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

[VanWilder.6923]

I would love to experience the game I paid for. I am legally the owner of my own game and being blocked out of some content because I am Not elitist or hardcore player.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > > But you can't discount that the bulk of that number *also* wanted an easy mode. Only 38% voted for "same or harder" with no "easier too" option.

> > > >

> > > > And the bulk of that number also voted for a hard mode. Only 38% voted for "same or easier" with no harder option. around it goes :)

> > > >

> > > > > Even if we consider the "we need a better option" option to mean "against ALL existing options," (which would be an overreach), it is still merely equal to both "one but not the other" options, and even the "better option" + "leave it alone" responses added together would not beat "BOTH." There is no way to spin this poll to indicate that the vote was *against* adding an easy mode (and also a hard mode).

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Oh no, I'm personally against adding a hard mode, like the one in the OP, I never said it was a result of the poll.

> > > >

> > > > > Perhaps so, perhaps the version of hard mode or easy mode they wanted was not the ones the OP described, btu they are clearly expressing an interest for *some* type of easy and hard mode to be added. They are voting strongly *against* leaving things alone.

> > > >

> > > > That's true. Although there has been quite a discussion on the easy mode version, there was hardly any on the hard part.

> > >

> > > Because we already have hard modes. We could certainly ask for mode hard modes (Xera and Sabetha would be super cool), but I think few people in the raiding community are interested enough on this to bother trying to reach Anet. I sometimes chat with raider friends about how it would be super cool to have more hard modes, but it is not important enough. **I prefer more content to more hard modes**, honestly, and I don't think the raiding team has time for more than what they are already doing.

> >

> > ^ This right here, the bolded one. More CMs? Yeah, I wouldn't mind, but they are ultimately the same fights. I prefer new bosses, with new, cool looks and mechanics. So since the dev resources are limited - which they always are - I'd rather have more of the normal raids.

>

> You're being pretty naive or dishonest here, that's not how programming work. Adjusting stats to implement easy and hard modes on top of the normal mode for every boss would be relatively easy, and it wouldn't take as much time as developing a single new boss.

 

Actually you're being pretty naive if you thing adjusting stats will get the stuff done. See the existing raid CMs. They all feature either brand new mechanics, or mechanics that work in a different way. Sure, the bosses usually have their numbers tweaked, but that a minor difference. The difficulty comes from the difference in the mechanics. Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is *NOT* easy and it is *NOT* fast. And also, it is *NOT* only programming. Not by a long shot.

[nia.4725]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > > > But you can't discount that the bulk of that number *also* wanted an easy mode. Only 38% voted for "same or harder" with no "easier too" option.

> > > > >

> > > > > And the bulk of that number also voted for a hard mode. Only 38% voted for "same or easier" with no harder option. around it goes :)

> > > > >

> > > > > > Even if we consider the "we need a better option" option to mean "against ALL existing options," (which would be an overreach), it is still merely equal to both "one but not the other" options, and even the "better option" + "leave it alone" responses added together would not beat "BOTH." There is no way to spin this poll to indicate that the vote was *against* adding an easy mode (and also a hard mode).

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Oh no, I'm personally against adding a hard mode, like the one in the OP, I never said it was a result of the poll.

> > > > >

> > > > > > Perhaps so, perhaps the version of hard mode or easy mode they wanted was not the ones the OP described, btu they are clearly expressing an interest for *some* type of easy and hard mode to be added. They are voting strongly *against* leaving things alone.

> > > > >

> > > > > That's true. Although there has been quite a discussion on the easy mode version, there was hardly any on the hard part.

> > > >

> > > > Because we already have hard modes. We could certainly ask for mode hard modes (Xera and Sabetha would be super cool), but I think few people in the raiding community are interested enough on this to bother trying to reach Anet. I sometimes chat with raider friends about how it would be super cool to have more hard modes, but it is not important enough. **I prefer more content to more hard modes**, honestly, and I don't think the raiding team has time for more than what they are already doing.

> > >

> > > ^ This right here, the bolded one. More CMs? Yeah, I wouldn't mind, but they are ultimately the same fights. I prefer new bosses, with new, cool looks and mechanics. So since the dev resources are limited - which they always are - I'd rather have more of the normal raids.

> >

> > You're being pretty naive or dishonest here, that's not how programming work. Adjusting stats to implement easy and hard modes on top of the normal mode for every boss would be relatively easy, and it wouldn't take as much time as developing a single new boss.

>

> Actually you're being pretty naive if you thing adjusting stats will get the stuff done. See the existing raid CMs. They all feature either brand new mechanics, or mechanics that work in a different way. Sure, the bosses usually have their numbers tweaked, but that a minor difference. The difficulty comes from the difference in the mechanics. Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is *NOT* easy and it is *NOT* fast. And also, it is *NOT* only programming. Not by a long shot.

 

Plus that dev time requires new loot and code for that loot.

[nia.4725]

> @"VanWilder.6923" said:

> I would love to experience the game I paid for. I am legally the owner of my own game and being blocked out of some content because I am Not elitist or hardcore player.

 

Nope. You pay for access to the game, but the game is property of ArenaNet.

[VanWilder.6923]

> @"nia.4725" said:

> > @"VanWilder.6923" said:

> > I would love to experience the game I paid for. I am legally the owner of my own game and being blocked out of some content because I am Not elitist or hardcore player.

>

> Nope. You pay for access to the game, but the game is property of ArenaNet.

 

You are right. English is not my 1st. I used wrong term, I am legally owner of my game content.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"VanWilder.6923" said:

> I would love to experience the game I paid for. I am legally the owner of my own game and being blocked out of some content because I am Not elitist or hardcore player.

 

1. You don't own the game, ANet does. You pay for the right to access it.

2. The game doesn't block you from any of it's content, your own choices do.

 

Try again.

[Dreddo.9865]

> @"nia.4725" said:

> > @"VanWilder.6923" said:

> > I would love to experience the game I paid for. I am legally the owner of my own game and being blocked out of some content because I am Not elitist or hardcore player.

>

> Nope. You pay for access to the game, but the game is property of ArenaNet.

Actually he means that he bought the game legally and he is excluded from the raids content due to the current situation with "show xxx LI, xx KP" groups. Can't really blame him he has a valid point. :)

 

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Dreddo.9865" said:

> > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > @"VanWilder.6923" said:

> > > I would love to experience the game I paid for. I am legally the owner of my own game and being blocked out of some content because I am Not elitist or hardcore player.

> >

> > Nope. You pay for access to the game, but the game is property of ArenaNet.

> Actually he means that he bought the game legally and he is excluded from the raids content due to the current situation with "show xxx LI, xx KP" groups. Can't really blame him he has a valid point. :)

>

 

No, he doesn't. Start your own group, or join a training run/guild, like we all did. The game offers the same means to do it that it did to us. It's your own choice to participate or not.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Lonami.2987" said:

> In what way is that statement a lie?

Because it's missing 1/3 of the poll results :)

 

> They naysayers are trying to spin this into a "hard mode" vs "easy mode" debate

This is hilarious. Again, if you take your time to read aside from one (???) poster everyone else interprets the poll results as a "we want change". It's some others that are only focusing on how high percentages the "we want an easy mode" got and push their agenda towards that alone.

 

> Easy mode would increase normal mode population, making grouping easier.

It's one thing to say that easy mode will allow more people to play the Raids, but saying it will increase the *normal mode* population is false... if anything, it's going to decrease the normal mode population, just by looking at how many people already posted here that they are fine finishing the current Raids but not find them "fun" so they want an easy mode instead.

 

> A good hard mode would kill raid selling for good.

I hope it does, raid selling is sad.

 

> There's examples all over the thread, starting with the very first post.

Out of 52 pages I'd wager there is less than 1 page discussing those, and yes I tried in the first few pages to start a discussion about it. Was drowned rather quickly.

[Voltekka.2375]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Dreddo.9865" said:

> > > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > > @"VanWilder.6923" said:

> > > > I would love to experience the game I paid for. I am legally the owner of my own game and being blocked out of some content because I am Not elitist or hardcore player.

> > >

> > > Nope. You pay for access to the game, but the game is property of ArenaNet.

> > Actually he means that he bought the game legally and he is excluded from the raids content due to the current situation with "show xxx LI, xx KP" groups. Can't really blame him he has a valid point. :)

> >

>

> No, he doesn't. Start your own group, or join a training run/guild, like we all did. The game offers the same means to do it that it did to us. It's your own choice to participate or not.

 

I fail to see how one can not play raids. If youre new, you can play with other, new players, just make an lfg that says "everyone welcome!" and play. How does that exclude you? Is the issue is about you - a new raider- wanting to join a random group that has people who set certain requirements? It is their right to not want to play with you, if you do not meet said requirements. As it is YOUR right to state in your lfg "NO dps meters, no elitist, casual run". I agree that raids have their problems, but making them world-boss like is a poor solution.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > But you can't discount that the bulk of that number *also* wanted an easy mode. Only 38% voted for "same or harder" with no "easier too" option.

>

> And the bulk of that number also voted for a hard mode. Only 38% voted for "same or easier" with no harder option. around it goes :)

 

I'm *90%* sure that you know better than to believe you're making a valid point here. Please don't disillusion me.

 

>This is hilarious. Again, if you take your time to read aside from one (???) poster everyone else interprets the poll results as a "we want change". It's some others that are only focusing on how high percentages the "we want an easy mode" got and push their agenda towards that alone.

 

Again, even if you don't include the 7% "want easy mode, but not hard" crowds in with the "we want both" position, the "we want both" position has 46% of the vote, which is still the plurality position, higher than "change nothing" and "different solution" combined. Higher than "change nothing" and "hard mode only" combined as well. So any way you slice it, the most expressed position of this poll, for whatever that may be worth, is that easy modes *should* be added (and maybe also hard modes *in addition to* easy modes).

 

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is NOT easy and it is NOT fast. And also, it is NOT only programming. Not by a long shot.

 

But again, the point of easy mode is just to soften what's already there. It doesn't need to be perfect, especially not in the first iteration given to the public. It just needs to be easier than the existing one. This why I say that however much work it takes, it's much less than making a "hard mode" that would please the target audience, and WAY easier than making the existing versions that please their target audience. The easy mode audience just has far lower expectations for what would constitute "a success."

 

 

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> Higher than "change nothing" and "hard mode only" combined as well. So any way you slice it, the most expressed position of this poll, for whatever that may be worth, is that easy modes *should* be added (and **maybe** also hard modes *in addition to* easy modes).

 

You were doing well until you added that **maybe**. :)

[Lonami.2987]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> Actually you're being pretty naive if you thing adjusting stats will get the stuff done. See the existing raid CMs. They all feature either brand new mechanics, or mechanics that work in a different way. Sure, the bosses usually have their numbers tweaked, but that a minor difference. The difficulty comes from the difference in the mechanics. Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is *NOT* easy and it is *NOT* fast. And also, it is *NOT* only programming. Not by a long shot.

 

That's if you want new modes with new mechanics, which is not the case for most people voting for modes here. Most of us want the same mechanics for easy mode, but less punishing, since the point is training and learning.

 

The same thing could be said for hard modes. The challenge motes should be part of normal mode by default anyway, hard modes would be fine with just some number tuning, as many of the examples posted across the thread have demonstrated.

 

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > In what way is that statement a lie?

> Because it's missing 1/3 of the poll results :)

 

Are you blind? No it's not. Stop lying and spinning things out of context.

 

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > Easy mode would increase normal mode population, making grouping easier.

> It's one thing to say that easy mode will allow more people to play the Raids, but saying it will increase the *normal mode* population is false... if anything, it's going to decrease the normal mode population, just by looking at how many people already posted here that they are fine finishing the current Raids but not find them "fun" so they want an easy mode instead.

 

There's a huge entry barrier for new players. Easy mode would soften that barrier. Those who beat easy mode would eventually move to normal mode, just like with fractals.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is NOT easy and it is NOT fast. And also, it is NOT only programming. Not by a long shot.

>

> But again, the point of easy mode is just to soften what's already there. It doesn't need to be perfect, especially not in the first iteration given to the public. It just needs to be easier than the existing one. This why I say that however much work it takes, it's much less than making a "hard mode" that would please the target audience, and WAY easier than making the existing versions that please their target audience. The easy mode audience just has far lower expectations for what would constitute "a success."

>

>

 

It doesn't matter how you word it, it's still a lot of work. Not easy, not fast, not only programming. Believing otherwise is naive. I stand by my words.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > Actually you're being pretty naive if you thing adjusting stats will get the stuff done. See the existing raid CMs. They all feature either brand new mechanics, or mechanics that work in a different way. Sure, the bosses usually have their numbers tweaked, but that a minor difference. The difficulty comes from the difference in the mechanics. Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is *NOT* easy and it is *NOT* fast. And also, it is *NOT* only programming. Not by a long shot.

>

> That's if you want new modes with new mechanics, which is not the case for most people voting for modes here. Most of us want the same mechanics for easy mode, but less punishing, since the point is training and learning.

 

It's still new mechanics from development perspective. Some *will* have to be changed considerably, others disabled, yet other tweaked. You'll have to go through numerous design-implement-test passes, because this is how this development works.

 

Oh, and you won't train or learn anything useful from these anyway.

[TexZero.7910]

Oh man we're debating poll percentages and inaccuracies due to poor polling.

 

Does that mean its time to close this down for good ?

[nia.4725]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > Actually you're being pretty naive if you thing adjusting stats will get the stuff done. See the existing raid CMs. They all feature either brand new mechanics, or mechanics that work in a different way. Sure, the bosses usually have their numbers tweaked, but that a minor difference. The difficulty comes from the difference in the mechanics. Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is *NOT* easy and it is *NOT* fast. And also, it is *NOT* only programming. Not by a long shot.

> >

> > That's if you want new modes with new mechanics, which is not the case for most people voting for modes here. Most of us want the same mechanics for easy mode, but less punishing, since the point is training and learning.

>

> It's still new mechanics from development perspective. Some *will* have to be changed considerably, others disabled, yet other tweaked. You'll have to go through numerous design-implement-test passes, because this is how this development works.

>

> Oh, and you won't train or learn anything useful from these anyway.

 

Yeah. I mean, do people really think that it would be just a dev in front of their computer saying "VG has 22 milion HP... okay, I'm going to change this number in this piece of code, now it's 10M"? Because it would not be that, at all. It would be several meeting of different people in order to design how the easy mode should be, it's getting the approval, it's implementing that into the code, it's designing the rewards easy mode will get, it's doing the code for it, it's adding the easy mode to a "raid picker" ingame, it's testing and fixing bugs...

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is NOT easy and it is NOT fast. And also, it is NOT only programming. Not by a long shot.

> >

> > But again, the point of easy mode is just to soften what's already there. It doesn't need to be perfect, especially not in the first iteration given to the public. It just needs to be easier than the existing one. This why I say that however much work it takes, it's much less than making a "hard mode" that would please the target audience, and WAY easier than making the existing versions that please their target audience. The easy mode audience just has far lower expectations for what would constitute "a success."

> >

> >

>

> It doesn't matter how you word it, it's still a lot of work. Not easy, not fast, not only programming. Believing otherwise is naive. I stand by my words.

 

But still *less* work than a hard mode or the work they've already put into the existing raids, right?

 

> @"nia.4725" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > Actually you're being pretty naive if you thing adjusting stats will get the stuff done. See the existing raid CMs. They all feature either brand new mechanics, or mechanics that work in a different way. Sure, the bosses usually have their numbers tweaked, but that a minor difference. The difficulty comes from the difference in the mechanics. Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is *NOT* easy and it is *NOT* fast. And also, it is *NOT* only programming. Not by a long shot.

> > >

> > > That's if you want new modes with new mechanics, which is not the case for most people voting for modes here. Most of us want the same mechanics for easy mode, but less punishing, since the point is training and learning.

> >

> > It's still new mechanics from development perspective. Some *will* have to be changed considerably, others disabled, yet other tweaked. You'll have to go through numerous design-implement-test passes, because this is how this development works.

> >

> > Oh, and you won't train or learn anything useful from these anyway.

>

> Yeah. I mean, do people really think that it would be just a dev in front of their computer saying "VG has 22 milion HP... okay, I'm going to change this number in this piece of code, now it's 10M"? Because it would not be that, at all. It would be several meeting of different people in order to design how the easy mode should be, it's getting the approval, it's implementing that into the code, it's designing the rewards easy mode will get, it's doing the code for it, it's adding the easy mode to a "raid picker" ingame, it's testing and fixing bugs...

 

Well, taking those a bit out of order, the UI stuff should be fairly trivial. You just take the existing "pick your raid map" UI, and start including "Wing 1, but easy" options on the list. No big deal.

 

The rewards, it really depends on how complicated they want to make it. I think that a "faction of an LI" reward shouldn't be all that hard to implement, there are plenty of other items in the game that are "click on three of these to produce one of another" items, you'd just change the output on them. I'm *really* hoping that their system is not so poorly designed that this would take more than a few minutes to set up. Then maybe a little time spent on some inventory sprites.

 

Now as for the design discussions, they really should have been having these discussions all along, just casually, and there were probably phases in development of the existing raids where things weren't as hard and they could use those as reference. They should know the systems well enough to pretty quickly realize how each could be tweaked down to a manageable level.

 

And then we come to the actual work of modding them, which we can't know from the outside, but still, I have to think they have the strong creative tools they would need to make that a fairly easy process of tweaking some numbers in a database and swapping out skill_effect_A for skill_effect_G, or something like that. If they don't have these tools then I weep for the poor content developers that have to hand code every single enemy and encounter in Binary or whatever you guys are imagining.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is NOT easy and it is NOT fast. And also, it is NOT only programming. Not by a long shot.

> > >

> > > But again, the point of easy mode is just to soften what's already there. It doesn't need to be perfect, especially not in the first iteration given to the public. It just needs to be easier than the existing one. This why I say that however much work it takes, it's much less than making a "hard mode" that would please the target audience, and WAY easier than making the existing versions that please their target audience. The easy mode audience just has far lower expectations for what would constitute "a success."

> > >

> > >

> >

> > It doesn't matter how you word it, it's still a lot of work. Not easy, not fast, not only programming. Believing otherwise is naive. I stand by my words.

>

> But still *less* work than a hard mode or the work they've already put into the existing raids, right?

 

No, it isn't. It's in the same ballpark - you're designing a new difficulty level and you're making the necessary changes for it.

 

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > Actually you're being pretty naive if you thing adjusting stats will get the stuff done. See the existing raid CMs. They all feature either brand new mechanics, or mechanics that work in a different way. Sure, the bosses usually have their numbers tweaked, but that a minor difference. The difficulty comes from the difference in the mechanics. Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is *NOT* easy and it is *NOT* fast. And also, it is *NOT* only programming. Not by a long shot.

> > > >

> > > > That's if you want new modes with new mechanics, which is not the case for most people voting for modes here. Most of us want the same mechanics for easy mode, but less punishing, since the point is training and learning.

> > >

> > > It's still new mechanics from development perspective. Some *will* have to be changed considerably, others disabled, yet other tweaked. You'll have to go through numerous design-implement-test passes, because this is how this development works.

> > >

> > > Oh, and you won't train or learn anything useful from these anyway.

> >

> > Yeah. I mean, do people really think that it would be just a dev in front of their computer saying "VG has 22 milion HP... okay, I'm going to change this number in this piece of code, now it's 10M"? Because it would not be that, at all. It would be several meeting of different people in order to design how the easy mode should be, it's getting the approval, it's implementing that into the code, it's designing the rewards easy mode will get, it's doing the code for it, it's adding the easy mode to a "raid picker" ingame, it's testing and fixing bugs...

>

> Well, taking those a bit out of order, the UI stuff should be fairly trivial. You just take the existing "pick your raid map" UI, and start including "Wing 1, but easy" options on the list. No big deal.

>

> The rewards, it really depends on how complicated they want to make it. I think that a "faction of an LI" reward shouldn't be all that hard to implement, there are plenty of other items in the game that are "click on three of these to produce one of another" items, you'd just change the output on them. I'm *really* hoping that their system is not so poorly designed that this would take more than a few minutes to set up. Then maybe a little time spent on some inventory sprites.

>

> Now as for the design discussions, they really should have been having these discussions all along, just casually, and there were probably phases in development of the existing raids where things weren't as hard and they could use those as reference. They should know the systems well enough to pretty quickly realize how each could be tweaked down to a manageable level.

>

> And then we come to the actual work of modding them, which we can't know from the outside, but still, I have to think they have the strong creative tools they would need to make that a fairly easy process of tweaking some numbers in a database and swapping out skill_effect_A for skill_effect_G, or something like that. If they don't have these tools then I weep for the poor content developers that have to hand code every single enemy and encounter in Binary or whatever you guys are imagining.

 

You're making an awful lot of wrong assumptions here. All for the sole reason that you *want* them to be right.

[Sykper.6583]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> There is no proof as to how exactly it would impact anything. It might slow new raid development, it might slow LW development, it might slow various side projects that we'd never miss, they might hire on new teams to do it. Hell, they just did an overhaul of underwater combat, that had to have taken someone's time and effort, why couldn't that have been spent on an easy mode raid? We don't know enough to say that it's definitely "not worth the cost," because we have no idea what the total cost would be, or what would need to be sacrificed to pay it.

 

We aren't the ones who can make that decision for them though. The only response that gives us a remote idea of the work involved was from Gaile who said we shouldn't just assume the actual workload involved and actively warned against the 'high hopes' that it's a simple change.

 

What more do you need that isn't a complete work lifecycle for their content this year? It's really not hard to imagine given how long it takes them to roll out the current raid content, that this niche content that's not supposed to be for everyone anyways that appeals greatly to the intended audience it has been afforded to, would suffer negatively if they had to add another mode to it. That's just plain common sense.

[Sykper.6583]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> Oh man we're debating poll percentages and inaccuracies due to poor polling.

>

> Does that mean its time to close this down for good ?

 

Nah I love arguing in circles about non-starters. I bet if we wanted to be productive we should have had a poll that asked everyone what they really think the issue with raiding right now is, and ask if it is the difficulty, or the accessibility, or some other problem. Mainly to split difficulty and accessibility as these two are not interchangeable words.

 

Did it ever even come into consideration past their rabid hate for raiding that maybe it's not the difficulty but something else accessibility-wise that causes so many issues? Maybe improving Guilds and Guild Halls so that there's an actual in-game method for guilds to recruit raiders? What a prospect!

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is NOT easy and it is NOT fast. And also, it is NOT only programming. Not by a long shot.

> > > >

> > > > But again, the point of easy mode is just to soften what's already there. It doesn't need to be perfect, especially not in the first iteration given to the public. It just needs to be easier than the existing one. This why I say that however much work it takes, it's much less than making a "hard mode" that would please the target audience, and WAY easier than making the existing versions that please their target audience. The easy mode audience just has far lower expectations for what would constitute "a success."

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > It doesn't matter how you word it, it's still a lot of work. Not easy, not fast, not only programming. Believing otherwise is naive. I stand by my words.

> >

> > But still *less* work than a hard mode or the work they've already put into the existing raids, right?

>

> No, it isn't. It's in the same ballpark - you're designing a new difficulty level and you're making the necessary changes for it.

 

Hmm, ok, if you don't want to take this discussion seriously, there's nothing I can do about it.

 

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > @"Lonami.2987" said:

> > > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > > Actually you're being pretty naive if you thing adjusting stats will get the stuff done. See the existing raid CMs. They all feature either brand new mechanics, or mechanics that work in a different way. Sure, the bosses usually have their numbers tweaked, but that a minor difference. The difficulty comes from the difference in the mechanics. Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is *NOT* easy and it is *NOT* fast. And also, it is *NOT* only programming. Not by a long shot.

> > > > >

> > > > > That's if you want new modes with new mechanics, which is not the case for most people voting for modes here. Most of us want the same mechanics for easy mode, but less punishing, since the point is training and learning.

> > > >

> > > > It's still new mechanics from development perspective. Some *will* have to be changed considerably, others disabled, yet other tweaked. You'll have to go through numerous design-implement-test passes, because this is how this development works.

> > > >

> > > > Oh, and you won't train or learn anything useful from these anyway.

> > >

> > > Yeah. I mean, do people really think that it would be just a dev in front of their computer saying "VG has 22 milion HP... okay, I'm going to change this number in this piece of code, now it's 10M"? Because it would not be that, at all. It would be several meeting of different people in order to design how the easy mode should be, it's getting the approval, it's implementing that into the code, it's designing the rewards easy mode will get, it's doing the code for it, it's adding the easy mode to a "raid picker" ingame, it's testing and fixing bugs...

> >

> > Well, taking those a bit out of order, the UI stuff should be fairly trivial. You just take the existing "pick your raid map" UI, and start including "Wing 1, but easy" options on the list. No big deal.

> >

> > The rewards, it really depends on how complicated they want to make it. I think that a "faction of an LI" reward shouldn't be all that hard to implement, there are plenty of other items in the game that are "click on three of these to produce one of another" items, you'd just change the output on them. I'm *really* hoping that their system is not so poorly designed that this would take more than a few minutes to set up. Then maybe a little time spent on some inventory sprites.

> >

> > Now as for the design discussions, they really should have been having these discussions all along, just casually, and there were probably phases in development of the existing raids where things weren't as hard and they could use those as reference. They should know the systems well enough to pretty quickly realize how each could be tweaked down to a manageable level.

> >

> > And then we come to the actual work of modding them, which we can't know from the outside, but still, I have to think they have the strong creative tools they would need to make that a fairly easy process of tweaking some numbers in a database and swapping out skill_effect_A for skill_effect_G, or something like that. If they don't have these tools then I weep for the poor content developers that have to hand code every single enemy and encounter in Binary or whatever you guys are imagining.

>

> You're making an awful lot of wrong assumptions here. All for the sole reason that you *want* them to be right.

 

No different than you, of course.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @"Sykper.6583" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > There is no proof as to how exactly it would impact anything. It might slow new raid development, it might slow LW development, it might slow various side projects that we'd never miss, they might hire on new teams to do it. Hell, they just did an overhaul of underwater combat, that had to have taken someone's time and effort, why couldn't that have been spent on an easy mode raid? We don't know enough to say that it's definitely "not worth the cost," because we have no idea what the total cost would be, or what would need to be sacrificed to pay it.

>

> We aren't the ones who can make that decision for them though. The only response that gives us a remote idea of the work involved was from Gaile who said we shouldn't just assume the actual workload involved and actively warned against the 'high hopes' that it's a simple change.

>

> What more do you need that isn't a complete work lifecycle for their content this year? It's really not hard to imagine given how long it takes them to roll out the current raid content, that this niche content that's not supposed to be for everyone anyways that appeals greatly to the intended audience it has been afforded to, would suffer negatively if they had to add another mode to it. That's just plain common sense.

 

I'm saying that there's no value it *you* telling *me* that it would be "too much work," since neither of us has enough information to accurately judge that situation.

 

Instead, the best *we* can do is make our case for why we think it would be a *good* idea in general, or a *bad* idea in general, and then we let *them* work out whether they think it would be worth the time and effort it would take to produce.

[Dreddo.9865]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> No, he doesn't. Start your own group, or join a training run/guild, like we all did. The game offers the same means to do it that it did to us. It's your own choice to participate or not.

Well that's how you and a few others look things but you can't enforce this 'view' to others. The discussion here is exactly for that situation where people are filtered from game content because of the "raid community's" restrictions and requirements - does this 'filtering' serves personal interests in some cases? (rhetorical).

 

> @"Voltekka.2375" said:

> I fail to see how one can not play raids. If youre new, you can play with other, new players, just make an lfg that says "everyone welcome!" and play. How does that exclude you? Is the issue is about you - a new raider- wanting to join a random group that has people who set certain requirements? It is their right to not want to play with you, if you do not meet said requirements. As it is YOUR right to state in your lfg "NO dps meters, no elitist, casual run". I agree that raids have their problems, but making them world-boss like is a poor solution.

Of course it is your right to choose your party composition and set the requirements but it's also the right of a GW2 customer to express his disappointment when he is treated with hostility only because he wanted to try some game content. I am not saying raids should become 'world bosses' but on the other hand you can't have half LFG being sellers and the other half severely restricting groups. Something is not right here.

 

We have content of scaled difficulty (e.g. fractals) where you can gradually work your equipment, skill and knowledge of mechanics to get to the top tier level at some point. What the OP says and I agree with him is a similar solution so that the content becomes available to more people even to the casual ones. It's not healthy for the game's community to have "content barriers" and to discourage people. And if this is something the community itself can't regulate then it's time for the developers team to offer a solution.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > > Design, implement, test. Rinse and repeat. Until you have a fun fight at the desired difficulty. It is NOT easy and it is NOT fast. And also, it is NOT only programming. Not by a long shot.

> > > > >

> > > > > But again, the point of easy mode is just to soften what's already there. It doesn't need to be perfect, especially not in the first iteration given to the public. It just needs to be easier than the existing one. This why I say that however much work it takes, it's much less than making a "hard mode" that would please the target audience, and WAY easier than making the existing versions that please their target audience. The easy mode audience just has far lower expectations for what would constitute "a success."

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > It doesn't matter how you word it, it's still a lot of work. Not easy, not fast, not only programming. Believing otherwise is naive. I stand by my words.

> > >

> > > But still *less* work than a hard mode or the work they've already put into the existing raids, right?

> >

> > No, it isn't. It's in the same ballpark - you're designing a new difficulty level and you're making the necessary changes for it.

>

> Hmm, ok, if you don't want to take this discussion seriously, there's nothing I can do about it.

 

LMAO. Since the start, you've been disregarding everything that doesn't fit into your wishes as "subjective" or "opinion". Now *you* are talking about serious discussion? :lol:

 

> @"Dreddo.9865" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > No, he doesn't. Start your own group, or join a training run/guild, like we all did. The game offers the same means to do it that it did to us. It's your own choice to participate or not.

> Well that's how you and a few others look things but you can't enforce this 'view' to others. The discussion here is exactly for that situation where people are filtered from game content because of the "raid community's" restrictions and requirements - does this 'filtering' serves personal interests in some cases? (rhetorical).

 

It's not a matter of views though. It's an objective fact - the game offers exactly the same opportunities to everyone. The UI is the same, the buttons are equally clickable, the text boxes in the LFG accept your keystrokes just as they accept mine. All of these are *facts*, hard and cold. Much as I understand someone's desire to blame the results of his own choices onto the game, I can't accept it.