Do raids need easy/normal/hard difficulty mode? [merged]

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > Because again, the idea is to make it casual-friendly, whatever tools you bring (within reason), should be good enough. Not the *most efficient,* but good enough. If you put out an LFG, and ten people show up, none of whom has a boon stripping ability, then that group should still be able to run the content, without having to kick anyone and put out a specific request. The whole point is to not wait around forming groups and just get in there.

>

> > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > In reality, the rest of the game needs to get on track and add more requirements, not remove requirements from content that has them. The player needs to adapt, not the content.

> The game is for the players, not the players for the game. The developer that designs content first (without considering their players) and then tries to persuade playerbase to like it is not going to stay succesful very long.

 

I beg to differ. The game designers have much better understanding of what makes a game fun than players. Feedback is helpful, to a degree, but mostly about details. Most often if you ask the players what they would like, you'd get flooded with stuff that basically says "make me OP AF" or "give me everything". It is genuinely interesting how many players fail to realize being godlike in a game gets boring incredibly fast.

 

So no, designing the content is better done by professionals. Much, much better.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

>Right and this imaginary person that you describe is such a high percentage of the population that is even worth discussing.

 

Again, moving the goal posts. You were asserting that *no* such person could possibly exist. I'm just pointing out it's quite possible that one does. If you don't believe the claim is of importance, then don't make it in the first place.

 

>"Skipping dungeons right into raiding" is also an impossibility.

 

Nope.

 

>If he enjoyed CoT he'd go play the other JPs too, if he didn't like CoT then he won't go and play the other JPs either, so your point is moot.

 

Maybe, maybe not. If he'd been more invested in LS and PoF content, then it's quite possible that he just wouldn't have gotten into the old zones and their JPs.

 

People are different, and each takes their own path.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> I beg to differ. The game designers have much better understanding of what makes a game fun than players. Feedback is helpful, to a degree, but mostly about details.

 

I beg to differ. Game designers certainly have their own perspectives, and more experience in creating systems, but something they develop blinders, where they view content from their own perspective, from how they *intend* it to work, and therefore how most people "in the know" interact with it, but then it turns out that the players engage the content in an entirely different way, and enjoy it or don't. It's not the dev's fault, they are working at this stuff all day, and they know things we don't know, and sometimes *forget* that we don't know, and it can mix up intention and results.

 

>Most often if you ask the players what they would like, you'd get flooded with stuff that basically says "make me OP AF" or "give me everything". It is genuinely interesting how many players fail to realize being godlike in a game gets boring incredibly fast.

 

That really hasn't been my experience on online communities. Most feedback I've read has been measured and constructive. Sometimes players will ask for a feature that has the potential to be OP (like "I want this move to cause blinding!"), and not realize how out of control that could get, but if it's explained how it could be an issue, they usually calm down about it or suggest a more measured alternative. And even if the idea itself is crazy, it can lead to inspiration in some other ways. I honestly couldn't do my job without well intentioned, if sometimes unworkable or misguided, customer feedback.

 

> So no, designing the content is better done by professionals. Much, much better.

 

But ideally in partnership with the community.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> Again, moving the goal posts. You were asserting that *no* such person could possibly exist. I'm just pointing out it's quite possible that one does. If you don't believe the claim is of importance, then don't make it in the first place.

>

 

I'm asserting that **no** such person could possibly exist and I still believe that. The sole exception, as given by Nia, is those that are dragged into the content by their friends. But even in that case, their friends must've run the previous content, It's really hard to believe that a group of 10 players go Raid without **anyone** of them ever be interested in the previous instanced content of the game.

 

Unless they all moved here from another raiding game specifically for Raids, but that's not a group interested in an easy mode anyway.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > I beg to differ. The game designers have much better understanding of what makes a game fun than players. Feedback is helpful, to a degree, but mostly about details.

>

> I beg to differ. Game designers certainly have their own perspectives, and more experience in creating systems, but something they develop blinders, where they view content from their own perspective, from how they *intend* it to work, and therefore how most people "in the know" interact with it, but then it turns out that the players engage the content in an entirely different way, and enjoy it or don't. It's not the dev's fault, they are working at this stuff all day, and they know things we don't know, and sometimes *forget* that we don't know, and it can mix up intention and results.

 

There is that, although to a much smaller extent than you're portraying it. However, it's again about the details. Full reworks are extremely rare, because they are very costly. And they're a result of blunders. Like everyone else, developers also make mistakes. This does *NOT*, however, mean the players would do better.

 

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> >Most often if you ask the players what they would like, you'd get flooded with stuff that basically says "make me OP AF" or "give me everything". It is genuinely interesting how many players fail to realize being godlike in a game gets boring incredibly fast.

>

> That really hasn't been my experience on online communities. Most feedback I've read has been measured and constructive. Sometimes players will ask for a feature that has the potential to be OP (like "I want this move to cause blinding!"), and not realize how out of control that could get, but if it's explained how it could be an issue, they usually calm down about it or suggest a more measured alternative. And even if the idea itself is crazy, it can lead to inspiration in some other ways. I honestly couldn't do my job without well intentioned, if sometimes unworkable or misguided, customer feedback.

 

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > So no, designing the content is better done by professionals. Much, much better.

>

> But ideally in partnership with the community.

 

"Partnership" implies a measure of equality, in a sense. With all honesty, there can never be that. I agree that the community feedback bears good will in the vast majority of the cases. But also in the vast majority of the cases it is very misdirected. I've seen it in other communities as well, and I see it here again and again. Players tend to fixate on their perceived problems, offering "solutions" that don't even address properly the issue. And I'd say that's normal. It's how we function - we see a problem and we try to think of a solution. The actual issue with this approach, however, is that games are quite complex systems. Most often players fail to adequately assess how their proposed "solutions" would affect the rest of the system.

 

So while player feedback can be useful, it also has to be filtered. Feedback *could* indicate an actual problem (doesn't necessarily do it), but it will extremely rarely offer an actual solution. I can't agree on the word "partnership" in this context.

[Ferelwing.8463]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > > > > > No.. You should have never talked about a game you knew nothing about.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You brought the game up. What are you talking about? I even stated that I only did a basic google search which already showed the game design and encounter design to be vastly different.

> > > > >

> > > > > So let me see if I got this right.. you walk into the discussion.. admit you know nothing but yet hope that you will beat someone with knowledge of both.

> > > > >

> > > > > You know, before I raid, I try to get a clue before i walk in, You might want to try that with forum discussion, I don't know, running in blind hoping to win might be how you roll tho, I feel bad for your raid group.

> > > >

> > > > I walked into the discussion having knowledge about raids in gw2, which is what this is actually about.

> > > >

> > > > You started talking about other games raids and brought up TERA. Which I indulged.

> > > >

> > > > You now decided to call it all off as a joke because, well I don't even know why. With now trying to point blame at me? Wow.

> > >

> > > The discussion was about Raids in GW2, vs Raids in other games. You only had half the knowledge to have a civil discussion. That is a faulting on your part.

> >

> > As mentioned my rading experience includes games as far back as DAoC (DAoC, WoW, Aion) as well as every boss in GW2.

> >

> > You decided to bring up TERA and when asked to provide examples how they (TERA raids) are similar to GW2 even though the game is designed completely differently (30 man raids, tank and spank, progressive gearing) you decided to get personal and change the topic (aka abandon your TERA example). Part of your civil discussion was now removed. The rest can be read in this thread up to this point.

>

> If yo didn't know anything about TERA, you should have stepped down and let someone who did, deal with it, as opposed to trying to be the hero and jumping into a discussion you were ill prepared to have.

>

> The Gear Tredmill, as I said before, is irrelevant, GW2 did not have a gear treadmill before Raids, in fact, making a QoL gear upgrade like legendary Armor be raid exclusive, makes GW2, far more akin to TERA then it used to be. Which makes Raids yet another step back and in the wrong direction IMHO, (but, I;m gonna trust Anet on this.. As I don't think they want to kill their game)

>

> With all that Said.

>

> **No.. you changed the topic** by saying that people who object to raids in GW2 never raided, which was flatly wrong, and That also was your mistake.

>

> and I see you are determined to continue down it. NO.. we are done, unless you get back on topic.

 

But you can get legendary armor in other game modes.. Only PVE is locked behind raiding. You can for instance get Legendary Armor from doing PvP or WvW

[Ferelwing.8463]

 

> >

>

> So legendary armor is a QoL feature as far as inventory space. Yeah I'd agree to that.

>

> How does this make it better compared to multiple ascended sets as far as actual cost and functionality? While inventory management is an issue, I doubt it's a bigger issue than gold cost or ease of use as far as changing specs.

>

> Nice pic, still doesn't address the issue besides some comedic relief.

 

Changing specs based on game mode is actually quite useful... Not everyone plays only in PVE some of us play in other game modes but.. to be fair, Anet gave WvW and PvP legendary armor of their own since both of them have to change armor far more often then PVE does.

 

 

[Ferelwing.8463]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > How does this make it better compared to multiple ascended sets as far as actual cost and functionality? While inventory management is an issue, I doubt it's a bigger issue than gold cost or ease of use as far as changing specs.

> If i don't have the space for multiple sets of armor, i don't have the space. Period. In this case, an ability to change the stats becomes invaluable. And no, i won't be changing stats in MF and rebuying the runes everytime i switch between different PvE specs, or between PvE and WvW. I'd go bankrupt within a month (or faster).

>

>

 

WvW has it's own Legendary armor they added it, you just have to save up for it (takes a bit but you can do it if you make Diamond every week). It doesn't do the "cool effects" but I'm all about the fashion wars so I'm not really that big on the cool effects for raid armor.

[Ohoni.6057]

 

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > [i'm asserting that **no** such person could possibly exist] . . . [The sole **exception**,]

> >

> > I do not think those words mean what you think they mean. . .

> >

>

> No such person exists that tries the higher tier of the same content type before trying the lower tier? Yes that kind of person doesn't exist. The exception is when there are other players involved. Remove the other players from the equations and absolutely nobody would do what you said they would do. I mean players are even buying Raids... do they "count" as players of that specific content? No they do not.

 

Do you need some help moving those goal posts? It can't be good for your back to do it alone. You've gotten them pretty much the entire length of the field by this point.

 

>Last I checked it was about 10-man content.

 

It was about whether there would be *one* person who would like to *participate* in 10-man content. You only just recently brought up the idea that *every* player in his team would have to follow the same requirements.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

>There is that, although to a much smaller extent than you're portraying it. However, it's again about the details. Full reworks are extremely rare, because they are very costly. And they're a result of blunders.

 

And yet ANet did full reworks of the trait system, one of the core mechanics, *twice* before HoT came out, and it *still* isn't in the best possible state (even PoF slightly tweaked the model, just without reworking the pre-existing traitlines). There's nothing wrong with making mistakes, *so long as you fix them.*

 

>This does NOT, however, mean the players would do better.

 

An *individual* player likely has lower odds of doing better than an individual developer. But hundreds, thousands of players offering guidance and sharing ideas, that is almost certain to develop some good paths forward for the developers to work with.

 

>Most often players fail to adequately assess how their proposed "solutions" would affect the rest of the system.

 

Which is why a back and forth is necessary, to properly check the idea against the realities of the situation, and re-evaluate. I agree that a one-sided conversation is less likely to provide useful results, but it's better than the devs just running off on their own. I often have to turn down ideas that won't work in the context of a game, but that often leads to a compromise suggestion that can fill many of the same roles while being more actionable.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> Do you need some help moving those goal posts? It can't be good for your back to do it alone. You've gotten them pretty much the entire length of the field by this point.

>

 

Got something to say other than the moving of goal posts?

 

> It was about whether there would be *one* person who would like to *participate* in 10-man content. You only just recently brought up the idea that *every* player in his team would have to follow the same requirements.

 

Not really true either. A person cannot participate alone in 10-man content, that's a fallacy, otherwise it wouldn't be 10-man content. I also didn't say anything about *every* player in the team following the same requirements, I said it's impossible for a person to join 10-man content with other 9 people that also have no interest in instanced group content. At least *some* of them must have, and then they drag the last players with them.

 

-edited to try to make a discussion

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> >There is that, although to a much smaller extent than you're portraying it. However, it's again about the details. Full reworks are extremely rare, because they are very costly. And they're a result of blunders.

>

> And yet ANet did full reworks of the trait system, one of the core mechanics, *twice* before HoT came out, and it *still* isn't in the best possible state (even PoF slightly tweaked the model, just without reworking the pre-existing traitlines). There's nothing wrong with making mistakes, *so long as you fix them.*

 

You're aware of the *definition* of the word "rare", aren't you?

 

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> >This does NOT, however, mean the players would do better.

>

> An *individual* player likely has lower odds of doing better than an individual developer. But hundreds, thousands of players offering guidance and sharing ideas, that is almost certain to develop some good paths forward for the developers to work with.

 

Ew. Designed by a committee? No. No no no no no. Not touching this with a mile-long pole. This is a form of art you're talking about. Have you noticed that artworks are usually created by either solitary authors or small groups of them? It is because the larger the group is, the more differences in opinions you'll have and the less direction. You'd end up with something absurdly generic and bland.

 

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> >Most often players fail to adequately assess how their proposed "solutions" would affect the rest of the system.

>

> Which is why a back and forth is necessary, to properly check the idea against the realities of the situation, and re-evaluate.

 

Yeah, but that's still not partnership. It's not even a peer review. It's measuring the reaction of the audience and adapting.

 

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > Do you need some help moving those goal posts? It can't be good for your back to do it alone. You've gotten them pretty much the entire length of the field by this point.

> >

>

> Got something to say other than the moving of goal posts?

 

Apparently not, or the boogeyman will get me.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> You're aware of the definition of the word "rare", aren't you?

 

But it does happen, and in many ways large and small, debatable and fairly clear. That was just a case that I figured we could all agree on.

 

>Ew. Designed by a committee? No. No no no no no. Not touching this with a mile-long pole. This is a form of art you're talking about. Have you noticed that artworks are usually created by either solitary authors or small groups of them? It is because the larger the group is, the more differences in opinions you'll have and the less direction. You'd end up with something absurdly generic and bland.

 

That's an exaggeration, like your constant Shadow Behemoth example. Artwork created by a single auteur is as likely to fail as anything else, it's just that you rarely see those works because they die quiet deaths in the dark. Everything you've seen in the game was "designed by committee," it was just a committee within ANet and all you saw was the result, not the sausage being made. I'm not saying that they have to run with every idea that passes there way, but I do believe that they benefit from constructive collaboration.

 

>Yeah, but that's still not partnership. It's not even a peer review. It's measuring the reaction of the audience and adapting.

 

Tomayto/tomahto.

 

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > Got something to say other than the moving of goal posts?

>

 

...so you agree or disagree with it? Just calling the boogeyman to escape isn't very nice now isn't it?

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > Got something to say other than the moving of goal posts?

> >

>

> ...so you agree or disagree with it? Just calling the boogeyman to escape isn't very nice now isn't it?

 

Out of my hands. Take it up with management.

[Voltekka.2375]

It almost feels like people want mechanics to be removed so raids can become mini core world bosses everyone can kill with 1-1-1-2.But with waaaaaaay better shinies. Almost.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > You're aware of the definition of the word "rare", aren't you?

>

> But it does happen, and in many ways large and small, debatable and fairly clear. That was just a case that I figured we could all agree on.

 

But it doesn't make my original point on the matter any less valid.

 

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> >Ew. Designed by a committee? No. No no no no no. Not touching this with a mile-long pole. This is a form of art you're talking about. Have you noticed that artworks are usually created by either solitary authors or small groups of them? It is because the larger the group is, the more differences in opinions you'll have and the less direction. You'd end up with something absurdly generic and bland.

>

> That's an exaggeration, like your constant Shadow Behemoth example. Artwork created by a single auteur is as likely to fail as anything else, it's just that you rarely see those works because they die quiet deaths in the dark. Everything you've seen in the game was "designed by committee," it was just a committee within ANet and all you saw was the result, not the sausage being made. I'm not saying that they have to run with every idea that passes there way, but I do believe that they benefit from constructive collaboration.

 

Nope.

 

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> >Yeah, but that's still not partnership. It's not even a peer review. It's measuring the reaction of the audience and adapting.

>

> Tomayto/tomahto.

>

 

Nope.

[Teamkiller.4315]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > Got something to say other than the moving of goal posts?

> > >

> >

> > ...so you agree or disagree with it? Just calling the boogeyman to escape isn't very nice now isn't it?

>

> Out of my hands. Take it up with management.

 

What does this even mean? Also you can't just go "ha! you committed a logical fallacy so clearly your point is invalid!" Sure, technically he isn't correct that this kind of player doesn't exist (they do), but they're such outliers that harping on him having moved the goalposts makes it look like you're far more interested in playing a game of "gotcha" than actually defendin the merits of your point.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> "Skipping dungeons right into raiding" is also an impossibility.

...i happen to know a few of those impossibilities. At least one of them skipped fractals as well.

 

Seriously, people do things for multitide of reasons, which quite often are not very logical.

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> I beg to differ. The game designers have much better understanding of what makes a game fun than players.

Past experiences (and not only of GW2, but of the game market in general) shows otherwise. Somethimes the devs do not know that even if they happen to play the game they develop. Devs assuming that other players liking the same things they personally do is a common occurence. Marketing overruling devs to introduce elements that are no fun but someone thought they might be _profitable_ is even more common one. And of course most of the devs (to say nothing of marketing) do _not_ in fact play their games.

 

> @"Ferelwing.8463" said:

> But you can get legendary armor in other game modes.. Only PVE is locked behind raiding. You can for instance get Legendary Armor from doing PvP or WvW

It just feels wrong when you start to think that the most reasonable way to get your legendary armor for the PvE content you play is by playing PvP or WvW.

 

 

 

 

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > I beg to differ. The game designers have much better understanding of what makes a game fun than players.

> Past experiences (and not only of GW2, but of the game market in general) shows otherwise. Somethimes the devs do not know that even if they happen to play the game they develop. Devs assuming that other players liking the same things they personally do is a common occurence. Marketing overruling devs to introduce elements that are no fun but someone thought they might be _profitable_ is even more common one. And of course most of the devs (to say nothing of marketing) do _not_ in fact play their games.

 

LOL, really? Point me to one MMO which was *not* designed by professionals and you've played. Your past experiences only show they aren't infallible. Such revelation! Jumping to the conclusion that players would do better is like concluding a baker driving to work every day could design a better petrol engine than the actual engineers. Come on...

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > "Skipping dungeons right into raiding" is also an impossibility.

> ...i happen to know a few of those impossibilities. At least one of them skipped fractals as well.

>

> Seriously, people do things for multitide of reasons, which quite often are not very logical.

>

 

Wow. They skipped dungeons and fractals because others who didn't dragged them in, or they joined 9 others directly into Raids skipping dungeons and fractals?

[Dreddo.9865]

I am surprised to see some think everything is fine while half Raids LFG is like "Selling FC, Whisper for Discounted prices". ^^

 

Now imagine what would happen if all instanced content were that way. Say people starting the game and wanting to do some dungeons or fractals. Raids have brought so much corruption into the relatively good spirit of the PvE community. This corruption is starting to pollute even top tier fractals. "Show KP to do Challenge mode" they say.

 

To take it a step further this "Selling scene" reminds me of some cheap MMO I played 20 years ago where chinese groups were farming for 0,00000x% rare drops to RMT. Not the same activity but exactly the same attitude.

 

Signs of decay? Who knows only future will tell.

[Vinceman.4572]

> @"Dreddo.9865" said:

> I am surprised to see some think everything is fine while half Raids LFG is like "Selling FC, Whisper for Discounted prices". ^^

 

Dunno if you are in EU or not. Ofc there are sellers but the majority of raid lfgs during prime time is not about selling.

 

> Now imagine what would happen if all instanced content were that way. Say people starting the game and wanting to do some dungeons or fractals. Raids have brought so much corruption into the relatively good spirit of the PvE community. This corruption is starting to pollute even top tier fractals. "Show KP to do Challenge mode" they say.

 

Try to run a fractal CM without asking for kps. Many groups will disband before they even see the second boss. The ones making it to the final encounter will disband there because they are not able to beat the last hurdle and the tiny minority that is able to finish the fractal played 1h or longer to get it done.

That's not a goal for me as a player who is able to oneshot every boss in 99 and 100 CM with a clear time of ~15-20 minutes on average. So please tell me, what is my possibility to come together with like-minded people on the same skill level so I can have fun within my personal time frame. Because wiping over and over again isn't funny at all if you know how not to fail. I have to use kps otherwise I would get a lot of players that are not on my skill level and narrow the success of the run.

 

 

[nia.4725]

> @"Vinceman.4572" said:

> > @"Dreddo.9865" said:

> > I am surprised to see some think everything is fine while half Raids LFG is like "Selling FC, Whisper for Discounted prices". ^^

>

> Dunno if you are in EU or not. Ofc there are sellers but the majority of raid lfgs during prime time is not about selling.

>

> > Now imagine what would happen if all instanced content were that way. Say people starting the game and wanting to do some dungeons or fractals. Raids have brought so much corruption into the relatively good spirit of the PvE community. This corruption is starting to pollute even top tier fractals. "Show KP to do Challenge mode" they say.

>

> Try to run a fractal CM without asking for kps. Many groups will disband before they even see the second boss. The ones making it to the final encounter will disband there because they are not able to beat the last hurdle and the tiny minority that is able to finish the fractal played 1h or longer to get it done.

> That's not a goal for me as a player who is able to oneshot every boss in 99 and 100 CM with a clear time of ~15-20 minutes on average. So please tell me, what is my possibility to come together with like-minded people on the same skill level so I can have fun within my personal time frame. Because wiping over and over again isn't funny at all if you know how not to fail. I have to use kps otherwise I would get a lot of players that are not on my skill level and narrow the success of the run.

>

>

 

Even normal T4 fractals are a pain to do with pugs. I usually do them with guildmates. When I've had to pug everything has been horrible. Not because of DPS, I don't really care about that as long as people do mechanics, but it seems that pugs can't do that.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > I beg to differ. The game designers have much better understanding of what makes a game fun than players.

> > Past experiences (and not only of GW2, but of the game market in general) shows otherwise. Somethimes the devs do not know that even if they happen to play the game they develop. Devs assuming that other players liking the same things they personally do is a common occurence. Marketing overruling devs to introduce elements that are no fun but someone thought they might be _profitable_ is even more common one. And of course most of the devs (to say nothing of marketing) do _not_ in fact play their games.

>

> LOL, really? Point me to one MMO which was *not* designed by professionals and you've played. Your past experiences only show they aren't infallible. Such revelation! Jumping to the conclusion that players would do better is like concluding a baker driving to work every day could design a better petrol engine than the actual engineers. Come on...

That's not what you claimed. Yes, MMOs are being designed by professionals. It means they are better at making a game than your average player. This _doesn't_ mean they know better than said player what makes that game fun for him. And i was referring to that part - there have been tons of games and developer decisions made that ultimately _haven't_ been fun for players. Even though they were also made by professionals.

 

In fact, for every game where developers guess right, there's a number of those that guessed wrong and thus we never even heard about them (or were so unlucky we _did_ hear about them, but not in the way developers wanted). And guessing right once is no guarantee of continuing to do so in the future (as, again, many games in the past have shown).

[BlaqueFyre.5678]

> @"Dreddo.9865" said:

> I am surprised to see some think everything is fine while half Raids LFG is like "Selling FC, Whisper for Discounted prices". ^^

>

> Now imagine what would happen if all instanced content were that way. Say people starting the game and wanting to do some dungeons or fractals. Raids have brought so much corruption into the relatively good spirit of the PvE community. This corruption is starting to pollute even top tier fractals. "Show KP to do Challenge mode" they say.

>

> To take it a step further this "Selling scene" reminds me of some cheap MMO I played 20 years ago where chinese groups were farming for 0,00000x% rare drops to RMT. Not the same activity but exactly the same attitude.

>

> Signs of decay? Who knows only future will tell.

 

Fun fact before Raids and even before Fractals players were Selling Dungeons paths, nothing has changed, people keep saying that Toxicity/corruption/new buzzword of the month has increase, but have yet to prove that it has and all signs show that the exact things existed just as much of not more long before.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > "Skipping dungeons right into raiding" is also an impossibility.

> > ...i happen to know a few of those impossibilities. At least one of them skipped fractals as well.

> >

> > Seriously, people do things for multitide of reasons, which quite often are not very logical.

> >

>

> Wow. They skipped dungeons and fractals because others who didn't dragged them in, or they joined 9 others directly into Raids skipping dungeons and fractals?

They joined the game after HoT, when dungeons were already considered to be dead content, and thus were never even interested in them.