Discussion Thread: ArenaNet News of 21 February 2019 [Merged]

[sigur.9453]

> @"mauried.5608" said:

> Whether Anet fails or succeeds is NOT your concern, unless you are a shareholder of Ncsoft.

> If you dont like the game , then dont play it .

>

 

Hey, don't like current politics? Don't vote! Why every time when some critizism comes up we get that "argument"? It's a well written opinion piece, and could give anet feedback to make the game better.

[Biff.5312]

I agree with everything you said, but i don't see what it has to do with people raving about the game being 'over' etc. I don't see any recent news that warrants being upset about.

[Roquen.5406]

> @"mauried.5608" said:

> Whether Anet fails or succeeds is NOT your concern, unless you are a shareholder of Ncsoft.

> If you dont like the game , then dont play it .

>

 

That depends on how you look at it. Even though I am not directly vested in the company I still want to see the game flourish. I put a lot of time into the game and got plenty of hours of fun out of it. Though, I've found myself playing less and less as it diverges from the things I enjoy. I still think there's something great here but I see it going in a bad direction (IMO). So yes, I can up and leave but I would prefer to stay.

 

> @"Biff.5312" said:

> I agree with everything you said, but i don't see what it has to do with people raving about the game being 'over' etc. I don't see any recent news that warrants being upset about.

 

Well, Anet just had to let go of well over a third of their employees... that is pretty substantial. With that there's news of refocusing on GW2. What has come to light is that the game was essentially put on auto-pilot with resources moved to other side projects for many years now (you can see various sources/comments showing this, such as WP video's). Those projects are now scrapped and so the years that were spent on them were for lack of a better word, wasted. I can imagine that if the projects showed something tangible they may not have been axed. In the interim the game itself suffered because Anet spread itself too thin. And I believe that is what people are upset about.

 

 

[derd.6413]

> @"Roquen.5406" said:

>What has come to light is that the game was essentially put on auto-pilot with resources moved to other side projects for many years now

 

this is just speculation (and very unsubstantial one at that)

[Zaklex.6308]

> @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > @"mauried.5608" said:

> > Whether Anet fails or succeeds is NOT your concern, unless you are a shareholder of Ncsoft.

> > If you dont like the game , then dont play it .

> >

>

> That depends on how you look at it. Even though I am not directly vested in the company I still want to see the game flourish. I put a lot of time into the game and got plenty of hours of fun out of it. Though, I've found myself playing less and less as it diverges from the things I enjoy. I still think there's something great here but I see it going in a bad direction (IMO). So yes, I can up and leave but I would prefer to stay.

>

> > @"Biff.5312" said:

> > I agree with everything you said, but i don't see what it has to do with people raving about the game being 'over' etc. I don't see any recent news that warrants being upset about.

>

> Well, Anet just had to let go of well over a third of their employees... that is pretty substantial. With that there's news of refocusing on GW2. What has come to light is that the game was essentially put on auto-pilot with resources moved to other side projects for many years now (you can see various sources/comments showing this, such as WP video's). Those projects are now scrapped and so the years that were spent on them were for lack of a better word, wasted. I can imagine that if the projects showed something tangible they may not have been axed. In the interim the game itself suffered because Anet spread itself too thin. And I believe that is what people are upset about.

>

>

 

There's one thing you're missing...there's probably a fair number of players that wouldn't consider any other game out there, because there isn't any other game like GW2, not matter what people might say. It is still very much it's own animal.

[Roquen.5406]

> @"derd.6413" said:

> > @"Roquen.5406" said:

> >What has come to light is that the game was essentially put on auto-pilot with resources moved to other side projects for many years now

>

> this is just speculation (and very unsubstantial one at that)

 

This is touched upon by statements from employees from the recent lay-off. I think you can also see by the changes over the past few years, as well as the cadence of releases in all aspects of the game. If I am overreaching than I apologize.

 

> @"Zaklex.6308" said:

 

> There's one thing you're missing...there's probably a fair number of players that wouldn't consider any other game out there, because there isn't any other game like GW2, not matter what people might say. It is still very much it's own animal.

 

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Yes, there are people that stay loyal to a company but is settling for less because there's nothing "better", what you want? It's concerning to see a company lose anyone, let alone 35% of their employees in one go. All we can do is wait and see but if you've been with the game or following it over the past six years you should be able to see the decline.

 

 

[derd.6413]

> @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > @"derd.6413" said:

> > > @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > >What has come to light is that the game was essentially put on auto-pilot with resources moved to other side projects for many years now

> >

> > this is just speculation (and very unsubstantial one at that)

>

> This is touched upon by statements from employees from the recent lay-off. I think you can also see by the changes over the past few years, as well as the cadence of releases in all aspects of the game. If I am overreaching than I apologize.

>

 

i know about the statements, i've seen non that indicate gw2 was on auto-pilot or in some other way crippled because anet was working on other projects

 

[gateless gate.8406]

Agree with much of what you said. It is a baffling business decision to drip-feed your money maker. "We are successful with this product, so now let's semi-abandon it while we develop other things that have zero guarantee of being successful" ...what??

 

Videogame development seems to be a very hit-and-miss endeavour. Some games absolutely dominate, while others flounder with limited player numbers (often despite being good games). If you're lucky enough to have a hit, feed it and nurture it.

 

Additionally, the decision to drip-feed GW2 is all the more confusing given that ANet doesn't control their own destiny. As we saw, NCSoft walked into the building and pressed the "delete" button on what was likely two or more projects that had been in development for several years. What a waste; **I can only imagine how awesome GW2 would be right now if they had truly devoted themselves to it.**

[Obtena.7952]

I don't get all this fallout.

 

Do yourself a mind experiment ... if we had been told nothing of the events ... GW2 would just be business as usual, with some 'special' thing happening delaying the recent patch. In otherwords, it doesn't affect you, at least not to the point where anyone was wise to Anet. l do think players noticed a dip in the quality of content over the last few LS releases, but certainly nothing that would clue you into Anet diverting people from GW2.

 

Frankly, I DON'T think anyone has a right to be upset with Anet. You aren't a shareholder here and you have NO say in how they allocate resources away from content that in all honesty ... you get for free. There is some level of entitlement showing through in this thread that indicates a real lack of understanding how the service provide/client relations works.

[Angoril.2179]

I don't get what this has to do with people acting like spoiled kids over something that has been happening in the gaming industry ever since it started but what I know is that hype hides a lot of things. If most of the people in this forum take their hype glasses off, they will see that the signs were there for a long while now. The entirety of LS4 is nothing but a chore with story which is nowhere close to what the writers in Anet can do and then you have the cherry on top, the WORST emotional (or at least trying to be) moment at the ending of All or Nothing. Everything was screaming that they were cutting corners but when you praise everything, no matter how bad it is, the subpar becomes the norm.

 

Vote with your wallets people. If you don't like something, stop paying them. Like all corporations, they'll get the message when money isn't flowing like it used to.

[Roquen.5406]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> I don't get all this fallout.

>

> Do yourself a mind experiment ... if we had been told nothing of the events ... GW2 would just be business as usual, with some 'special' thing happening delaying the recent patch. In otherwords, it doesn't affect you, at least not to the point where anyone was wise to Anet. l do think players noticed a dip in the quality of content over the last few LS releases, but certainly nothing that would clue you into Anet diverting people from GW2.

>

> Frankly, I DON'T think anyone has a right to be upset with Anet. You aren't a shareholder here and you have NO say in how they allocate resources away from content that in all honesty ... you get for free. There is some level of entitlement showing through in this thread that indicates a real lack of understanding how the service provide/client relations works.

 

I'm not sure where in my post I indicated entitlement. The content isn't free persay - it was included with the purchase of the "box" sales. The reason they keep this model is because it is sustainable for them, it's not done as a favor to us. I am not sure this game would retain the same numbers if they had a sub model, I think that is harder to do nowadays. The relationship is symbiotic (maybe the wrong word for this). Without a product there's nothing for customers to have but without customers...a product is nothing.

 

Also, I personally have seen this decline for a while, I just had no idea it would ever impact them this greatly. Here are some things that I noticed:

 

1. Original 19 Gen two legendaries promised for free in 2012/2013, scrapped numerous times, used as a selling point for HoT, they are STILL missing 1 Gen 2 legendary two expansions later. So while not locked behind a second PoF content wise, it is time wise.

2. New legendary backpacks per each season promised in PvP, to date only one was ever released.

3. PvP - Stagnant same mode, promised changes never coming to fruition or taking ages to release, balance slow and often misdirected, cheaters/win-traders/manipulators never really punished

5. WvW - Stagnant, once again changes slow and often misdirected, promised releases or changes never seeing the light of day or getting scrapped entirely

5. Pace of raid releases, promised more and more often, slowly pushed back and now close to a year between releases

6. Different teams being merged - Fractal/Raids, slowing cadence even more

7. Less and less communication overtime

 

It just seems overall there are great ideas but they always get pushed back or dropped entirely and unfortunately it drives people away.

 

Like I said, I don't say this because I feel entitled to anything, it's just my view on what I see unfolding.

[Obtena.7952]

The short version is that we got exactly what we paid for, so the idea we have some right to be upset that Anet was expanding other developments is not reasonable, even if it was at the expense of GW2 development. If the game isn't delivering what you want, the most profound statement you can make with that is to not play it. In fact, it's the nature of the business model; Anet has taken that into count in how they develop the game. In otherwords, GW2 was designed to allow Anet to be agile in their resources.

[Roquen.5406]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

>**The short version is that we got exactly what we paid for**, so the idea we have some right to be upset that Anet was expanding other developments is not reasonable, even if it was at the expense of GW2 development. If the game isn't delivering what you want, the most profound statement you can make with that is to not play it. In fact, it's the nature of the business model; Anet has taken that into count in how they develop the game. In otherwords, GW2 was designed to allow Anet to be agile in their resources.

 

I don't necessarily agree with you here. There are things that were used as selling points but were never actually delivered on. Does it mean the end of the world? No, but it is a valid point to make. I'm personally not upset that they were expanding development but you can clearly see that they stretched themselves too thin. So, yes they can do whatever the hell they want but there are consequences to their actions. I can leave, the player-base can leave and you can be left with a shell of a game. I'm not saying that is remotely what is going to happen but it seems that's the approach that many people want to take and I don't understand it. "Don't like it leave?" How is that conducive to anyone?

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> >**The short version is that we got exactly what we paid for**, so the idea we have some right to be upset that Anet was expanding other developments is not reasonable, even if it was at the expense of GW2 development. If the game isn't delivering what you want, the most profound statement you can make with that is to not play it. In fact, it's the nature of the business model; Anet has taken that into count in how they develop the game. In otherwords, GW2 was designed to allow Anet to be agile in their resources.

>

> I don't necessarily agree with you here. There are things that were used as selling points but were never actually delivered on. Does it mean the end of the world? No, but it is a valid point to make. I'm personally not upset that they were expanding development but you can clearly see that they stretched themselves too thin. So, yes they can do whatever the hell they want but there are consequences to their actions. I can leave, the player-base can leave and you can be left with a shell of a game. I'm not saying that is remotely what is going to happen but it seems that's the approach that many people want to take and I don't understand it. "Don't like it leave?" How is that conducive to anyone?

 

It's very conducive ... people leaving/not spending money tells service providers they aren't serving the needs of their market, then they make adjustments to their offerings or services. It's how business works.

[Roquen.5406]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> It's very conducive ... people leaving/not spending money tells service providers they aren't serving the needs of their market, then they make adjustments to their offerings or services. It's how business works.

 

So is feedback...

 

 

[Trise.2865]

Sure. Everything is bad. Life sucks.

[DiabolicalHamSandwich.8756]

> @"mauried.5608" said:

> Whether Anet fails or succeeds is NOT your concern, unless you are a shareholder of Ncsoft.

> If you dont like the game , then dont play it .

>

 

Come again? I'm not a shareholder, I doubt OP is a shareholder. But that is irrelevant. We are players. Some of us have both time and money invested in this game, on top of just liking it. Wanting to see it get better. This not even including anyone with any personal ties to the folks in Anet. Them not succeeding means this game could, and probably would be affected. Which then affects everyone involved.... to varying degrees of course.

 

Either way, what happens to Anet is VERY MUCH our concern.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > It's very conducive ... people leaving/not spending money tells service providers they aren't serving the needs of their market, then they make adjustments to their offerings or services. It's how business works.

>

> So is feedback...

>

>

 

No doubt, but feedback is not as statistically relevant as Revenue is.

 

> @"DiabolicalHamSandwich.8756" said:

> > @"mauried.5608" said:

> > Whether Anet fails or succeeds is NOT your concern, unless you are a shareholder of Ncsoft.

> > If you dont like the game , then dont play it .

> >

>

> Come again? I'm not a shareholder, I doubt OP is a shareholder. But that is irrelevant. We are players. Some of us have both time and money invested in this game, on top of just liking it. Wanting to see it get better. This not even including anyone with any personal ties to the folks in Anet. Them not succeeding means this game could, and probably would be affected. Which then affects everyone involved.... to varying degrees of course.

>

> Either way, what happens to Anet is VERY MUCH our concern.

 

I think that line of thought doesn't mesh with how business works or how players should think. You haven't 'invested' anything playing the game, sort of like how you didn't 'invest' anything if you go to the movie or out for diner. You exchanged your time/money for entertainment. There isn't an 'investment' per say because there isn't any expectation that Anet owes you more than what they explicitly defined for what you paid for.

[Ryou.2398]

> @"Roquen.5406" said:

> I personally feel that people are missing something here when they defend Anet so blindly - **feel free to correct me on points where I am mistaken.**

>

> First off, I want to state that every business is out there to make money...I get that. What I think is important here is HOW they go about making that money.

>

> When Guild Wars 2 was announced there was a certain "passion" that seemed to come along with it. They had their manifesto with what they were going to do and how it was going to set this mmo apart from the rest. In some ways they really knocked it out of the park but in other ways it missed the mark. This is fine because nothing is perfect but the intention was there and early on you could see that they were committed to making changes for the better - or at least trying to.

>

> Eventually this all changed. I don't know if this was because they were being too ambitious or mismanaged. I can only speculate that it was most likely a little bit of both. At some point they flipped a switch and the game began to suffer greatly in all aspects.

>

> PvE - Content slowed to a crawl, updates got pushed back or cancelled entirely, different teams were merged to consolidate...further slowing content, and there seems to be an overall lack-of-communication. Look at the release of HoT as an example. There were three waves of testing for the elite specs, with detailed notes and comments on what they were trying to do. With player feedback, adjustments were made but by the time the third wave of changes were supposed to hit communication went silent. In fact I'm not sure if the third wave of changes ever made it in. We rarely ever saw communication like that again.

>

> PvP - Esports scene didn't do so well and from that point on it seemed pvp became stagnant. There has been pretty much one mode for six years. The other two modes put in were scrapped almost immediately rather than working to improve them and one was actually removed from the game (TDM). The balance here seems abysmally slow and often misses the mark of what is causing problems and some changes literally seem like random adjustments. Balance has been cut to two devs as far as I understand and I'm not even sure if it's just their side project? The "numbers" team tweaks internally different from the "balance" team and it seems that they don't often communicate.

>

> WvW - While a very ambitious mode in its own right it has been stagnant for the majority of its life even though there has been tons of feedback on what would make it something greater. It's gotten 1 map, world-relinking, some other small scale adjustments/additions, and a strange reward system that got pushed out very late. It's a system that seems to punish the casual player and in some ways I think it pushes new players out of the mode rather than welcoming them in.

>

> For a while you could see the writing on the wall. All these changes meant Anet's focus shifted - it was no longer about providing a quality game that would then provide a source of income for them. It became a cash cow that they wanted to milk as much as they could before it was done. The Gemstore got boosted and while it's great to have another avenue to support the company... they cashed in on it hard, from casino style lootboxes, mount passes, skins, outfits, etc. Some of these items even costing 1/3 of an entire expansion for a SINGLE skin.

>

> Let's look at the mount skins. Rather than releasing them all individually for a small price point, they locked them behind a casino style loot box. You had the option to buy them all outright but this was a lot more costly, especially if there was only one skin that you wanted. Eventually after the outcry they began to release certain individual skins at a much higher price point. The rational behind this was that, "It takes a lot of work to make these skins and not everyone would buy them all if we released them individually". Some of the skins do indeed look like a lot of effort was put into them but others were just simple reskins, sometimes of just one part of the mount. To me this meant that they weren't confident enough that their product would sell itself, so they had to force people to buy things they didn't want to get in order to get something they did want. I guess it's not necessarily a bad practice but I personally found it distasteful. I think the quality of your work should speak for itself - people buy things they like!

>

> To me it really seems that they went for the short term gain and in the end they are suffering because of it.

>

> Unfortunately, this is the fallout we are seeing today...

>

> **Now here is the thing...Anet needs us more than we need them.** If this product fails to meet the needs of its customers, they will just leave and find something else. If the player-base leaves Anet loses its source of income. Their livelihood depends on them providing a quality game for its player-base and when it fails to do that they suffer a lot more than we do, as we have just seen. This is why I believe that players have every right to be outspoken, upset, and to voice their opinions and concerns. They are upset because they care and they saw/see the potential for something that they really do love but it seems to be going off course for a while now.

 

This is what I also observed since I started gw2 some years ago, honestly I do not think you could be more right but of course we have the constant defenders in the forum who constantly attempt to troll, or belittle any kind of constructive criticism that exists, and sometimes they over word things to make it seem like there is not a real issue.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Ryou.2398" said:

> > @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > I personally feel that people are missing something here when they defend Anet so blindly - **feel free to correct me on points where I am mistaken.**

> >

> > First off, I want to state that every business is out there to make money...I get that. What I think is important here is HOW they go about making that money.

> >

> > When Guild Wars 2 was announced there was a certain "passion" that seemed to come along with it. They had their manifesto with what they were going to do and how it was going to set this mmo apart from the rest. In some ways they really knocked it out of the park but in other ways it missed the mark. This is fine because nothing is perfect but the intention was there and early on you could see that they were committed to making changes for the better - or at least trying to.

> >

> > Eventually this all changed. I don't know if this was because they were being too ambitious or mismanaged. I can only speculate that it was most likely a little bit of both. At some point they flipped a switch and the game began to suffer greatly in all aspects.

> >

> > PvE - Content slowed to a crawl, updates got pushed back or cancelled entirely, different teams were merged to consolidate...further slowing content, and there seems to be an overall lack-of-communication. Look at the release of HoT as an example. There were three waves of testing for the elite specs, with detailed notes and comments on what they were trying to do. With player feedback, adjustments were made but by the time the third wave of changes were supposed to hit communication went silent. In fact I'm not sure if the third wave of changes ever made it in. We rarely ever saw communication like that again.

> >

> > PvP - Esports scene didn't do so well and from that point on it seemed pvp became stagnant. There has been pretty much one mode for six years. The other two modes put in were scrapped almost immediately rather than working to improve them and one was actually removed from the game (TDM). The balance here seems abysmally slow and often misses the mark of what is causing problems and some changes literally seem like random adjustments. Balance has been cut to two devs as far as I understand and I'm not even sure if it's just their side project? The "numbers" team tweaks internally different from the "balance" team and it seems that they don't often communicate.

> >

> > WvW - While a very ambitious mode in its own right it has been stagnant for the majority of its life even though there has been tons of feedback on what would make it something greater. It's gotten 1 map, world-relinking, some other small scale adjustments/additions, and a strange reward system that got pushed out very late. It's a system that seems to punish the casual player and in some ways I think it pushes new players out of the mode rather than welcoming them in.

> >

> > For a while you could see the writing on the wall. All these changes meant Anet's focus shifted - it was no longer about providing a quality game that would then provide a source of income for them. It became a cash cow that they wanted to milk as much as they could before it was done. The Gemstore got boosted and while it's great to have another avenue to support the company... they cashed in on it hard, from casino style lootboxes, mount passes, skins, outfits, etc. Some of these items even costing 1/3 of an entire expansion for a SINGLE skin.

> >

> > Let's look at the mount skins. Rather than releasing them all individually for a small price point, they locked them behind a casino style loot box. You had the option to buy them all outright but this was a lot more costly, especially if there was only one skin that you wanted. Eventually after the outcry they began to release certain individual skins at a much higher price point. The rational behind this was that, "It takes a lot of work to make these skins and not everyone would buy them all if we released them individually". Some of the skins do indeed look like a lot of effort was put into them but others were just simple reskins, sometimes of just one part of the mount. To me this meant that they weren't confident enough that their product would sell itself, so they had to force people to buy things they didn't want to get in order to get something they did want. I guess it's not necessarily a bad practice but I personally found it distasteful. I think the quality of your work should speak for itself - people buy things they like!

> >

> > To me it really seems that they went for the short term gain and in the end they are suffering because of it.

> >

> > Unfortunately, this is the fallout we are seeing today...

> >

> > **Now here is the thing...Anet needs us more than we need them.** If this product fails to meet the needs of its customers, they will just leave and find something else. If the player-base leaves Anet loses its source of income. Their livelihood depends on them providing a quality game for its player-base and when it fails to do that they suffer a lot more than we do, as we have just seen. This is why I believe that players have every right to be outspoken, upset, and to voice their opinions and concerns. They are upset because they care and they saw/see the potential for something that they really do love but it seems to be going off course for a while now.

>

> This is what I also observed since I started gw2 some years ago, honestly I do not think you could be more right but of course we have the constant defenders in the forum who constantly attempt to troll, or belittle any kind of constructive criticism that exists, and sometimes they over word things to make it seem like there is not a real issue.

 

Sure, but there isn't any 'right' a player has to be upset about it. That's a ridiculous notion that somehow players are more vested in the game than simply clients of a service. They aren't. We get what we pay for, we can provide feedback ... to go to the point where we should be 'upset' is an misunderstanding of the relationship clients have with their service provider.

 

The fact is that unless Anet set some explicit expectation on the delivery of something, no player can reasonably claim the right to be upset about something they impose their own expectations onto Anet. What is more reasonable is that we can say we would LIKE Anet to do some things better, but the notion we have the right to be upset for something Anet doesn't even set expectations for is just entitlement.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

I imagine this will get merged, but...

Do players think the 150 or so new hires in the last year or two would have happened if there were no 'other projects'? I'm not sure there would have been. Thus, we are back to the amount of resources spent on GW2 before said projects.

Do players really believe a 'skeleton crew' was left to work on GW2? That 300+ Devs were working on the 'other projects'? I find that hard to believe.

I also find it a stretch to cite these 'broken promises'. /re

[Drecien.4508]

Where's the tl:dr

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > @"derd.6413" said:

> > > @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > >What has come to light is that the game was essentially put on auto-pilot with resources moved to other side projects for many years now

> >

> > this is just speculation (and very unsubstantial one at that)

>

> This is touched upon by statements from employees from the recent lay-off. I think you can also see by the changes over the past few years, as well as the cadence of releases in all aspects of the game. If I am overreaching than I apologize.

 

You are taking too much from too little.

We know the company laid off 143 people. We know those people came from all over, including from the private projects and GW2. We also know that ANet shared resources. The fractal team (when it existed by itself) shared with the raid team and the living world team, various designers worked (within the same month) on fractals, LS, and more.

 

When a non-manager sees that "sharing" going on with non-GW2 projects, the natural reaction is to assume that it means GW2 was losing people. The thing is: we don't actually know where the money for those positions came from. It's entirely possible (and likely given other info we've had in the past) that people were shared on an "as needed basis" and that sometimes the private projects got less, sometimes GW2 got less.

 

Even without that sharing, what does it even mean that the game was "essentially put on auto-pilot"? Because clearly putting out Living World isn't "maintenance" -- it's a big deal, with new achievements, new maps, new features, new skills. The new beetle mount wasn't "auto-pilot."

 

And these weren't "side projects." These were major initiatives, begun to (in theory) ensure the long term health of the company.

 

tl;dr So all we can say for certain is that, like any efficient company, ANet re-allocated resources as needed. The people who got used to having those resources around got annoyed, as happens anywhere. Everything else is speculative, with some being implausible and some being more plausible.

[Ryou.2398]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Ryou.2398" said:

> > > @"Roquen.5406" said:

> > > I personally feel that people are missing something here when they defend Anet so blindly - **feel free to correct me on points where I am mistaken.**

> > >

> > > First off, I want to state that every business is out there to make money...I get that. What I think is important here is HOW they go about making that money.

> > >

> > > When Guild Wars 2 was announced there was a certain "passion" that seemed to come along with it. They had their manifesto with what they were going to do and how it was going to set this mmo apart from the rest. In some ways they really knocked it out of the park but in other ways it missed the mark. This is fine because nothing is perfect but the intention was there and early on you could see that they were committed to making changes for the better - or at least trying to.

> > >

> > > Eventually this all changed. I don't know if this was because they were being too ambitious or mismanaged. I can only speculate that it was most likely a little bit of both. At some point they flipped a switch and the game began to suffer greatly in all aspects.

> > >

> > > PvE - Content slowed to a crawl, updates got pushed back or cancelled entirely, different teams were merged to consolidate...further slowing content, and there seems to be an overall lack-of-communication. Look at the release of HoT as an example. There were three waves of testing for the elite specs, with detailed notes and comments on what they were trying to do. With player feedback, adjustments were made but by the time the third wave of changes were supposed to hit communication went silent. In fact I'm not sure if the third wave of changes ever made it in. We rarely ever saw communication like that again.

> > >

> > > PvP - Esports scene didn't do so well and from that point on it seemed pvp became stagnant. There has been pretty much one mode for six years. The other two modes put in were scrapped almost immediately rather than working to improve them and one was actually removed from the game (TDM). The balance here seems abysmally slow and often misses the mark of what is causing problems and some changes literally seem like random adjustments. Balance has been cut to two devs as far as I understand and I'm not even sure if it's just their side project? The "numbers" team tweaks internally different from the "balance" team and it seems that they don't often communicate.

> > >

> > > WvW - While a very ambitious mode in its own right it has been stagnant for the majority of its life even though there has been tons of feedback on what would make it something greater. It's gotten 1 map, world-relinking, some other small scale adjustments/additions, and a strange reward system that got pushed out very late. It's a system that seems to punish the casual player and in some ways I think it pushes new players out of the mode rather than welcoming them in.

> > >

> > > For a while you could see the writing on the wall. All these changes meant Anet's focus shifted - it was no longer about providing a quality game that would then provide a source of income for them. It became a cash cow that they wanted to milk as much as they could before it was done. The Gemstore got boosted and while it's great to have another avenue to support the company... they cashed in on it hard, from casino style lootboxes, mount passes, skins, outfits, etc. Some of these items even costing 1/3 of an entire expansion for a SINGLE skin.

> > >

> > > Let's look at the mount skins. Rather than releasing them all individually for a small price point, they locked them behind a casino style loot box. You had the option to buy them all outright but this was a lot more costly, especially if there was only one skin that you wanted. Eventually after the outcry they began to release certain individual skins at a much higher price point. The rational behind this was that, "It takes a lot of work to make these skins and not everyone would buy them all if we released them individually". Some of the skins do indeed look like a lot of effort was put into them but others were just simple reskins, sometimes of just one part of the mount. To me this meant that they weren't confident enough that their product would sell itself, so they had to force people to buy things they didn't want to get in order to get something they did want. I guess it's not necessarily a bad practice but I personally found it distasteful. I think the quality of your work should speak for itself - people buy things they like!

> > >

> > > To me it really seems that they went for the short term gain and in the end they are suffering because of it.

> > >

> > > Unfortunately, this is the fallout we are seeing today...

> > >

> > > **Now here is the thing...Anet needs us more than we need them.** If this product fails to meet the needs of its customers, they will just leave and find something else. If the player-base leaves Anet loses its source of income. Their livelihood depends on them providing a quality game for its player-base and when it fails to do that they suffer a lot more than we do, as we have just seen. This is why I believe that players have every right to be outspoken, upset, and to voice their opinions and concerns. They are upset because they care and they saw/see the potential for something that they really do love but it seems to be going off course for a while now.

> >

> > This is what I also observed since I started gw2 some years ago, honestly I do not think you could be more right but of course we have the constant defenders in the forum who constantly attempt to troll, or belittle any kind of constructive criticism that exists, and sometimes they over word things to make it seem like there is not a real issue.

>

> Sure, but there isn't any 'right' a player has to be upset about it. That's a ridiculous notion that somehow players are more vested in the game than simply clients of a service. They aren't. We get what we pay for, we can provide feedback ... to go to the point where we should be 'upset' is an misunderstanding of the relationship clients have with their service provider.

>

> The fact is that unless Anet set some explicit expectation on the delivery of something, no player can reasonably claim the right to be upset about something they impose their own expectations onto Anet. What is more reasonable is that we can say we would LIKE Anet to do some things better, but the notion we have the right to be upset for something Anet doesn't even set expectations for is just entitlement.

 

Well this entire point is more based on your opinion or their opinion then fact though, what people have a right to be upset about can be objective and subjective depending on the entire picture as a whole, I personally believe anyone has a right to be upset when negative things keep happening to their class when they are not op for example while they have invested time and money into a game, time is just as important as anything else I do not think anyone could disagree with that.

[DiabolicalHamSandwich.8756]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"DiabolicalHamSandwich.8756" said:

> > > @"mauried.5608" said:

> > > Whether Anet fails or succeeds is NOT your concern, unless you are a shareholder of Ncsoft.

> > > If you dont like the game , then dont play it .

> > >

> >

> > Come again? I'm not a shareholder, I doubt OP is a shareholder. But that is irrelevant. We are players. Some of us have both time and money invested in this game, on top of just liking it. Wanting to see it get better. This not even including anyone with any personal ties to the folks in Anet. Them not succeeding means this game could, and probably would be affected. Which then affects everyone involved.... to varying degrees of course.

> >

> > Either way, what happens to Anet is VERY MUCH our concern.

>

> I think that line of thought doesn't mesh with how business works or how players should think. You haven't 'invested' anything playing the game, sort of like how you didn't 'invest' anything if you go to the movie or out for diner. You exchanged your time/money for entertainment. There isn't an 'investment' per say because there isn't any expectation that Anet owes you more than what they explicitly defined for what you paid for.

 

The entire point was players having reasons for wanting Anet to succeed. Whether through time and money invested in this game. Personal ties with the company, or just wanting to see it get better. Therefore making what happens to Anet, very much a concern of ours. Also, there is more then one definition for "invested". I was not speaking on literal business investments. Thought that would've been obvious, but I guess not.