maddoctor.2738 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > Sure but if the fights are interesting enough but lack the challenge, going into it with lesser gear will increase the challenge level of beating the fight. So why wouldn't it be fun if the mechanics are fine and you just make it harder because you equip lesser gear? > > Tell me, if the mechanics are fine, then what is the problem exactly? Again, you are going backwards. If the mechanics are fine, then I have no issue with it, unless those mechanics can be avoided/skipped because of the lack of challenge. An interesting mechanic has a high penalty for failure. If it doesn't have a high penalty for failure then it's no longer an interesting mechanic because you simply skip it. Gorseval is a perfect example, it has some very interesting mechanics (as it's a Raid boss) but most of it can be simply ignored or skipped because there is no challenge (other than "do your rotation well" challenge). Legendary Wyvern (all of them) fly-by attacks (with their breath weapons) can instant kill players, making their "break their bar before they fly away" mechanic important. If you remove the challenge by making their flames tickle, it's no longer a challenge and it's no longer an interesting mechanic. If Liadri's shadowfell attack simply did 100 damage to you, then it wouldn't be an interesting mechanic to move away of them. You can't have an interesting mechanic, without it also being somewhat challenging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion.8457 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Ayakaru.6583" said: > I mean, for real, why should we have to take Balthazar and Joko seriously, if we LITERALLY cannot lose to them? > Every duel with a boss follows the same pattern, you put in half an effort, and you kill the boss with easy. > Or you just laze away, half-minded, and the boss kills you a few times, but no worries, because THERE ARE NO FAIL CONDITIONS. > There literally isn't a point to having a health bar, because once the health bar hits zero, it just goes back to full and you can keep fighting. > Even if you're somehow so bad you keep dying until you're in your underwear, as long as you keep hitting that respawn button, you can kill Balthazar in your swim shorts. > > So thats what I'm asking, why do we even care about the big villains if they're INCAPABLE of defeating us? We can literally keep nibbling away at them at our weakest, and they can't do anything to stop us. > > And it's not just from a mechanical point of view, we're even immortal in the story. > Apparantly, having died once, makes us immune to dying again, according to LS4-3, which didn't make any sense to me, at all. > What, so we're incorporeal now? the beetles can't dig into us, lay eggs, and eat us up from the inside because our bodies have already been dead once before? > > I am PLEADING you, anet, give the bosses some fail conditions, let them win for a change. Give us a reason to take their fights seriously? > Otherwise we can all just go on vacation and send a swarm of Skritt and Quaggans to go kill the next boss. > > The whole talk about Generation III bugs had me hoping there would be a story point where Joko unleashes the plague, and we lose, and we have to cleanse, purge, or downright burn down an entire society or something. To keep it from spreading. > When we stormed that palace of his, and the gates broken, I thought "here it is". > Only to have a bunch of ghosts say "we'll keep them contained". > Then what was the whole point of the plague? > There was never any risk if we only needed a few ghosts to end the plague. > The plague was a sort of MacGuffin, but now it's just a background drop. > > Give the villains some slack, anet, please, give us a reason to actually WANT to defeat them Have you played POF story? don't you remember that we died vs Balthazar it wasn't so easy, we were in the underworld. Spoil alert: we will be victorious vs all the next ennemies in GW2. Maybe you prefer loosing and taking hours to beat one ennemy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve The Cynic.3217 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 I feel compelled to make mock of the OP. I just logged in to a character who was by the Dewclaw waypoint in the extreme south of the Iron Marches. Honest to Grenth (it was on Kylara Nightsong, the Purple Reaper), I saw a fellow player attack a yellow-name Black Sheep. He lost. He got downed, then he got defeated and mapped out. From "attack sheep" to "defeated" was about four seconds. Is that challenging enough? I mean, sure, you can exit from the Plains of Ashford into the Iron Marches, so he might have been only, say, level 10-15, but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen.2907 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Steve The Cynic.3217" said: > I feel compelled to make mock of the OP. I just logged in to a character who was by the Dewclaw waypoint in the extreme south of the Iron Marches. > > Honest to Grenth (it was on Kylara Nightsong, the Purple Reaper), I saw a fellow player attack a yellow-name Black Sheep. He lost. He got downed, then he got defeated and mapped out. From "attack sheep" to "defeated" was about four seconds. > > Is that challenging enough? I mean, sure, you can exit from the Plains of Ashford into the Iron Marches, so he might have been only, say, level 10-15, but... > Sure, you can let yourself be defeated. I have seen characters defeated by using a lunge skill too close to a cliff. That doesnt mean that there was any actual challenge involved. Oddly enough, I have seen a random neutral animal (a boar as I recall) kill a veteran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gehenna.3625 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > Sure but if the fights are interesting enough but lack the challenge, going into it with lesser gear will increase the challenge level of beating the fight. So why wouldn't it be fun if the mechanics are fine and you just make it harder because you equip lesser gear? > > > > Tell me, if the mechanics are fine, then what is the problem exactly? > > Again, you are going backwards. If the mechanics are fine, then I have no issue with it, unless those mechanics can be avoided/skipped because of the lack of challenge. An interesting mechanic has a high penalty for failure. If it doesn't have a high penalty for failure then it's no longer an interesting mechanic because you simply skip it. > > Gorseval is a perfect example, it has some very interesting mechanics (as it's a Raid boss) but most of it can be simply ignored or skipped because there is no challenge (other than "do your rotation well" challenge). Legendary Wyvern (all of them) fly-by attacks (with their breath weapons) can instant kill players, making their "break their bar before they fly away" mechanic important. If you remove the challenge by making their flames tickle, it's no longer a challenge and it's no longer an interesting mechanic. If Liadri's shadowfell attack simply did 100 damage to you, then it wouldn't be an interesting mechanic to move away of them. > > You can't have an interesting mechanic, without it also being somewhat challenging. I am not going backwards but am simply trying to determine what the issue is. Could you perhaps simply state without using the term "if" whether you find the mechanics of story bosses fine or not in this game. At first I thought you were not. Then you told me I was wrong. And now you tell me that there is an issue. I'm just trying to figure out where you stand, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashantara.8731 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Ayakaru.6583" said: > If you read any of the discussion *at all* you would've known that we want harder bosses because we can't them serious as villains if they're as weak as average skritt. I love how some people use "we" to emphasize the validity of their point even when the majority doesn't agree with them. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > I'm just trying to figure out where you stand, that's all. There is no universal answer for every mechanic, but, since Heart of Thorns the boss fights have improved A LOT. Path of Fire also has some excellent mechanics. There are some fights that need improvements but mechanic wise I can say that the game has gone a very long way since the damage sponges of the original personal story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gehenna.3625 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > I'm just trying to figure out where you stand, that's all. > > There is no universal answer for every mechanic, but, since Heart of Thorns the boss fights have improved A LOT. Path of Fire also has some excellent mechanics. There are some fights that need improvements but mechanic wise I can say that the game has gone a very long way since the damage sponges of the original personal story. Ok thanks. That's a clear answer. So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gehenna.3625 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taygus.4571 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > 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. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warscythes.9307 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60% or a flat number. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Godrik.5841 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 You want more challenge, give yourself a handicap. Try doing story with no armor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFishBob.6518 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 Well, not all tough story boss encounters need to be made possible by cheapening it with a deliberate corpse rush. Anet could show a bit of creativity to set up why you're allowed to continue this fight after being defeated. For example: >! Balthazar revives you if you're downed in the Departing, repeating various lines insulting your weakness. This is what Anet has done already and every major story boss encounter should have something like this instead of a lazy revive and start from where you left off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoukiNeko.6047 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 Story instances should be a walk in the park. They are for everyone. GW2 was marketed as casual game and I do hope the story stays accessible for everyone. Raids and fractal can be buffed since they are advertised as hard content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gehenna.3625 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warscythes.9307 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. > > You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. > > The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. > > That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. > > Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. > > 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. I hope this provides the example that players will overcome challenges if there are enough incentives. Not the claim that many people will fail and then just quit forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. Then we get back to the "ask for advice" part (from the other thread on the subject). If you can't beat content that lots of others did, ask how. You know some years ago the internet was full of guides and advice on how to beat certain encounters, or even entire games. For some reason the current gamer generation is willing to give up or ask for nerfs when they can't beat content, instead of asking for help. Because more often than not, it's their own build choice or approach to the content that's the problem and there is no problem with the content itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Taygus.4571" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > 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. > > 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. If it was an intentional feature to allow players to beat the content, then it would work everywhere. I think it's mostly a leftover that applies to certain situations but not others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gehenna.3625 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > > > > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > > > > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > > > > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. > > > > You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. > > > > The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. > > > > That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. > > > > Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. > > > > > > 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. I hope this provides the example that players will overcome challenges if there are enough incentives. Not the claim that many people will fail and then just quit forever. > > Well having to raid to progress the story will also keep certain players out that don't care for having to be forced to complete the main story. As GW2 is marketed as a more casual game and a personal story, the comparison falls flat for me. Personally because I find the story lines drag too much and the boss fights boring, I only do them on my main and avoid them. And it's not even because it's too hard but too annoying. I can understand other people having similar feelings about fights they find too hard. When I say many that doesn't mean most by the way. That distinction is very important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warscythes.9307 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > > > > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > > > > > > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > > > > > > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. > > > > > > You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. > > > > > > The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. > > > > > > That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. > > > > > > Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. > > > > > > > > > > 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. I hope this provides the example that players will overcome challenges if there are enough incentives. Not the claim that many people will fail and then just quit forever. > > > > > Well having to raid to progress the story will also keep certain players out that don't care for having to be forced to complete the main story. As GW2 is marketed as a more casual game and a personal story, the comparison falls flat for me. > > Personally because I find the story lines drag too much and the boss fights boring, I only do them on my main and avoid them. And it's not even because it's too hard but too annoying. I can understand other people having similar feelings about fights they find too hard. > > When I say many that doesn't mean most by the way. That distinction is very important. > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > > > > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > > > > > > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > > > > > > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. > > > > > > You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. > > > > > > The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. > > > > > > That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. > > > > > > Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. > > > > > > > > > > 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. I hope this provides the example that players will overcome challenges if there are enough incentives. Not the claim that many people will fail and then just quit forever. > > > > > Well having to raid to progress the story will also keep certain players out that don't care for having to be forced to complete the main story. As GW2 is marketed as a more casual game and a personal story, the comparison falls flat for me. > > Personally because I find the story lines drag too much and the boss fights boring, I only do them on my main and avoid them. And it's not even because it's too hard but too annoying. I can understand other people having similar feelings about fights they find too hard. > > When I say many that doesn't mean most by the way. That distinction is very important. > Sure having to raid will keep certain players out but enough people passed in FFXIV to progress the story so that it was never considered an issue. I am sure that there are people who still fail the current GW2 story because they just don't have the reflex to glide, hit and move at the same time or even do certain puzzles. Do we want to lower the difficulty even more? Because at a certain point you just have to stop. Nobody here in this thread want a raid boss in the story. However I think we can agree that there should be a baseline for how difficult should be and that the current status of corpse rush can be improved upon. Also I don't think GW2 ever advertised it to be easy. It is casual and being casual doesn't mean it is easy. GW2 is known to be easy to pick up due to no sub fee, it is easy to join group on open world due to dynamic events, and it is easy to come back because there is no gear trendmill. However I have never seen ads where it says this game is so easy to play. In fact I would argue GW2 is harder in terms of game mechanics compared to other mainstream MMOs. GW2 is a hybrid action tab MMO should by definition requires better reflex than tab MMOs. It offers a lot more customization options in terms of stats, traits and skills that again by definition makes it more difficult compare to other MMOs because you can make a very very bad build. FFXIV also marketed towards casual players with a personal story, in fact it is known for its elaborate personal story and robust casual gameplay thanks to its crafting system. Yet again having required raid is not an issue in that game. Players adapted and overcame the challenges and all is good. People will get better if there are enough incentives. I find the boss fights boring because I literally cannot fail. That is it. I don't expect raid boss tier mechanics nor perfect dps rotations to beat the boss. But I wish that there exist a way for you to fail. That is really it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gehenna.3625 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > > > > > > > > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > > > > > > > > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. > > > > > > > > You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. > > > > > > > > The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. > > > > > > > > That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. > > > > > > > > Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. I hope this provides the example that players will overcome challenges if there are enough incentives. Not the claim that many people will fail and then just quit forever. > > > > > > > > Well having to raid to progress the story will also keep certain players out that don't care for having to be forced to complete the main story. As GW2 is marketed as a more casual game and a personal story, the comparison falls flat for me. > > > > Personally because I find the story lines drag too much and the boss fights boring, I only do them on my main and avoid them. And it's not even because it's too hard but too annoying. I can understand other people having similar feelings about fights they find too hard. > > > > When I say many that doesn't mean most by the way. That distinction is very important. > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > > > > > > > > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > > > > > > > > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. > > > > > > > > You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. > > > > > > > > The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. > > > > > > > > That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. > > > > > > > > Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. I hope this provides the example that players will overcome challenges if there are enough incentives. Not the claim that many people will fail and then just quit forever. > > > > > > > > Well having to raid to progress the story will also keep certain players out that don't care for having to be forced to complete the main story. As GW2 is marketed as a more casual game and a personal story, the comparison falls flat for me. > > > > Personally because I find the story lines drag too much and the boss fights boring, I only do them on my main and avoid them. And it's not even because it's too hard but too annoying. I can understand other people having similar feelings about fights they find too hard. > > > > When I say many that doesn't mean most by the way. That distinction is very important. > > > > Sure having to raid will keep certain players out but enough people passed in FFXIV to progress the story so that it was never considered an issue. I am sure that there are people who still fail the current GW2 story because they just don't have the reflex to glide, hit and move at the same time or even do certain puzzles. Do we want to lower the difficulty even more? Because at a certain point you just have to stop. Nobody here in this thread want a raid boss in the story. However I think we can agree that there should be a baseline for how difficult should be and that the current status of corpse rush can be improved upon. > > Also I don't think GW2 ever advertised it to be easy. It is casual and being casual doesn't mean it is easy. GW2 is known to be easy to pick up due to no sub fee, it is easy to join group on open world due to dynamic events, and it is easy to come back because there is no gear trendmill. However I have never seen ads where it says this game is so easy to play. In fact I would argue GW2 is harder in terms of game mechanics compared to other mainstream MMOs. GW2 is a hybrid action tab MMO should by definition requires better reflex than tab MMOs. It offers a lot more customization options in terms of stats, traits and skills that again by definition makes it more difficult compare to other MMOs because you can make a very very bad build. FFXIV also marketed towarded casual players with a personal story, in fact it is known for its elaborate personal story and robust casual gameplay thanks to its crafting system. Yet again having required raid is not an issue in that game. Players adapted and overcame the challenges and all is good. > > I find the boss fights boring because I literally cannot fail. That is it. I don't expect raid boss tier mechanics nor perfection dps rotations to beat the boss. But I wish that there exist a way for you to fail. That is really it. Well, all I can say is that the bosses aren't too difficult for me, but I do find the fights boring and too lengthy in the sense that it distracts me from the actual story. So I just end up ignoring the story and just slugging my way through it to get it done. I cannot however see myself as the standard and I do think that if, as suggested dying means starting over, it will cause an uproar in a part of the community. I do not have numbers but my feeling tells me that this part of the community is too big too ignore. GW2 as a more casual game, still attracted players who want challenge. That's actually what's weird, considering what GW2 is. It's about farming and gathering. LS introduced zones you can farm daily. And all to create ascended and legendary stuff and various cosmetics. The core was never about challenge. Now the OP's request isn't a strange one, but it's one that might, in the context of GW2, backfire quite a bit. In GW2 the main challenge is to not get bored before you reach your goals. Casual players tend to be more patient but also don't want to have walls put in front of them, even if you can walk around them. And hey, I'm not trying to tell ArenaNet what to do. If they think this is a great idea then by all means. I just expect there to be a big uproar. I could be wrong, but the risk is ArenaNet's to run and not mine. So I'll let them decide. My issues with story bosses are different than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper Cutter.9376 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: >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. They removed it from dungeons because dungeons were always intended to be challenging (they were the original endgame, after all). Story missions really weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoukiNeko.6047 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > > > > > > > > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > > > > > > > > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. > > > > > > > > You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. > > > > > > > > The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. > > > > > > > > That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. > > > > > > > > Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. I hope this provides the example that players will overcome challenges if there are enough incentives. Not the claim that many people will fail and then just quit forever. > > > > > > > > Well having to raid to progress the story will also keep certain players out that don't care for having to be forced to complete the main story. As GW2 is marketed as a more casual game and a personal story, the comparison falls flat for me. > > > > Personally because I find the story lines drag too much and the boss fights boring, I only do them on my main and avoid them. And it's not even because it's too hard but too annoying. I can understand other people having similar feelings about fights they find too hard. > > > > When I say many that doesn't mean most by the way. That distinction is very important. > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > @"Warscythes.9307" said: > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > > > > > > So are you (reasonably) happy with the fights now as they are or do you feel like the OP that the boss fights are way too easy to the point he doesn't take them seriously anymore? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 are right. The OP isn't saying that. I just reread it and you are quite correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course, if they were to do what he suggests, then we will get the situation where the fights are impossible to finish for many people and that can only be detrimental to the game's longevity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you are underestimating how players can overcome challenges if given enough incentives. FFXIV for example has forced 8 men raid fights that you have to beat in order to actually continue the main story. Plenty of people have beat it and there's been no major complaints about it. > > > > > > > > > > I believe the biggest reason for players fail instances is simply that their build suck. In other MMOs such as FFXIV, WoW etc etc. While you can change your talent, the difference it will make is fairly minimal in terms of easier content. However in GW2 the difference can be absolutely massive. As you can see from the previous poster with multiple guardians. The kill difference between a dps build and a healer build is between 5 and 45 minutes. This means a player with incorrect gear and trait options can take up to a hour to do a fight whereas people who do their build correctly will take 5 minutes. > > > > > > > > > > I think if death rez is removed then the replacement should simply be a stat buff upon death. If you die then you gain a stacking buff that provides 10% increase to everything with a somewhat reasonable limit of say 40-60%. This makes it so that there is a baseline for the mission to be designed around whereas now Anet has to assume the players are so bad that they have to make it to be impossible to fail. > > > > > > > > You see, we are talking about story bosses and not raids. Casual people tend to stay away from raids so that's not a useful comparison. > > > > > > > > The fact that the build makes an enormous difference in GW2 is part of the problem in my view. The difference is too big and that makes it harder also to create a good baseline experience for the story. However, length of the fight is not the issue here. It's an issue but for a different thread. The OP doesn't like as I was reminded that dying has no effect as you can run back in and continue where you left off. However, changing that will make it very hard for a lot of players and casual players will not do what you think because they are not raiders but just want to have fun and aren't looking for big challenges. > > > > > > > > That's where my point lies. I do not find the fights too hard myself but I have seen many people struggle with things in various MMOs and when they leave so does a big part of the revenue of a game. ArenaNet needs to know who their customers are and they know that they cannot make the story bosses more punishing. That sucks for people who do like a challenge, but I think they'll just have to resign themselves to the point that story is not the place for the big challenges.. It's a bad decision economically for ArenaNet to push those people out. > > > > > > > > Casual players are not like raiders. Most of them won't buckle up and meet the challenge, I think many of them would say f this crap and move on and they will move on with their money. It's not what they're looking for. Either because it's too complicated for them or they're not interested in that. Now I am not saying that the way ArenaNet handles it is necessarily the best way. I would like some changes too but there has to be a solution for casual players as well and just telling them to get better of force them is like EA saying "if you don't like it, don't buy it". I think you know how well that worked for them with BF V. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. I hope this provides the example that players will overcome challenges if there are enough incentives. Not the claim that many people will fail and then just quit forever. > > > > > > > > Well having to raid to progress the story will also keep certain players out that don't care for having to be forced to complete the main story. As GW2 is marketed as a more casual game and a personal story, the comparison falls flat for me. > > > > Personally because I find the story lines drag too much and the boss fights boring, I only do them on my main and avoid them. And it's not even because it's too hard but too annoying. I can understand other people having similar feelings about fights they find too hard. > > > > When I say many that doesn't mean most by the way. That distinction is very important. > > > > Sure having to raid will keep certain players out but enough people passed in FFXIV to progress the story so that it was never considered an issue. I am sure that there are people who still fail the current GW2 story because they just don't have the reflex to glide, hit and move at the same time or even do certain puzzles. Do we want to lower the difficulty even more? Because at a certain point you just have to stop. Nobody here in this thread want a raid boss in the story. However I think we can agree that there should be a baseline for how difficult should be and that the current status of corpse rush can be improved upon. > > Also I don't think GW2 ever advertised it to be easy. It is casual and being casual doesn't mean it is easy. GW2 is known to be easy to pick up due to no sub fee, it is easy to join group on open world due to dynamic events, and it is easy to come back because there is no gear trendmill. However I have never seen ads where it says this game is so easy to play. In fact I would argue GW2 is harder in terms of game mechanics compared to other mainstream MMOs. GW2 is a hybrid action tab MMO should by definition requires better reflex than tab MMOs. It offers a lot more customization options in terms of stats, traits and skills that again by definition makes it more difficult compare to other MMOs because you can make a very very bad build. FFXIV also marketed towards casual players with a personal story, in fact it is known for its elaborate personal story and robust casual gameplay thanks to its crafting system. Yet again having required raid is not an issue in that game. Players adapted and overcame the challenges and all is good. People will get better if there are enough incentives. > > I find the boss fights boring because I literally cannot fail. That is it. I don't expect raid boss tier mechanics nor perfect dps rotations to beat the boss. But I wish that there exist a way for you to fail. That is really it. Both WoW and FF14 have normal (easy) difficulty settings for their raids and can be easily done once released. This is why they can put story inside the raids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dashingsteel.3410 Posted September 9, 2018 Share Posted September 9, 2018 > @"Ashen.2907" said: > When I want challenge from a game I want encounters that test the limits of my character's abilities, at his best, while my own abilities as a player are also stretched. Self handicapping, by not using my character to his full capacity (such as by not using his best gear), does not fulfill that desire for challenge. > Unfortunately this isn't a single player game and is filled with players of varying degrees of ability. Should Anet tune the story to test the limits of ops ability...…. That means that anyone that doesn't equal or surpass op's ability level will effectively be shut out of the story(if the idea of you die you start again is enacted). Anyone want to guess how many players will get shut out of the story? I am guessing that being shut out of the games story would be a dealbreaker for quite a few customers. Anet can't afford to lose any customers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now