Do you think FoTM is good enough to not have new world dungeon content?

[Zenith.7301]

I voted No mostly because the Agony Resistance system is atrocious. It is anti-alts, with the humongous goldsink of getting AR for 7+ professions up to 150, having to have that AR on multiple jewelry unless you want to spend every damn time trudging through the bank to swap jewelry across toons.

 

The dungeons themselves are good. Nightmare, Shattered Observatory are great dungeons.

 

But the way fractals have all these time and gold gates that fracture the dungeon community and makes having alts costly and inconvenient casts quite a shadow over how fractals function.

 

I know Anet loves their precious goldsinks, but those should be on rewards, not on requirements for entry. Agony Resistance should be revamped to be an account bound value.

 

It won't make infusions obsolete because you can still use the + infusions to make the extra stat infusions.

[thrag.9740]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> There are many posts like this already. I don't feel that anyone has satisfactorily explained the difference between 'fractals' and 'dungeons'. They are both 5-person instanced content. The main difference to ANet is that one requires more infrastructure to support, update, and add and the other requires less.

>

> Since I don't see a distinction, the question makes little sense to me: we already have dungeon content; it's just called fractals.

Key differences I have talked about:

-Dungeons are in world, so they can be gated behind expansions. I.e. dungeons could have gliding and mounts, the same way raids do. Fractals will almost certainly never allow gliding/mounts/mushrooms etc.

-Dungeons are large maps, which makes transportation and movement much more important than fractals. There are almost no stealth skips in fractals, and as a result, the entire community has forgotten skills dungeon runners use to have such as juggling blocks to stay out of combat, blasting stealth, sharing swiftness, portal skips etc

-Dungeons are much less punishing of melee builds because they don't have social awkwardness/toxic trails

 

 

edit: I voted yes, because all these things could be put into fractals if Anet wanted. There is no inherent limitation to the fractal system in these regards, Anet chooses not to in practice however.

 

[Rennie.6750]

No. The ladder system is more annoying than fun. Agony resistance is an artificial gating that really feels bad, it's so slow to get through it it's not even funny. Also, dungeon tokens are somehow better than fractal loot. With dungeons, there's little RNG and you can join at nearly any level and don't have to bother with an artificial and boring ladder put in there because the devs want to make you grind for pointless things.

 

Agony resistance is NOT character progression. It's just a piss-poor time gate that serves no purpose except hiding a major lack of content. I also don't like fractal anomalies. While a couple of them are fun or entertaining, most are just plain boring.

[Ahlen.7591]

More dungeons will never happen because dungeons are a design dead end.

 

You add a dungeon, that dungeon can give a set of armor maybe and weapons. Path can give gold. That's it, there's no extended system. Not to mention the fact that dungeons would start to feel 'samey' if they tried to add additional paths, while fractals allow for the ability to just throw whatever random stuff together you want.

 

You design a fractal, you don't have to design rewards for it, you don't have to build a system because the system is already there. Fractals are modular and easy to fit new ones into the existing architecture with a smaller development team.

 

Agony resist is kind of a red herring used by people who don't really want to commit to fractals or have an axe to grind. Getting your AR to 100 takes less than a week, especially considering that you can just buy AR for gold and inbued/attuned rings will give you an absolute ton of AR by themselves.

[Samnang.1879]

Fractals are dungeon.

[MoarChaos.8320]

Do any dungeon and you see all the problems. Skip here, here, and here, and stack here. Fractals on the other hand allow pretty much anything to be dropped and they should really just go crazy with it. They don't even need to go past 100 or 150 AR. Just eventually have two fractals on one number. So for fractal 11 you can do Bloopity Bloppyland or Snippity Snorty as an example. The numbers shouldn't matter in a lab that's doing something as crazy as stabilizing the most unstable areas of the mists.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @thrag.9740 said:

> > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > There are many posts like this already. I don't feel that anyone has satisfactorily explained the difference between 'fractals' and 'dungeons'. They are both 5-person instanced content. The main difference to ANet is that one requires more infrastructure to support, update, and add and the other requires less.

> >

> > Since I don't see a distinction, the question makes little sense to me: we already have dungeon content; it's just called fractals.

> Key differences I have talked about:

> -Dungeons are in world, so they can be gated behind expansions. I.e. dungeons could have gliding and mounts, the same way raids do. Fractals will almost certainly never allow gliding/mounts/mushrooms etc.

> -Dungeons are large maps, which makes transportation and movement much more important than fractals. There are almost no stealth skips in fractals, and as a result, the entire community has forgotten skills dungeon runners use to have such as juggling blocks to stay out of combat, blasting stealth, sharing swiftness, portal skips etc

> -Dungeons are much less punishing of melee builds because they don't have social awkwardness/toxic trails

>

>

> edit: I voted yes, because all these things could be put into fractals if Anet wanted. There is no inherent limitation to the fractal system in these regards, Anet chooses not to in practice however.

>

 

As you've acknowledged in your edit, none of those are differences *because* they are dungeons. One could just as easily say, "I want bigger maps and have to fight mobs to reach the dungeon." (As it happens, I don't want either of those things; I think they make dungeons more tedious, not more fun.)

 

As regards to social awkwardness & toxic trails: they punish those who don't pay attention to the mechanics; the "meta" for fractals is mostly melee. (doesn't necessarily make them fun or good — the point is that they don't punish melee specifically)

 

Which means that the question still isn't phrased in a way that enables a proper discussion. The question that would be more helpful for ANet would be, "what would you like to see in instanced content?" and leave it open-ended rather than via survey.

[thrag.9740]

Oh no I dont want to have to fight mobs to reach the dungeon/progress through it, I want to use stealth and teamwork to skip mobs. I liked stealth skipping, it felt cool.

 

It doesn't matter if they, 'punish melee specifically', the fact is fractals punish melee much more than dungeons ever did. Its like your defending their design decision. You asked what the difference between fractals and dungeons are, and I gave you the answers based on how Anet implements those 2 things.

 

What would I like to see? I'm happy with fractals and raids. I want them to be continued to be developed in the direction they are going. I just wish they hadn't also intentionally killed off dungeons, because the community of speed run players never returned. And doing dungeons with inexperienced players just isn't fun after you've done them a hundred times already.

 

The combat in dungeons was so easy, that for 5 experienced players ultimately the challenge came from movement, and how to do it quickly. It was a very different style of content being challenging, content that I think would really shine with things like mounts and gliders. Its too bad we will never get that.

[Xstein.2187]

In theory, fractals could replace dungeons. However, I don't see it happening. A lot of rework would be needed.

 

**My problems with fractals**

1. Fractals are meant to tell a story across different points in time and space. While good in theory, what have we received from fractals that has expanded on the story and took place in the 'Now'? This expansion was the perfect time to introduce a PoF fractal or a PoF fractal series. However, this didn't happen. It also didn't happen with HoT. Dungeons are often a great way to expand on the story of a franchise which I think is currently needed in gw2. Weather you call fractals dungeons or not, fractals did not accomplish this throughout the past two, and the only two, expansions.

2. Fractals are too . . . . chaotic in nature for many players. It is fun and something different for those who like the chaotic nature of fractals. However, what about those who like more structure? A good example is the Snowblind fractal. First of all, the snow-blind fractal gives players practically nothing in terms of story telling compared to dungeons released by gw2. If you can't tell a story with one fractal, then more should be added to create a full story. It should also be completely obvious to the players how the story progresses. For example, Snowblind 1, Snowblind 2, and finaly Snowblind 3. Further more, for those who don't like this chaos and as others have mentioned, you shouldn't be incentivized to complete random fractals based on the day. You should be incentivized to do stories. For example, Snow-blind 1-3 if there existed 3 different snow-blind fractals that provided a well told story. Unfortunately, this isn't even currently possible.

3. With some of the more recent changes, they tried to 'standardize' fractals and make them all about the same length. While this is good so many players don't prefer shorter fractals, if this 'standardization' in any way decreases the value of the story told by the fractal, then I can't be on board with it.

4. It is currently hard for the devs to make it feel like the character is making a real impact in fractals. For example, in Ascalon catacombs you physically helped Eir obtain Magdaer so that it could be reforged. In fractals, you what? . . . . defeat Mai Trin just so the fractals can loop back and you can do it again tomorrow since in terms of player impact, she is already dead so you are doing basically nothing.

5. As others have mentioned already, infusions and agony resistance when you have many characters.

 

**Possible Solutions**

1. Start working on fractals that occur in the 'Now' ASAP. By this I mean that I personally believe that we should have had three HoT fractals added with HoT and three PoF fractals added with PoF (or during the PoF living story). Same with the next expansion. I obviously do not expect this anymore. However, for fractals to truly replace dungeons I believe during this living world series they need to come out with a least 2 fractals that takes place in PoF, and start working on 3 fractals to take place during the next expansion. These fractals should be accessible through real world dungeon like entrances and through the fractal hub (basically like raids and the Lion's Arch Aerodrome). If at all possible, they should also make current dungeons accessible through the fractal hub as well.

2. Restructure/organize fractals and group them or start to group them by story type. After 8 more fractals we are going to run out of room for a 1-100 system anyway. Additionally, I personally think it is too chaotic/unorganized to add 'Now' fractals with the current fractals that take place across different time points. Personally, what I would do is get rid of the 1-100 system and go straight to an Initiate, Adept, Expert, and Master system. For all initiate fractals (for 1% health lost per tick), you don't need any agony resistance, for adept fractals you need 50, for expert you need 100, and for master you need 150. There should be one fractal type per tier. Fractals should then be grouped into stories.

Living World Season 1: includes Molten Furnace, Molten Boss, Aetherblade, Captain Mai Trin Boss, and Nightmare

Mistlock Observatory: includes Uncategorized, Chaos Isles, and Shattered Observatory

Historic Fractals: includes Urban Battleground, Aquatic Ruins, Volcanic, Snowblind, Underground Facility, Jade Maw, and Thaumanova Reactor

?: includes Swampland and Cliffside

PoF: includes path of fire fractals.

If possible: fractal story sections added for each current dungeon (scaling and adding agony and instabilites may take to much work)

3. 3 Fractal dailies should then not be random, but divided by story. For example, complete the Mistlock Observatory story, with rewards still given per fractal based on the fractal level.

4. Make it less costly or free to move infusions between armor sets and make it so exotics can use infusions as well, or at least infusions up to a certain agony resistance.

5. For an optional layout, new fractals would be added for all 3 piece stories for dailies. For example, another Molten fractal would be added for a 3 part Molten story, another aetherblade type fractal would be added for a 3 part aetherblade story, etc.

[Death.9268]

I prefer both. With every raid wing they could add a dungeon wing for those who want to play that content with 5 people instead of 10. And with an expansion they could add dungeons to give side story quests. Like with HOT a dungeon about Malyk/Nightmare court and a dungeon about Rata Novus. :)

[Jahroots.6791]

I prefer dungeons. The agony system does not feel like progression, but a gold/time gate. There's a bunch of alts I'd love to pop into fractals and test out but I just can't be arsed to put the infusions together at this point. Also, not a big fan of the forced daily selection. I'd rather have the ability to choose which ones I run and still be properly rewarded.

 

The main issue I have though is the slow release rate. A single one, every few months, is just not satisfying. They ought to be released in sets of three or four, as a single fractal is about equal to a raid boss/encounter in terms of play time.

[Einlanzer.1627]

My general perspective is this -

 

FotM makes for a pretty cool scalable macro dungeon, but it does not fill the content void left my ceasing development on traditional dungeon content. This is because traditional dungeons provide a level of immersion and help deepen the story and world exploration experience in a way that FoTM cannot replicate. They are also much more accessible for casual players.

 

Frankly, even if it means even slower delivery on FoTM content - we need regular dungeons and updates to old dungeons from time to time. They made a mistake getting rid of their dungeon team years ago.

[Malediktus.9250]

No. It is way too little. 2-3 short instances per year is laughable.

[Ayrilana.1396]

What's the difference between fractals and dungeons really tbh?

[npmis.7860]

In my opinion they are good enough, but new dungeons would still be a good addition to the game. They could have the same nice mechanic-designs as the latest fractals, but tell side -stories about the current Tyria.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @Ayrilana.1396 said:

> What's the difference between fractals and dungeons really tbh?

 

Pretty obvious, but it's discussed above. Dungeons are longer, more complex, serve as extensions of the surrounding environment (better for immersion and depth of gameplay) , and also more accessible for casual players. Fractals scale and are tied together as one macro dungeon.

[maxwelgm.4315]

Fractals would need to be released on a tighter schedule to even compare to dungeons. Even after all these years there are still more dungeon than fractal skins and there are more concise storylines in the derelict dungeons. Only closure we have ever gotten from Fractals was Arkk and that's not really much given the short format of the medium. One proof of how dearly we lack having proper long term 5-man content is the bitter taste that Raids leave in the mouths of many simply because it's that much harder to find 10 people willing to raid at any time.

[MyPuppy.8970]

I don't do much raid, dungeon or fractals, but the way I feel it, dungeons should be an epic quest taking several hours to complete. With a feeling of satisfaction and glory when you clear it. If possible, with a map/monster/boss generator so that it is never the same twice, preventing speedclears and rush. Paths to chose, doors to open, jumping and magic puzzles...

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> My general perspective is this -

>

> FotM makes for a pretty cool scalable macro dungeon, but it does not fill the content void left my ceasing development on traditional dungeon content. This is because traditional dungeons provide a level of immersion and help deepen the story and world exploration experience in a way that FoTM cannot replicate. They are also much more accessible for casual players.

 

That's only true if they are designed to be accessible to whatever "casual player" means to you. ANet's original intent was that explorable dungeons be for "... coordinated groups of skilled players." That's not "casual" to me. That's raid-oriented. That some of the existing explorable paths are accessible was, imo, a design failure -- assuming ANet's intent remained as stated. So, the question of whether "casual" endgame content is to include new dungeons very much depends on what ANet would want for such content. Without anything but the original design statement, I'd have to assume that new dungeons would be aimed at decidedly not casual players, and we have high-level FotM and raids for that demographic.

 

>

> Frankly, even if it means even slower delivery on FoTM content - we need regular dungeons and updates to old dungeons from time to time. They made a mistake getting rid of their dungeon team years ago.

 

Dev time for a new dungeon initiative would have to come from somewhere. In the unlikely event that new dungeons alone were to provide a revenue stream to fund their development, then ANet might be able to hire more devs to fill a new dungeon team. However, even if that hypothetical revenue increase were to materialize, it wouldn't do so until the first new dungeons appeared. This means the dev time to get it started would have to be shaved off from existing content. I don't see the demographics that are already clamoring for more new content X (where X = their content type of choice) being happy to take a back seat.

 

_If_ new dungeons were to be aimed at a casual demographic (and remember, lacking the scaling present in fractals, dungeons will be aimed at either casual or hardcore), would the dev resources be deducted from the decidedly casual persistent world content? That would make a sort of sense. It could also result in longer delays between regular content updates. Given the reaction and dramatic revenue drop near the end of last year's "content drought," I doubt that such delays would be in the best interests of ANet.

 

So, I voted, "Yes." However, I did so because I believe the consequences of ANet dev time being stretched too thin would be bad for the game as a whole.

[hornswroggle.8023]

Whenever this discussion comes up, advocates of classic dungeos often get asked: "What can dungeons do, that fractals cannot?"

 

I think my answer is: Dungeons are instanced group content that is by design NOT challenging.

 

Fractals are implemented in such a way that running them outside of daylies does for most players not pay off for the hastle of getting together a reasoable group comp. And as much as T4 fracs are a breeze for expierienced players we all know that a bad comp (not necessarily a non-meta build) can screw over the best players.

 

Dungeons are different. Being around the T2 to early-T3 mark in terms of difficulty, they don't add the layer of mechanics on top in form of agony and instabilities. They are more laid back and are the type of content I play when coming home from an 8h workday or a week of study lessons, the times when I don't really want to give anything about a comp and take 2 friends and 2 Lv 73 randoms on a ride.

 

Since the rewards from dungeons were reduced (which hindsight I fully understand; running Arah with HoT/PoF specs would cause insane inflation) people also have dropped the speedrun mentality and shifted it to fracs. People now value dungeons for what they are rather than the rewards.

 

And lastly there is the theming and storytelling. Fractals are a part of the mists and I can really feel the point that Rytlock has whenever the mists come up: "I've had enough metaphysical landscapes for a lifetime."

In the mists nothing is tangible, nothing is fact, everything is maybes and mights. Dungeons are real, anchored in the reality of Tyria. The small stories they tell are more "reasonable" than the fractal ones. I feel that my actions have an impact on a small part of this world, whereas in fractals everything is "For science!" despite the fact we know, that any deductions made never leave the Observatoy.

 

I like fractals for what they are: Challenging group content with solid rewards.

But I also like dungeons for what they are: NON-challenging group content with low rewards.

[Ayakaru.6583]

I think thw quality and content of fractals is much better than dungeons. Dungeons were way too straightforward in my opinion, whereas fractals have all these fun gimmicks, and regional debuffs.

That said, I did hope that disbanding the dungeon team would mean a buff on fractal creations, but honestly.. fractals creation has been as slow as ever..

[Ahlen.7591]

> @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > @Ayrilana.1396 said:

> > What's the difference between fractals and dungeons really tbh?

>

> Pretty obvious, but it's discussed above. Dungeons are longer, more complex, serve as extensions of the surrounding environment (better for immersion and depth of gameplay) , and also more accessible for casual players. Fractals scale and are tied together as one macro dungeon.

 

Dungeons are certainly not longer than fractals. And they are ABSOLUTELY not as complex as fractals.

 

That is just foolish bias. Most dungeon paths can be done in < 5 minutes by skilled players, <10 by casuals. And the complexity boils down to "Stand in corner and stack".

[Scipion.7548]

I voted no but honnestly I don't like GW2 dungeons and fractals. Without clear roles they are a mess. The group is too disorganized and I usually ask my self what I am doing, but the boss dies anyway.

[zealex.9410]

> @Scipion.7548 said:

> I voted no but honnestly I don't like GW2 dungeons and fractals. Without clear roles they are a mess. The group is too disorganized and I usually ask my self what I am doing, but the boss dies anyway.

 

Dps'/supports there u go.

[Einlanzer.1627]

> @Ahlen.7591 said:

> > @Einlanzer.1627 said:

> > > @Ayrilana.1396 said:

> > > What's the difference between fractals and dungeons really tbh?

> >

> > Pretty obvious, but it's discussed above. Dungeons are longer, more complex, serve as extensions of the surrounding environment (better for immersion and depth of gameplay) , and also more accessible for casual players. Fractals scale and are tied together as one macro dungeon.

>

> Dungeons are certainly not longer than fractals. And they are ABSOLUTELY not as complex as fractals.

>

> That is just foolish bias. Most dungeon paths can be done in < 5 minutes by skilled players, <10 by casuals. And the complexity boils down to "Stand in corner and stack".

 

That's due to the design for encounters/rewards, not the dungeons themselves. That would be easy to update for both existing and new dungeons i.e. - increase the rewards for trash mobs and reduce the rewards for bosses/completion, fill them out with more mandatory encounters, etc.