I want more challenge in this game

[Frenzify.6832]

> @"Hyper Cutter.9376" said:

> > @"Frenzify.6832" said:

> >I'm very much reminded of the Eater of Souls in PoF, and how people wouldn't think to just switch up their builds, or had no concept of the break bar

> iirc, you _can't_ change your build or equipment for the Eater of Souls fight without starting the whole instance over again.

>

I'm almost certain you can, but I may be mistaken. I'm sure I remember being able to go into the hero panel and change things. I thought it was only the inventory you couldn't access.

[Miellyn.6847]

> @"Ashantara.8731" said:

> challenge <> difficulty

>

> Something can be challenging without being extremely difficult. For instance, challenging to the mind rather than your reflexes in a fight.

>

> I'd like more trap puzzles and anything that requires mystery-solving. <3

 

Everytime they introduced something like this (like the protection bubbles in "Where's Balthazar?" LS3E6) we get threads that people don't like this things in their story instance.

More and more people confuse games with interactive filmes.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> I guess I was under the impression that most people wanted some form of a challenge.

Maybe they do. It's just you forgot that for most players current living story encounters are _already_ a challenge.

 

And as for hard mode for storyline... fine, as soon as they implement easy mode for raids.

 

> @"Warscythes.9307" said:

> I gave the raid example because in FFXIV you HAVE to raid in order to progress the story. Yet this is not seen as a major issue by the playerbase which is by all means fairly casual in nature.

There's an easy mode for those raids (i mean really, _really_ easy). And it's that mode you need to pass for the story. Using the term "raid" trying to somehow compare it to gw2 raids is just confusing the picture.

 

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > Don't you think that they added the rezzing because players werent able to complete the instances? I means it's not like anyone wants to rez rush, they do so because they can't beat it otherwise.

>

> I don't think so because there are encounters that do not allow it, like Mordremoth for example.

It's exactly because of the Mordremoth encounter that they changed it later on. Too many people got stuck on Heart and Minds, and they realized they can't continue like that in the future, or they'll lose too many players.

 

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> The OP isn't saying that the bosses are too easy. It's about the idea that every boss can be beaten without any trouble, provided they spend enough time corpse running. And I agree with the OP in that regard because we get complicated encounters with fine mechanics that are overshadowed by the corpse run tactic. Hit-Die-Revive-Run-Hit-Die-Revive-Run and so on. Arenanet "fixed" this in dungeons by not allowing players to use waypoints when their team is in combat because even the developers figured it was a very very cheap tactic. Yet they allow it in story instances. That's what the OP said, not that the encounters have too easy encounters or lack mechanics.

>

> edit: basically, death should reset the fight, unless it has many long phases, then it could reset to the latest phase instead. This has nothing to do with how challenging the fight mechanics are, which I can repeat again, I think are mostly fine.

You do remember what was the cost of fixing respawn mechanics in dungeons, right?

For anyone that doesn't remember, i will answer - anet nad to nerf practically all dungeon boss fights to compensate. The same would happen in the story - if the encounter is supposed to reset after failure, it would need to be way easier.

 

I'm not sure if OP would want that, although it _would_ be an acceptable solution. It would just run the danger of making the fights more boring (Zhaitan fight anyone?).

 

 

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> It's exactly because of the Mordremoth encounter that they changed it later on.

 

Did they? Is that written anywhere and explicitly stated that was the reason?

 

> For anyone that doesn't remember, i will answer - anet nad to nerf practically all dungeon boss fights to compensate. The same would happen in the story - if the encounter is supposed to reset after failure, it would need to be way easier.

 

I don't remember any of those "global heavy nerfs", only that players got good playing the game. Sure some bosses were nerfed but not as "compensation" for that, in fact many bosses were nerfed much much later (like Simin) while others were barely touched (Subject Alpha). Also, they made some -other- bosses significantly harder, like all Ascalonian Catacombs bosses, while also introducing Fractals with higher difficulty than core dungeons AND the only extra dungeon path (Aetherpath) that was ever added had significantly higher difficulty than most other dungeon paths. I don't see any kind of "evidence" that they nerfed the difficulty of all dungeons to compensate for the removal of death rushing. So the argument "if they remove death rushing, the content will be nerfed" is really weak.

[Malediktus.9250]

> @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > > > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > > > @"Zaraki.5784" said:

> > > > > How fun, just yesterday I read a topic named "Stop making story bosses hard!".

> > > > > Now I feel sad for anet...they can't make everybody happy since these are two completely opposite opinions....

> > > > >

> > > > Have at least 3 difficulty modes (easy (current difficulty), normal and hardcore)

> > > >

> > > > As long as Anets mantra is one difficulty for everyone they cannot win indeed.

> > > >

> > >

> > > The last two Living World updates arrived "late" according to many posters on the forums. That was with one difficulty mode for story.

> > >

> > > Also, as there are more calls (by my reckoning, anyway) for easier than for harder, why would the current level of "difficulty" be the easy mode?

> >

> > Since it is impossible to fail them they are baby mode at best. Normal mode would be if you die the instance would have to be restarted (+ some other tweaks to mob difficulty). Hardcore mode would be if you or an important NPC dies you have to restart (+some additional mob difficulty tweaks).

>

> What about the people who ask for nerfs to the current "difficulty?" The only reason I could see to add modes would be to have the content serve more people. Catering to one end of the spectrum and not the other ignores the fact that people at both ends are not enjoying the current approach.

 

How many actually ask for nerfs? I hardly ever see anyone ask for nerfs, just hear people saying LS is boring

[Dante.1763]

> @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > > > > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > > > > @"Zaraki.5784" said:

> > > > > > How fun, just yesterday I read a topic named "Stop making story bosses hard!".

> > > > > > Now I feel sad for anet...they can't make everybody happy since these are two completely opposite opinions....

> > > > > >

> > > > > Have at least 3 difficulty modes (easy (current difficulty), normal and hardcore)

> > > > >

> > > > > As long as Anets mantra is one difficulty for everyone they cannot win indeed.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > The last two Living World updates arrived "late" according to many posters on the forums. That was with one difficulty mode for story.

> > > >

> > > > Also, as there are more calls (by my reckoning, anyway) for easier than for harder, why would the current level of "difficulty" be the easy mode?

> > >

> > > Since it is impossible to fail them they are baby mode at best. Normal mode would be if you die the instance would have to be restarted (+ some other tweaks to mob difficulty). Hardcore mode would be if you or an important NPC dies you have to restart (+some additional mob difficulty tweaks).

> >

> > What about the people who ask for nerfs to the current "difficulty?" The only reason I could see to add modes would be to have the content serve more people. Catering to one end of the spectrum and not the other ignores the fact that people at both ends are not enjoying the current approach.

>

> How many actually ask for nerfs? I hardly ever see anyone ask for nerfs, just hear people saying LS is boring

 

Everytime a boss is suddenly hard they ask for nerfs.

 

Mordremoth, Eater Of Souls, The Centuar at the end of the Caithe missions all had threads asking for nerfs about them due to difficulty, and at least one of them had one not that long ago(Eater Of Souls) there was a thread made earlier this month asking to stop making the LW hard. The exterminator robot in the story with the Olmakahn Charr also had complaints though i dont remember it being nerfed, thankfully. Players complained about Arah(Victory or death) enough that it got nerfed to be made soloable, Prior to that the platform with the three towers in the same instance had complaints and it got nerfed as well.

 

 

I could go find individual threads though alot of them existed on the older forums.

[Ayakaru.6583]

> @"Dante.1763" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > > > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > > > > > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > > > > > @"Zaraki.5784" said:

> > > > > > > How fun, just yesterday I read a topic named "Stop making story bosses hard!".

> > > > > > > Now I feel sad for anet...they can't make everybody happy since these are two completely opposite opinions....

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > Have at least 3 difficulty modes (easy (current difficulty), normal and hardcore)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > As long as Anets mantra is one difficulty for everyone they cannot win indeed.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > The last two Living World updates arrived "late" according to many posters on the forums. That was with one difficulty mode for story.

> > > > >

> > > > > Also, as there are more calls (by my reckoning, anyway) for easier than for harder, why would the current level of "difficulty" be the easy mode?

> > > >

> > > > Since it is impossible to fail them they are baby mode at best. Normal mode would be if you die the instance would have to be restarted (+ some other tweaks to mob difficulty). Hardcore mode would be if you or an important NPC dies you have to restart (+some additional mob difficulty tweaks).

> > >

> > > What about the people who ask for nerfs to the current "difficulty?" The only reason I could see to add modes would be to have the content serve more people. Catering to one end of the spectrum and not the other ignores the fact that people at both ends are not enjoying the current approach.

> >

> > How many actually ask for nerfs? I hardly ever see anyone ask for nerfs, just hear people saying LS is boring

>

> Everytime a boss is suddenly hard they ask for nerfs.

>

> Mordremoth, Eater Of Souls, The Centuar at the end of the Caithe missions all had threads asking for nerfs about them due to difficulty, and at least one of them had one not that long ago(Eater Of Souls) there was a thread made earlier this month asking to stop making the LW hard. The exterminator robot in the story with the Olmakahn Charr also had complaints though i dont remember it being nerfed, thankfully. Players complained about Arah(Victory or death) enough that it got nerfed to be made soloable, Prior to that the platform with the three towers in the same instance had complaints and it got nerfed as well.

>

>

> I could go find individual threads though alot of them existed on the older forums.

 

They only cry because they couldn't clear it in one go, with their auto-attack, in non-oriented gear.

Instead of unitizing their gear, and adjusting their skills to match the fight they ask anet to make the boss easy enough for their non-builds to clear it without any hiccups

[Frenzify.6832]

> @"Miellyn.6847" said:

> > @"Ashantara.8731" said:

> > challenge <> difficulty

> >

> > Something can be challenging without being extremely difficult. For instance, challenging to the mind rather than your reflexes in a fight.

> >

> > I'd like more trap puzzles and anything that requires mystery-solving. <3

>

> Everytime they introduced something like this (like the protection bubbles in "Where's Balthazar?" LS3E6) we get threads that people don't like this things in their story instance.

> More and more people confuse games with interactive filmes.

 

Pretty much how I see it too. A lot of the time it does feel like people don't want to actually play the game, and just want to consume the story. For sure, I don't doubt that there are a decent number of people who legitimately find the content difficult, but there are also those who find the content braindead. As has been said, unless they put in some kind of difficulty toggle, they will only be able to cater to one side, or worse. Leave it in the middle where no one is happy.

[Warscythes.9307]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

>>There's an easy mode for those raids (i mean really, really easy). And it's that mode you need to pass for the story. Using the term "raid" trying to somehow compare it to gw2 raids is just confusing the picture.

 

For FFXIV? I would say the story mode raid is harder than any of the GW2 story bosses but even that is beside the point. The importance is that you can definitely fail to complete it which is currently something that's not present here.

 

WoW's LFR is practically a joke but is still possible to fail.

[Torolan.5816]

Maybe look at it this way:

For the OP and many other people in this thread, changing gear and skills is the solution to any GW2 problem. You have the resources, time and probably most important the will to do that. It may not even be that you have great reflexes or can read a mob after some tries to defeat it, trial and error will do it after some time. All fine and dandy.

 

But:

Imagine someone plays an hour a day. Girlfriends, Boyfriends, parents, children, work matters interrupt that spare game time. You simply don´t have the will to adapt then, you want to play your favorite game for a little relaxing game time. I highly doubt that many of these people are actually willing to min-max anymore, even if they want to. So to keep that players in the game, Anet is basically forced to keep the ls as easy as possible. And even that comparably easier mode is too much for many people.

 

Therefore the introduction of raids was probably a mistake (burn Carthage! ^^ ) or at least a high level risk game at this curve in gamer behavior and demographic statistics, especially with fractals already challenging a large majority of players at even middle levels.

[Warscythes.9307]

> @"Torolan.5816" said:

> Maybe look at it this way:

> For the OP and many other people in this thread, changing gear and skills is the solution to any GW2 problem. You have the resources, time and probably most important the will to do that. It may not even be that you have great reflexes or can read a mob after some tries to defeat it, trial and error will do it after some time. All fine and dandy.

>

> But:

> Imagine someone plays an hour a day. Girlfriends, Boyfriends, parents, children, work matters interrupt that spare game time. You simply don´t have the will to adapt then, you want to play your favorite game for a little relaxing game time. I highly doubt that many of these people are actually willing to min-max anymore, even if they want to. So to keep that players in the game, Anet is basically forced to keep the ls as easy as possible. And even that comparably easier mode is too much for many people.

>

> Therefore the introduction of raids was probably a mistake (burn Carthage! ^^ ) or at least a high level risk game at this curve in gamer behavior and demographic statistics, especially with fractals already challenging a large majority of players at even middle levels.

 

I think the issue is that you don't understand what sort game you are playing.

 

This is not a mobile game designed for everybody ages 3 and up. This is an hybrid action tab MMORPG which by definition requires reflexes and is harder than most other tab based MMOs. It offers much more customization via skills, traits and gear stats than most MMO on the market. Your very basic defense is an action that provides a .75second evade frame with a 10 second cd. The game is easy to pick up and put down which is why people like me who has a job and other daily personal matter still play it despite the hectic schedule. It does not mean it is easy because at it's core, GW2's combat system is difficult compared to mainstream MMOs.

 

We change our traits and skills etc because that is what the game expects you to do. Why else is the option given? Otherwise they could have just locked 90% of the customization like FFXIV and WoW and call it a day. The feature is designed to be used.

 

Honestly I am frankly a bit insulted that you think people who are busy are simply incapable of rudimentary thinking. There's a generation of people who grew up with games and being older doesn't mean we suddenly do not understand how basic mechanics work. We may be rusty, we might ask more questions or read more guides during lunch but it does not mean we are not willing to improve or get better.

 

 

[Torolan.5816]

> @"Warscythes.9307" said:

> I think the issue is that you don't understand what sort game you are playing.

>

> This is not a mobile game designed for everybody ages 3 and up. This is an hybrid action tab MMORPG which by definition requires reflexes and is harder than most other tab based MMOs. It offers much more customization via skills, traits and gear stats than most MMO on the market. Your very basic defense is an action that provides a .75second evade frame with a 10 second cd. The game is easy to pick up and put down which is why people like me who has a job and other daily personal matter still play it despite the hectic schedule. It does not mean it is easy because at it's core, GW2's combat system is difficult compared to mainstream MMOs.

>

> We change our traits and skills etc because that is what the game expects you to do. Why else is the option given? Otherwise they could have just locked 90% of the customization like FFXIV and WoW and call it a day. The feature is designed to be used.

>

> Honestly I am frankly a bit insulted that you think people who are busy are simply incapable of rudimentary thinking. There's a generation of people who grew up with games and being older doesn't mean we suddenly do not understand how basic mechanics work. We may be rusty, we might ask more questions or read more guides during lunch but it does not mean we are not willing to improve or get better.

>

>

I have no problem with people who seek challenges and voice their opinion. I am a DAOC, Eve Online and WOW veteran and know how to fight for the stuff I like, and I was never stuck for longer on a ls boss. Most are really easy and you can indeed die your way over them. But I am also not blind to the change in gaming behavior and the simple idea that we as gamers who were used to grind our way through levels with hard mobs may not be the target group for gaming companies anymore. So I simply tried to give an explanation why things could be the way they are right now.

 

I opposed raids because of the commitment, group building issues, elitism, special rewards and class restrains, not because they were difficult.

 

I also don´t think that people with busy lives are incapable of mob reading or rudimentary thinking, quite the contrary. But I think a large percentage is unwilling to spend the hour they play with the customization of their skills.

 

So I did not want to challenge your position or insult you. If you still have the reflexes you had when you were 20, good for you. But consider that you are probably a top 10 person in that regard then. As an example, I play on a foosball table then and when with a young man that is 23 years old. I was a pretty good foosball table player when I was his age, but I see how I can´t keep up with him from experience alone as my reflexes are failing me here and there against him. I see with my own eyes how people fail to keep up with dodging in fractals or even the open world. How do you expect them to beat a punishing boss?

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @"Torolan.5816" said:

> I have no problem with people who seek challenges and voice their opinion. I am a DAOC, Eve Online and WOW veteran and know how to fight for the stuff I like, and I was never stuck for longer on a ls boss. Most are really easy and you can indeed die your way over them. But I am also not blind to the change in gaming behavior and the simple idea that we as gamers who were used to grind our way through levels with hard mobs may not be the target group for gaming companies anymore. So I simply tried to give an explanation why things could be the way they are right now.

 

I won't speak to other gaming companies, however, I think I've observed ANet enough over the years to infer some things. I believe ANet management's hearts lie with the hardcore gamers _who are devoted to their games_. However, as a business, they also want the money from less committed players as well. That's why so many aspects of GW2 are compromises. Those compromises include story fights, and even raids -- which certainly _could_ be harder and thus exclude more people.

 

The biggest concession to players who just want to stomp some mobs in their down time without thinking overly much is the core open world. The net result of that is that when ANet presents content that is harder (and they've been doing so since the first year of the game), those used to the core open world don't have fun and complain. Fortunately, even such players adapt, which is why some of the initial complainers (the ones who don't rage quit) step up their game in some fashion, only to complain again the next time ANet steps up the challenge.

 

As far as compromises go, the compromise to present bosses which can kill characters in story fights while allowing those players to res rush them is not a fun compromise at either end of the spectrum. Those who find the fights easier dislike the idea, as it removes the chance of failing and having to start over. For challenge to exist, there has to be the possibility of failure. Meanwhile, for those players who are having to res rush for whatever reason are presented with an experience that is neither fulfilling, nor fun.

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

Would be nice if they would lock exclusive rewards behind difficult solo content. At least If you cant succeed at it then, you have nobody else to blame but yourself.

[Warscythes.9307]

> @"Torolan.5816" said:

> > @"Warscythes.9307" said:

> > I think the issue is that you don't understand what sort game you are playing.

> >

> > This is not a mobile game designed for everybody ages 3 and up. This is an hybrid action tab MMORPG which by definition requires reflexes and is harder than most other tab based MMOs. It offers much more customization via skills, traits and gear stats than most MMO on the market. Your very basic defense is an action that provides a .75second evade frame with a 10 second cd. The game is easy to pick up and put down which is why people like me who has a job and other daily personal matter still play it despite the hectic schedule. It does not mean it is easy because at it's core, GW2's combat system is difficult compared to mainstream MMOs.

> >

> > We change our traits and skills etc because that is what the game expects you to do. Why else is the option given? Otherwise they could have just locked 90% of the customization like FFXIV and WoW and call it a day. The feature is designed to be used.

> >

> > Honestly I am frankly a bit insulted that you think people who are busy are simply incapable of rudimentary thinking. There's a generation of people who grew up with games and being older doesn't mean we suddenly do not understand how basic mechanics work. We may be rusty, we might ask more questions or read more guides during lunch but it does not mean we are not willing to improve or get better.

> >

> >

> I have no problem with people who seek challenges and voice their opinion. I am a DAOC, Eve Online and WOW veteran and know how to fight for the stuff I like, and I was never stuck for longer on a ls boss. Most are really easy and you can indeed die your way over them. But I am also not blind to the change in gaming behavior and the simple idea that we as gamers who were used to grind our way through levels with hard mobs may not be the target group for gaming companies anymore. So I simply tried to give an explanation why things could be the way they are right now.

>

> I opposed raids because of the commitment, group building issues, elitism, special rewards and class restrains, not because they were difficult.

>

> I also don´t think that people with busy lives are incapable of mob reading or rudimentary thinking, quite the contrary. But I think a large percentage is unwilling to spend the hour they play with the customization of their skills.

>

> So I did not want to challenge your position or insult you. If you still have the reflexes you had when you were 20, good for you. But consider that you are probably a top 10 person in that regard then. As an example, I play on a foosball table then and when with a young man that is 23 years old. I was a pretty good foosball table player when I was his age, but I see how I can´t keep up with him from experience alone as my reflexes are failing me here and there against him. I see with my own eyes how people fail to keep up with dodging in fractals or even the open world. How do you expect them to beat a punishing boss?

 

I am sorry to say then that this is simply not the type of game that you think this is. Yes the game demographic is changing and there are more games designed to appeal to them. This is again at it's core combat feature is an easy game. Do not mistake casual for easy as they are not mutually exclusive. There are all sorts of different types of video games in the market. Ranging from the very casual such as Japanese mobile games that play for you, to games such as Dota2 that players cannot master after even hundreds of hours. As I demonstrated in my previous post; this is by definition not suppose to be an easy game. It is an action based that require split second reflex, it offers extensive amount of number crunching and customization to most MMOs on the market. You do not go to Dota2 players and tell them that they should make the game accessible to everyone by removing last hitting or losing gold on death, nor do you go to csgo and ask them to turn on autoaim because some people just can't aim. You will be laughed out and have the door slammed on you. If they just can't do it? The response is just either get better or play something else. There's League of Legends or Overwatch and both are incredibly successful games in their own right. To follow your foosball example, what did the older gentleman do when he realizes he can't keep up with the young adult? Did he complain that the game should be made easier so he can have a chance? Or did he perhaps just go play something else after awhile or maybe even have fun despite losing?

 

I do not disagree that some features can be improved and appeal to the more casual market more. However it should not come at the expense of the core combat features of the game because is good for business. Allow players to restart fights instantly, offer better tutorial and explanations, not put it to a level where you literally cannot lose which is the issue of the topic. I do not want raid or brainkilling difficult enemies in story instances. In fact I would argue the current difficulty is about right. I just want the ability to fail which is not present in the current story of the game.

[Torolan.5816]

> @"Warscythes.9307" said:

> I am sorry to say then that this is simply not the type of game that you think this is. Yes the game demographic is changing and there are more games designed to appeal to them. This is again at it's core combat feature is an easy game. Do not mistake casual for easy as they are not mutually exclusive. There are all sorts of different types of video games in the market. Ranging from the very casual such as Japanese mobile games that play for you, to games such as Dota2 that players cannot master after even hundreds of hours. As I demonstrated in my previous post; this is by definition not suppose to be an easy game. It is an action based that require split second reflex, it offers extensive amount of number crunching and customization to most MMOs on the market. You do not go to Dota2 players and tell them that they should make the game accessible to everyone by removing last hitting or losing gold on death, nor do you go to csgo and ask them to turn on autoaim because some people just can't aim. You will be laughed out and have the door slammed on you. If they just can't do it? The response is just either get better or play something else. There's League of Legends or Overwatch and both are incredibly successful games in their own right. To follow your foosball example, what did the older gentleman do when he realizes he can't keep up with the young adult? Did he complain that the game should be made easier so he can have a chance? Or did he perhaps just go play something else after awhile or maybe even have fun despite losing?

>

> I do not disagree that some features can be improved and appeal to the more casual market more. However it should not come at the expense of the core combat features of the game because is good for business. Allow players to restart fights instantly, offer better tutorial and explanations, not put it to a level where you literally cannot lose which is the issue of the topic. I do not want raid or brainkilling difficult enemies in story instances. In fact I would argue the current difficulty is about right. I just want the ability to fail which is not present in the current story of the game.

 

Then I would say that the game you want GW2 to be would not be as sustainable as GW2 probably is. Which again leads me to the conclusion that the MMO as we learned it in the older days is gone. Maybe GW2 was envisioned as such a game when it started, but the challenge already went down after the beta. What did you expect would happen? Players would get used to rising challenges? Why should they when much more casual games are around?

 

The last online shooter I played is Unreal Tournament, so I can´t fight on that front to be honest.

 

The hardest online game game I personally played is EVE Online. For its genre, it has survived long and pretty good. But you can say without getting red in the face is that it is loosing new players like no other game because of its unforgiving nature. CCP obviously can live with that, although recently things seem to have turned to be bad for them as Eve went free to play. EVE never had really big gamer numbers, and I doubt that it would get green lighted again today. Star Citizen is already making promises that ganking will be hard. Of course ganking and challenging content are not the same, but you get the point: hard circumstances are bad for business.

 

And the older gentleman never laid focus on winning against the young man. He still plays today and of course follows the standard rules, but the younger man often insists that the older gentleman gets some goals in advance or anything like that. Which the older gentleman usually declines. ;)

I am a strict opponent of weeding out people because they don´t make the cut, winning at all costs or being part of a special club of able people was never part of my mentality.

[joneirikb.7506]

> @"Warscythes.9307" said:

> I think the issue is that you don't understand what sort game you are playing.

>

> This is not a mobile game designed for everybody ages 3 and up. This is an hybrid action tab MMORPG which by definition requires reflexes and is harder than most other tab based MMOs. It offers much more customization via skills, traits and gear stats than most MMO on the market. Your very basic defense is an action that provides a .75second evade frame with a 10 second cd. The game is easy to pick up and put down which is why people like me who has a job and other daily personal matter still play it despite the hectic schedule. It does not mean it is easy because at it's core, GW2's combat system is difficult compared to mainstream MMOs.

>

> We change our traits and skills etc because that is what the game expects you to do. Why else is the option given? Otherwise they could have just locked 90% of the customization like FFXIV and WoW and call it a day. The feature is designed to be used.

 

Very well said. I've been wondering for years now why this game draws such a "casual crowd" when the main game mechanics are actually so far away from what most "casual crowd" usually likes ? The game combat has more in common with a fighting game than most other MMO titles (relying on passive numbers and trinity etc, more like a normal rpg where you give your characters orders/commands, instead of like gw2 where you directly control it).

[Taygus.4571]

> @"Warscythes.9307" said

>. However it should not come at the expense of the core combat features of the game because is good for business.

 

You do realise they need to make money right?

 

>Allow players to restart fights instantly, offer better tutorial and explanations, not put it to a level where you literally cannot lose which is the issue of the topic

 

It's a story... most people want an interactive movie when it comes to story instances.

If they allow failing in story..as they have previously.. they essentislly lock people out of future content. And then players start quitting. That's a terrible business plan.

Anet knowshow many players have left, how many players complete which instances.

They know what sells best.

 

If you truly..just want challenge... be creative, make your own.

Personal challenges are often more impressive anyway.

 

>. I do not want raid or brainkilling difficult enemies in story instances. In fact I would argue the current difficulty is about right. I just want the ability to fail which is not present in the current story of the game.

 

I don't want to fail. I find the instances already take long enough.

 

I despised ls2 and HoT story because they had what you ask for.

And as anet changed it to rez more, after these, this opinion must be common enough.

Enough so that they were perhaps losing money/player population.

 

 

 

To be somewhat on your side tho,

I'm entirely for them adding a "story gauntlet" Where perhaps you could fight harder versions of the story bosses or fail possible version etc. That could be cool.

 

 

[Frenzify.6832]

> @"Taygus.4571" said:

> > @"Warscythes.9307" said

> >Allow players to restart fights instantly, offer better tutorial and explanations, not put it to a level where you literally cannot lose which is the issue of the topic

>

> It's a story... most people want an interactive movie when it comes to story instances.

> If they allow failing in story..as they have previously.. they essentislly lock people out of future content. And then players start quitting. That's a terrible business plan.

> Anet knowshow many players have left, how many players complete which instances.

> They know what sells best.

>

> If you truly..just want challenge... be creative, make your own.

> Personal challenges are often more impressive anyway.

>

 

It's a game before it's a story, and this is what I was worried about. People who don't treat this as a game, but rather a movie which inconveniences them by making them actually do things to progress it. I'm all for inclusion. I'm all for not pushing players away. But I am absolutely not for gutting out a game's content just to cater to players who don't want to put in any effort to experience the story.

 

Players leave games. That's the reality of it. Those players may not like having to actually play the game to progress it, but the players that remain may very well. To then change things up for the players who left, and risk the other part of the fanbase disliking the much more simplified content, that doesn't sound like a good business plan either. Different games draw in different players, and no game can please everyone, and trying will only result in failure. If those players left because it was too hard for them, that's unfortunate. The game wasn't for them, then. Harsh, perhaps. But Anet shouldn't then go to try and scramble for them back, only to annoy the fans that did enjoy what they made before.

 

A game that doesn't allow failure is barely a game at all. I'll say it again, this is not an interactive movie, it's a game, and should be treated as such. It's quite frankly absurd if people treat it as an interactive movie, and despite me saying I'm all for inclusion, those are not the people Anet should be catering to.

 

> >. I do not want raid or brainkilling difficult enemies in story instances. In fact I would argue the current difficulty is about right. I just want the ability to fail which is not present in the current story of the game.

>

> I don't want to fail. I find the instances already take long enough.

>

> I despised ls2 and HoT story because they had what you ask for.

> And as anet changed it to rez more, after these, this opinion must be common enough.

> Enough so that they were perhaps losing money/player population.

>

 

Simply including checkpoints nullifies the issue of instances being too long. Ls2 and HoT were poor in that respect. And I've seen arguments from both sides who hate the insta res. Having difficult bosses that some people find frustrating, but just making them instantly res doesn't make the boss more fun for them. Having difficult bosses that some people may have found challenging if the game didn't force them to instantly res from being downed is not fun for them. I've seen threads asking for more challenge, and threads asking to make things simpler. This is the result of them trying to please everyone. They meet in the middle and please no one, leaving us all unsatisfied, instead of one side outright hating it, and the other side loving it. I don't know if I'd call that a good result.

[Taygus.4571]

> @"Frenzify.6832" said:

> It's a game before it's a story, and this is what I was worried about.

 

It's both.

 

>But I am absolutely not for gutting out a game's content just to cater to players who don't want to put in any effort to experience the story.

 

They're catering to both. They know their player numbers. You do realise the story used to be the way you want. They changed that for a reason. I would be surprised if they went back on that change.

If you want more effort you can make your own personal challenges. Like many of the truely hardcore crowd do.

 

> Players leave games. That's the reality of it.

 

Yes, but Anet would obviously like to minimize that loss.

 

>Those players may not like having to actually play the game to progress it,

 

There are plenty of progression aspects to this game.

But many players see story as something more relaxing. They more interested on immersion and interesting story telling than challenging encounters.

I love the puzzle aspects in the stories for example. I'm not so keen on the boss encounters as I find many of them disruptive to the story.

I do enjoy fractals however.

 

>but the players that remain may very well.

 

As I've said earlier, they added this change in LW3, I think..and continue to add it. I would hope they know their player stats.

 

>Different games draw in different players, and no game can please everyone, and trying will only result in failure.

 

Well, I like the balance they have atm. The rezing has got me back into playing LW.

 

> If those players left because it was too hard for them, that's unfortunate. The game wasn't for them, then.

 

And yet, Anet is showing differently by having rezzing.

 

>Harsh, perhaps. But Anet shouldn't then go to try and scramble for them back, only to annoy the fans that did enjoy what they made before.

 

We don't know this. Which crowd brings in the moat money I wonder.

We'll never know. But anet knows.

 

>A game that doesn't allow failure is barely a game at all.

 

There's failure in raids and fractals.

So they allow story to always be progressed... it's a solo story. Why do you want to block other players from the experience?

 

>I'll say it again, this is not an interactive movie, >it's a game,

 

It's both.

 

>It's quite frankly absurd if people treat it as an interactive movie,

 

Your opinion. I do wonder what the majority enjoy. I would love to see Anets stats.

 

>and despite me saying I'm all for inclusion, those are not the people Anet should be catering to.

 

Why not?

 

>bosses that some people find frustrating, but just making them instantly res doesn't make the boss more fun for them.

 

It does allow them to move past it easily enough tho. So they can still experience the story.

 

> Having difficult bosses that some people may have found challenging if the game didn't force them to instantly res from being downed is not fun for them. I've seen threads asking for more challenge, and threads asking to make things simpler. This is the result of them trying to please everyone. They meet in the middle and please no one, leaving us all unsatisfied, instead of one side outright hating it, and the other side loving it. I don't know if I'd call that a good result.

 

If they choose the wrong side tho, they could set up the game for failure.

 

Keep in mind..forums see the most vocal..we do not see what's actually most played or replayed.

 

 

[Blaeys.3102]

In an ideal world, the answer here is the same answer they could use to address the accessibility level issue in raids - develop story and challenge motes gamewide, opening up new options for all types of players. They could even do this with open world content through the guild event flag.

 

Reality though - it would take a good deal of work which they likely dont have the resources for now.

 

I still love this game a lot, but it does feel like it is fragmenting into separate stand alone games and communities based around this very topic.

 

 

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> In an ideal world, the answer here is the same answer they could use to address the accessibility level issue in raids - develop story and challenge motes gamewide, opening up new options for all types of players. They could even do this with open world content through the guild event flag.

>

> Reality though - it would take a good deal of work which they likely dont have the resources for now.

>

> I still love this game a lot, but it does feel like it is fragmenting into separate stand alone games and communities based around this very topic.

>

>

 

So create two versions of the story where one allow death rushing and the other one doesn't? That shouldn't be hard to implement but I don't see a point in having such a separation and instead disable death rushing all together.

[starlinvf.1358]

> @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> Would be nice if they would lock exclusive rewards behind difficult solo content. At least If you cant succeed at it then, you have nobody else to blame but yourself.

 

Except that ultimately lends incentive to leveling services, and with it, giving someone access to your account...... 2 things Anet is firmly against due to account risk.

[Frenzify.6832]

> @"Taygus.4571" said:

> > @"Frenzify.6832" said:

> > It's a game before it's a story, and this is what I was worried about.

>

> It's both.

>

I will consider this debatable, and a case of whether one considers gameplay more important than story.

 

> >But I am absolutely not for gutting out a game's content just to cater to players who don't want to put in any effort to experience the story.

>

> They're catering to both. They know their player numbers. You do realise the story used to be the way you want. They changed that for a reason. I would be surprised if they went back on that change.

> If you want more effort you can make your own personal challenges. Like many of the truely hardcore crowd do.

>

 

Here's the thing, it's been said before but if I'm aware enough of the game and my class, all self-inflicted challenges would do is lengthen the fight needlessly. And as has also been said before, a longer fight, whilst technically more challenging, is just more tedious.

> > Players leave games. That's the reality of it.

>

> Yes, but Anet would obviously like to minimize that loss.

>

> >Those players may not like having to actually play the game to progress it,

>

> There are plenty of progression aspects to this game.

> But many players see story as something more relaxing. They more interested on immersion and interesting story telling than challenging encounters.

> I love the puzzle aspects in the stories for example. I'm not so keen on the boss encounters as I find many of them disruptive to the story.

> I do enjoy fractals however.

>

Are you implying that means that there's no reason for the story to have to require any effort to beat?

 

Calling things like boss fights "disruptive to the story" really makes it sound like you don't even want to play the game. It really makes it sound like you just want to walk through the instance and soak up the story. I hope I'm wrong there, because you must understand how that absolutely should not be catered to in an MMO. This isn't a book or a movie.

> >but the players that remain may very well.

>

> As I've said earlier, they added this change in LW3, I think..and continue to add it. I would hope they know their player stats.

>

> >Different games draw in different players, and no game can please everyone, and trying will only result in failure.

>

> Well, I like the balance they have atm. The rezing has got me back into playing LW.

>

> > If those players left because it was too hard for them, that's unfortunate. The game wasn't for them, then.

>

> And yet, Anet is showing differently by having rezzing.

>

Because they're trying to please everyone. As you say later on, perhaps the distaste is mainly on the forums, but what are the official forums if not a platform for Anet to get feedback? I would like them to change things, but as you say that may mean going one way or the other, in terms of this difficulty debate.

> >Harsh, perhaps. But Anet shouldn't then go to try and scramble for them back, only to annoy the fans that did enjoy what they made before.

>

> We don't know this. Which crowd brings in the moat money I wonder.

> We'll never know. But anet knows.

>

Do they know? Can they differentiate which group makes them the most money, when it's all part of the same bigger group?

> >A game that doesn't allow failure is barely a game at all.

>

> There's failure in raids and fractals.

> So they allow story to always be progressed... it's a solo story. Why do you want to block other players from the experience?

 

The story is part of the game. It's not like I'm saying it has to be dark souls levels of challenging, and that only 1% of the players can progress, but without failure what point is there in playing the game? What accomplishment is there in beating a boss? What difference is there in me playing verses watching it all on YouTube? Even Mario has failure. Even the easiest of Pokemon games has failure, and those are aimed at even younger children. That's what games are: a challenge for you to beat. But when you remove the possibility of even failing there is no challenge, and there's no point to "beating" it because you're not beating anything.

>

> >I'll say it again, this is not an interactive movie,

> it's a game,

>

> It's both.

>

I can't for a second entertain the idea that this is an interactive movie. At that point there is practically no reason to play rather than just watching it. I won't argue this point further, because I don't believe either of us will budge on it.

> >It's quite frankly absurd if people treat it as an interactive movie,

>

> Your opinion. I do wonder what the majority enjoy. I would love to see Anets stats.

>

Except this is not an interactive movie. It's a game, with a story. I know I said I wouldn't argue the point further, but I just find it so surreal. Just because a game has a story, that doesn't make it an interactive movie, or mean it should be treated like one. Take any David Cage game. Those are made solely with the story in mind, and are generally considered interactive movies. The gameplay of them is minimal at best, frequently criticised as such, and merely serves as a means to move the story forward. That is not, and should not be the case with Guild Wars 2. Hell, even in the case of David Cage games where it's impossible to really fail, they still have failure states in the forms of bad endings.

> >and despite me saying I'm all for inclusion, those are not the people Anet should be catering to.

>

> Why not?

>

Because the gameplay is just as important as the story.

> >bosses that some people find frustrating, but just making them instantly res doesn't make the boss more fun for them.

>

> It does allow them to move past it easily enough tho. So they can still experience the story.

>

At the expense of fun and/or accomplishment.

> > Having difficult bosses that some people may have found challenging if the game didn't force them to instantly res from being downed is not fun for them. I've seen threads asking for more challenge, and threads asking to make things simpler. This is the result of them trying to please everyone. They meet in the middle and please no one, leaving us all unsatisfied, instead of one side outright hating it, and the other side loving it. I don't know if I'd call that a good result.

>

> If they choose the wrong side tho, they could set up the game for failure.

>

Yeah. For sure. I won't deny that, but nor will I deny that leaving things as they are will leave many on both sides dissatisfied. It's not a good situation Anet have found themselves in, because trying to please every kind of gamer with just one level of difficulty is a terrible idea.

 

> Keep in mind..forums see the most vocal..we do not see what's actually most played or replayed.

>

>

Absolutely, but as I said before, where will they get feedback if not from their vocal fans?

 

All this being said, it's been suggested over and over, but the only choice they have in this matter that will please the most people is adding varying levels of difficulty. Do I see that happening? Maybe eventually, but not any time soon.

[Taygus.4571]

It's a quoting mess to go through all your points on a phone.

 

So I'm just going to target the accomplishment debate.

 

We don't all seek the same accomplishments.

And there are plenty of other things in this game that have failure.

 

Why do you need the fight to reset? To find it challenging...is that the only thing to make it worth while for you?

 

Btw, mmo stands for mass multiplayer online..it does not mean difficulty or failure.

Why should allowing people to make it through story not be catered for?

 

Your comment on fun is opinion based.You don't speak for everyone.

As I said, the rezzing has me back playing LW.

 

Also speaking of mario..have you played those games recently? They also have made it impossible to fail. On the 3ds game, if you die 2 or 3 times, you get an invincibility leaf.

Games are adding this in more and more.

There must be a reason for that.

 

I really dont see how this affects your sense of achievement..surely if you can do it without getting down..what does rezzing change for you?