer on it. I will say though I am hoping for a new WvW map with EoD and I still remain hopeful for alliances and the removal of server worlds as they currently exist. Guilds and Friends should be able to easily play together in WvW without having to pay for a server transfer.. this is something that Gw2 needs to get rid of imo. > Removing those parasitic items in the gemstore such as the level 80 booster, experience boosters and waypoint unlock which rob the player from experiencing the game. Those items could still exist but if they do they should be rewards to dedicated players. > Experience boosters are fine with me although the level 80 booster should give a warning that this item is designed for veteran players and that using it could spoil the Gw2 experience for new players. Same for the Waypoint unlock. > The leveling process itself should be looked at as well. In my opinion the leveling process is worse and less meaningful than it was at and near the launch of the game. It wasn't perfect but it made you try things out. Tbh I can't remember the old leveling process that much.. although I do remember a time where you had to unlock your traits by completing certain events or finding certain things in the open world. I really liked that idea although it was badly implemented in Gw2 and needed to be an optional thing. I think Anet should revisit this idea sometime and refine it, I personally had a lot of fun unlocking my traits this way and it greatly enriched the core world imo and give me reasons to go there and do that :) > Noting other aspects of the leveling process I'd personally lock the player out of the PoF mounts and gliding until they reach level 80. I'd suggest a leveling mount that was, say 50% faster than player speed, maybe less that had no flashy abilities that was available to level 1-79 players so they could get that mount fix new players crave. Could even be used as a part of the advertising campaign. > Locking under level 80 players out of using mounts would be a very very bad idea.. As someone with a lot of Alts getting around the core world for map completion is something I have done time and time again, Mounts are a blessing for this and greatly diminish the tedium of exploring the core world on multiple characters. Another problem with this is one that exists in game to this day with new and mount-less players being unable to keep up with mounted players when doing events etc. Locking non 80's out of mounts would only make this problem worse. I am though completely in support of a "leveling mount" or more specifically a core game mount and this is something I have on many occasions brought up on the forums and given my ideas/suggestions on how it could be done. I have pretty much settled on making the Warclaw function that way in the PvE game for a couple of reasons. 1. The WvW crowd has largely complained to the point where this mount has been gutted down to little more than a speed boost there so the concept of Warclaw as a WvW mount has been severely diminished in my opinion.. I think a lot of people would agree with that as well. 2. It has no special abilities in PvE and in PvE it is pretty much outclassed in every way by the other mounts, so it is already filling the role of a beginner mount in that regard. 3. If the Warclaw was available as a core game mount it would not only serve as incentive for people to buy PoF for the better mounts but it would also serve as incentive for players to come and try out to WvW to unlock it. It would also serve as a pretty appealing end game reward too for players once they hit level 80. > Advertising is another major weakness of the game. Word of mouth isn't good enough. Arena net needs to show what the potential players are missing. > Again agreed, I still often meet gamer's who have never heard of Gw2.. Since this is one of my favourite games and franchises that saddens me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Hypnowulf.7403" said: > > So what else can be done to make Guild Wars 2 profitable? > > You could appeal to another audience. There's one country out there with a very large audience for online gaming that's quite economically stable: China. Isn't it interesting that the next expansion is going to Cantha? That's a very intelligent choice. I applaud it. It's not a setting I'm personally interested in as I'm more drawn to characters of the non-human persuasion, but I understand that they need money to stay afloat and NCSoft can be a greedy, bloated thing of a thing. ing in. China has their own GW2 servers. I'm not sure that Anet is offering Cantha to that demographic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teratus.2859 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > @"Hypnowulf.7403" said: > > > > > So what else can be done to make Guild Wars 2 profitable? > > > > You could appeal to another audience. There's one country out there with a very large audience for online gaming that's quite economically stable: China. Isn't it interesting that the next expansion is going to Cantha? That's a very intelligent choice. I applaud it. It's not a setting I'm personally interested in as I'm more drawn to characters of the non-human persuasion, but I understand that they need money to stay afloat and NCSoft can be a greedy, bloated thing of a thing. > ing in. > > China has their own GW2 servers. I'm not sure that Anet is offering Cantha to that demographic. I'm curious if certain "changes" will be put in for the Chinese release of EoD if there is one.. As long as that doesn't impact the Western releases though I don't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 I think there is a real important message here .... DON'T expect more than what we had in the last two expansions: 1. some new maps with the standard map content (WP/hearts/POI's/MP/HP) 2. Story expanded 3. an elite spec per class 4. some kind of 'new' mechanic or additions to old ones 5. Some new skins Expansions are NOT for fixing old things or completely revamping the whole game. If your expectations are bigger than those 5 things, you WILL be disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicky.9751 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 ....................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > China has their own GW2 servers. I'm not sure that Anet is offering Cantha to that demographic. Considering that Divinity's Reach Canthan Quarter was pulled from core partially because of China, i'm quite sure that this expac is mainly meant for western market, not for eastern one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inculpatus cedo.9234 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 There is no official information that the Canthan District in DR was 'pulled...because of China'. The whole rumor is based on one Dev's personal thoughts on what happened (Josh Foreman), and he stated it was his opinion that one of the Korean NCSoft executives may have had an objection, but there was no proof. You can easily read the transcript from the podcast, if you are interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeanBB.4268 Posted December 29, 2020 Share Posted December 29, 2020 > @"Lily.1935" said: > ... I can't help but feel it just wont offer enough. ... We have a few images of the upcoming expansion, and that is it. Why bother speculating on how it fails? We know literally nothing other than they have told us it is based in Cantha. That immediately triggers those with nostalgia to imagine the best when, again, we literally have no idea. So to speculate what it will or will not offer is pointless and most likely setting up unrealistic expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lily.1935 Posted December 30, 2020 Author Share Posted December 30, 2020 I'm going to concede the mount point for the time being. Perhaps I'll bring it up in another discussion in the future, but for now I'd prefer we move on. Scrap that gripe for the time being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lily.1935 Posted December 30, 2020 Author Share Posted December 30, 2020 > @"DeanBB.4268" said: > > @"Lily.1935" said: > > ... I can't help but feel it just wont offer enough. ... > > We have a few images of the upcoming expansion, and that is it. Why bother speculating on how it fails? We know literally nothing other than they have told us it is based in Cantha. That immediately triggers those with nostalgia to imagine the best when, again, we literally have no idea. So to speculate what it will or will not offer is pointless and most likely setting up unrealistic expectations. Never said End of Dragons will fail. I think it'll be extremely popular with the existing fans. And my expectations for the expansion is extremely low. I expect nee maps, new elite specs, a solid story, great music and a new gimmick. I don't expect it to breath new life into the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eloc Freidon.5692 Posted December 30, 2020 Share Posted December 30, 2020 Things were steady in hype and looking up as we approached the end of Season 4 followed by an expected expansion. It was okay that they announced they wanted to do another season since it would allow more time to make the expansion even better. Season 3 and 4 were quality so why not another season? Unfortunately the Icebrood Saga's way of doing things was a drop in quality. No new map every episode. No episodic legendaries to keep farmers interested. Grinding and gold sinks for the worst of collections that make mount gold sinks look tame. It is the wrench in content flow and design that stopped GW2's acceleration. Anet wanted to take the best parts of LW1 and make it work for this season. It certainly feels like LW1 again in the way that this game looks like it could flop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excursion.9752 Posted December 30, 2020 Share Posted December 30, 2020 @"Lily.1935" I agree with most everything you said. Player retention due to lack of updating instanced content and competitive modes will greatly cause the population to dwindle. The new player / new character experienced does need to be looked at. I am not sure if limiting all mount mobility is part of that answer however. What I see is that people create new characters then rush them to end game content. While the instant 80's are awesome in all but it really handicaps the player using it unless they are familiar with the class/specialization they made. Most people have no clue what most of the skills are outsides of the ones used in the Meta build for their game mode. In short people don't know their class. Then they try to get into a group of veterans who know more about their class than they do and end up getting kicked because they under perform. Most players perceive this as toxic behavior. But truly its not. But what it does do is make the players start to get a bad impression of the game and little by little starts to chip at them and then they stop playing because the game is "toxic" or simply don't want to put up with the people. Is it the people who is kicking the peoples fault, no. Is it the person who is under prepared for the contents fault, no. Who's fault is it. It is the new player / new character system's fault for not properly preparing you. I believe there needs to be a system in place the "teaches" you the basics of your class, traits, utilities and specializations. The Silverwastes just does not cut it. I would wager most people don't spend a ton of time there before they move on. Not to mention the experience scrolls and tomes of knowledge people have saved up. All of this just lets you jump right to end game content. Most people, myself included, thought I could just make a new class and be good at it because "I know the game". I was wrong and in most cases people are not good straight away but they sure want to fake it until they make it. Yes eventually you do learn but it can be a tough process. Especially if you are trying to do T4 Fractals or Raids. Do I have an answer for the best solution to solving this? Not at all but I do think allowing people to jump straight into end game content with little or no experience is bad and it effects player retention because players leave when they don't "feel" accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lily.1935 Posted December 30, 2020 Author Share Posted December 30, 2020 > @"Excursion.9752" said: > @"Lily.1935" > I agree with most everything you said. Player retention due to lack of updating instanced content and competitive modes will greatly cause the population to dwindle. > > The new player / new character experienced does need to be looked at. I am not sure if limiting all mount mobility is part of that answer however. What I see is that people create new characters then rush them to end game content. While the instant 80's are awesome in all but it really handicaps the player using it unless they are familiar with the class/specialization they made. Most people have no clue what most of the skills are outsides of the ones used in the Meta build for their game mode. In short people don't know their class. Then they try to get into a group of veterans who know more about their class than they do and end up getting kicked because they under perform. > > Most players perceive this as toxic behavior. But truly its not. But what it does do is make the players start to get a bad impression of the game and little by little starts to chip at them and then they stop playing because the game is "toxic" or simply don't want to put up with the people. Is it the people who is kicking the peoples fault, no. Is it the person who is under prepared for the contents fault, no. > > Who's fault is it. It is the new player / new character system's fault for not properly preparing you. I believe there needs to be a system in place the "teaches" you the basics of your class, traits, utilities and specializations. The Silverwastes just does not cut it. I would wager most people don't spend a ton of time there before they move on. Not to mention the experience scrolls and tomes of knowledge people have saved up. All of this just lets you jump right to end game content. > > Most people, myself included, thought I could just make a new class and be good at it because "I know the game". I was wrong and in most cases people are not good straight away but they sure want to fake it until they make it. Yes eventually you do learn but it can be a tough process. Especially if you are trying to do T4 Fractals or Raids. > > Do I have an answer for the best solution to solving this? Not at all but I do think allowing people to jump straight into end game content with little or no experience is bad and it effects player retention because players leave when they don't "feel" accepted. I do think part of the issue can be solved through a revamp of Dungeons and possibly adding new strikes in between when a player would gain access to dungeons. This would give players something to do every 10 levels, or every 5 levels, after hitting level 30. Dungeons and these new strikes could have a Random group find system so that players could pick up a run quicker than group find as the normal group find, although great in many aspects, can cause exclusion. Having daily Random Dungeons or strikes for rewards could help this process out as well. Revamping the dungeons so they force players to engage with Mechanics that they'll need to know at the end game content like Fractals and raids would help them to transition into that content. Many think that raids and fractals are for elitists only but in truth those forms of content are fairly forgiving in a lot of sense and reward players for their dedication for their class and builds. And less Viable classes and builds do get a leg up through builds like the heal scourge which can ignore mechanics. Dungeons having parts where players need to engage with Jumping over aoe, dodging, using special action keys, using CC against breakbars should all be weaved into the dungeon and leveling strike experience building up in game on their skills as these dungeons only require you to know maybe one or two of these mechanics as to not overwhelm the players. I do think that Looking into this could give players a lot to do in the early levels which would allow them to further engage with the game and be built up for success in the game. I do think Strikes overall are a good idea. How they're implemented I feel wasn't well excited. Arena net does take so much away from the leveling experience that players care more about the destination of Level 80 than the journey to that goal in the first place. What many people seem to be forgetting in this Forum post is the fundamental idea of an RPG which is the progress of power. Players need to earn that power. But the journey to that power should be fun to do. As for the other game modes, PvP and WvW. I actually don't know what they could need to really help them out. I don't personally enjoy them so I could only make second hand guesses as to what the competitive players want. Where as the PvE its an issue of bridging the gap between new and veteran players and giving more incentive for Veterans to go back, engage with, and help new players, for PvP and WvW I don't think that issue is quite the same. I'd love to have PvP and WvW player's give their take on it. On another note, I do think there are more methods Anet could aid in bridging this gap in PvE. And that's the introduction of a new Race, New class and new leveling zones. All of these could help to get old players into old zones with new players or even gain the desire to explore the new leveling zones and enjoy the new local stories, ambiance, and events those places have to offer. WHY I have an issue with mounts in early zones isn't because I am some elitist who hates mounts and who wants to flaunt my undead skyscale mount in front of people, that isn't even remotely close. Why I have an issue with mounts is that the core maps of tyria are designed without them and exploring those maps and discovering how to get up to those vistas, points of interest, looking down nooks and crannies to find jumping puzzles is eroded when a raptor can just jump over a gap, or a springer can just hop up to the next vista. It takes away the problem solving element of the leveling process and reduces the player's ability to think critically and be more observant of their surroundings while leveling. Its an experience I wish new players where encouraged to partake in but mounts discourage the player's ability to almost literally get lost in the world. Even with my distaste for that lost experience I do want to give new players a mount without the bells and whistles and slightly slower and for leveling. Why? Because mounts are cool and I do honestly believe players will be super excited when they unlock it at lets say level 10 or 15. Suddenly the task of leveling to 80 just to get a mount isn't needed. All they need to do is get to level 10 or 15. I'll use another game as an Example of this. Final Fantasy 14. You don't need to get to max level to get a mount. And to tell you the truth I was super happy as a newb when I got my big goofy yellow Chocobo. No bells and whistles on that mount at all, but I appreciated it a lot. Its simple things that really can give a good impression. And Sure, a Veteran player would lose out in that they couldn't make a new level 1 character and be able to fly over all the other level 1s with their Skyscale, but do we really need to flaunt a superiority complex over the new players at every single step of the game? I think this is especially important if a new race was added with a new leveling zone. New players jump in to play the new race and Old players jump in and just do donuts around new players with their rollerbeetle before speeding off never to see those new players again. For me, the mount issue is compounded with other issues. And What I WANT is for new and old players to play together and be incentivized and rewarded for doing so. If I was to go back and try and help a new player now, it would not reward me in game. I would still do it but we can't assume that of everyone, especially considering MMOs often attract people who struggle in social situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted December 31, 2020 Share Posted December 31, 2020 > @"Lily.1935" said: > WHY I have an issue with mounts in early zones isn't because I am some elitist who hates mounts and who wants to flaunt my undead skyscale mount in front of people, that isn't even remotely close. Why I have an issue with mounts is that the core maps of tyria are designed without them and exploring those maps and discovering how to get up to those vistas, points of interest, looking down nooks and crannies to find jumping puzzles is eroded when a raptor can just jump over a gap, or a springer can just hop up to the next vista. It takes away the problem solving element of the leveling process and reduces the player's ability to think critically and be more observant of their surroundings while leveling. Its an experience I wish new players where encouraged to partake in but mounts discourage the player's ability to almost literally get lost in the world. This is a player's choice. If you enjoy doing these things without using mounts, then by all means do so. Other players doing them with mounts in no way impacts your preferred style of play. I think it is a good thing that players have choices now and was disappointed when Anet blocked mounts from jumping puzzles because of some vocal minority whining about "fairness". > @"Lily.1935" said: >Revamping the dungeons so they force players to engage with Mechanics that they'll need to know at the end game content like Fractals and raids would help them to transition into that content. Anet and GW2 have never been about forcing players to do anything. > @"Lily.1935" said: >What many people seem to be forgetting in this Forum post is the fundamental idea of an RPG which is the progress of power. Players need to earn that power. But the journey to that power should be fun to do. I'm not sure that I agree with this being the "fundamental idea of an RPG" > @"Lily.1935" said: > And Sure, a Veteran player would lose out in that they couldn't make a new level 1 character and be able to fly over all the other level 1s with their Skyscale, but do we really need to flaunt a superiority complex over the new players at every single step of the game? I think this is especially important if a new race was added with a new leveling zone. New players jump in to play the new race and Old players jump in and just do donuts around new players with their rollerbeetle before speeding off never to see those new players again. This is your perception. Flaunting a superiority complex over new players? Again, players using mounts in no way affects other players from completing content. > @"Lily.1935" said: >As for the other game modes, PvP and WvW. I actually don't know what they could need to really help them out. I don't personally enjoy them so I could only make second hand guesses as to what the competitive players want. Where as the PvE its an issue of bridging the gap between new and veteran players and giving more incentive for Veterans to go back, engage with, and help new players, for PvP and WvW I don't think that issue is quite the same. One need only to go through the [PvP ](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/categories/pvp)and [WvW](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/categories/wvw) forums to understand what that community would like to see. > @"Lily.1935" said: >On another note, I do think there are more methods Anet could aid in bridging this gap in PvE. And that's the introduction of a new Race, New class and new leveling zones. All of these could help to get old players into old zones with new players or even gain the desire to explore the new leveling zones and enjoy the new local stories, ambiance, and events those places have to offer. Maybe veteran players have done everything in the early zones that they wish to accomplish? Also, a new class would be released with the latest expansion (if at all) which would again be flaunting a superiority complex over those players who haven't purchased the expansion. > @"Lily.1935" said: > For me, the mount issue is compounded with other issues. And What I WANT is for new and old players to play together and be incentivized and rewarded for doing so. If I was to go back and try and help a new player now, it would not reward me in game. I would still do it but we can't assume that of everyone, especially considering MMOs often attract people who struggle in social situations. And here we come to the crux of the entire thread. You WANT to force players to play together -- even those who struggle in social situations. I can't see how that would incentivize new players to stay with the game. Besides, helping new players ought to be its own reward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted December 31, 2020 Share Posted December 31, 2020 @"Lily.1935" "If I was to go back and try and help a new player now, it would not reward me in game." -ouch, so much for those threads being aimed at making new player experience better. Plenty of people help new players without the rewards, if someone thinks he's entitled to getting rewarded for simply helping someone, then that's even more of a reason to not implement system that supports that. Even moreso, when rewarding players would either be irrelevant (as in rewards with no worth at all) or cause people that aren't really interested in helping anyone to flock new players strictly to try and farm the rewards -I'm sure that would play out just great. Trying to claim that players with mounts use them for ~~flexing~~ *flaunting a superiority complex over the new players* instead of just... using them for convenience in the form of added mobility is a pretty weird take (even forgetting about the fact that new players can unlock them rather fast/easly, so.. um.. what superiority again?). Trying to claim that removing mounts from early zones would somehow incentivize older players to play with new ones [when they go to that zone with another goal in mind] is also pretty misguided. There's plenty of mobility sources and knowledge about combat for the veteran players to leave the new ones behind even without mounts. If they go to the starting zone with the goal of completing a task, then in majority of cases they'll do exactly that. If they plan to help new players, then they'll do that with or without mounts. Also "**I want for new and old players to play together**", but "**mounts helping new players catch up to the more recent content (where most of old players are) is bad and shouldn't be a thing**"? If there's a goal of making a connection between the players here, it should be to help new players catch up, not to drag old players to starting zones and then lock content (like mounts/gliding) from them, while trying to claim it would magically add player retention. Aaaaand "*new starting zone/race/class will help with getting old players to play with new ones in starting zone/s*" -no, they won't. IF old players decide to try the new race/zone, there's no reason to think it will be treated differently than current starting zones. Most of those players will create new race character, "clear" the zone once and move on to doing what they're already doing, which is late/endgame content with logically and obviously better rewards and higher difficulty level instead of a tutorial-grade one. You've already tried claiming new race will somehow add player retention before, but that's just false. It's nothing more than trying to support your opinion by covering it with "it's for the new players/player retention!" blanket. No, it's not -it's largely (or even completely) irrelevant for "new player experience"/"player retention". Overally... agreed with @"kharmin.7683" here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now