An Argument for the Return of Hard Mode

[FrigginPaco.4178]

> @"Iron.4372" said:

> > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > > @"Iron.4372" said:

> > > I think the best way to introduce Hard Mode in GW1-Style in GW2-Style would be fantastic idea, but there is always "but" .

> > >

> > > Basing on the latest news - current Living World team's working on new events to old maps. It may happen in different instance OR it will happen everywhere, like Kessex Hills during LS1. That leaves open doors to stand a question - Maybe it will be Hard Mode for different instance of the map?

> > >

> > > The other side - that would mean - small/no new lore/maps - depending on current resources.

> >

> > Even that I would welcome more than ignoring things altogether.

>

> You don't know, if they are ignoring things - they're working the best they can. You can't show a random girl a Diamond Ring, that You were working for 6 months. You don't know what's going on inside ;)

 

Well that's part of the issue; no one knows what's happening.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> How precisely would that be carried out without feeling cheap?

>

>

I don't know ... how do you even begin to qualify what feeling cheap means? Is that just a phrase your going to hit people with when their ideas aren't what you consider valid ways to make the game harder?

 

I mean, let's be clear here ... you are not the sole client of this game, so it's not about implementing what you want. It's about offering a solution that works. Time for some honesty ... either the stats on the player gets a nerf or the stats on the mobs get a buff ... that' s going to be easiest way to implement the same (existing OR future) content with hard and easy levels. Why would anyone consider a different approach that's likely more work for affecting difficulties? I don't think you have the proper perspective here. This isn't an exercise in making things harder with all these conditions that you decide to impose on it ... if that's the case, there isn't any reason take your ideas seriously.

 

Here is my biggest problem. People have offered you a way to try to make the game harder for yourself ... and you blew them off like they were some kind of ridiculous idiots. The reality is that the ideas they suggest to downplay your stats are very likely to be part of how difficulty levels would be implemented in a game that never intended for them to exist in the first place. So instead of blowing them off, go do it and see what you don't like about it so if this ever DOES become something Anet would consider, you know what you're talking about instead of daydreaming how you think you want it.

[FrigginPaco.4178]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > How precisely would that be carried out without feeling cheap?

> >

> >

> I don't know ... how do you even begin to qualify what feeling cheap means? Is that just a phrase your going to hit people with when their ideas aren't what you consider valid ways to make the game harder?

>

> I mean, let's be clear here ... you are not the sole client of this game, so it's not about implementing what you want. It's about offering a solution that works. Time for some honesty ... either the stats on the player gets a nerf or the stats on the mobs get a buff ... that' s going to be easiest way to implement the same (existing OR future) content with hard and easy levels. Why would anyone consider a different approach that's likely more work for affecting difficulties? I don't think you have the proper perspective here. This isn't an exercise in making things harder with all these conditions that you decide to impose on it ... if that's the case, there isn't any reason take your ideas seriously.

>

> Here is my biggest problem. People have offered you a way to try to make the game harder for yourself ... and you blew them off like they were some kind of ridiculous idiots. The reality is that the ideas they suggest to downplay your stats are very likely to be part of how difficulty levels would be implemented in a game that never intended for them to exist in the first place. So instead of blowing them off, go do it and see what you don't like about it so if this ever DOES become something Anet would consider, you know what you're talking about instead of daydreaming how you think you want it.

 

That suggestion will never accomplish the goal. If you, and others, cannot see from my viewpoint that a handicap does not equal content, then that's too bad.

 

Additionally, I very much know what I want, there's no "how I think I want it" about it. I've had enough of you. Good day.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > > How precisely would that be carried out without feeling cheap?

> > >

> > >

> > I don't know ... how do you even begin to qualify what feeling cheap means? Is that just a phrase your going to hit people with when their ideas aren't what you consider valid ways to make the game harder?

> >

> > I mean, let's be clear here ... you are not the sole client of this game, so it's not about implementing what you want. It's about offering a solution that works. Time for some honesty ... either the stats on the player gets a nerf or the stats on the mobs get a buff ... that' s going to be easiest way to implement the same (existing OR future) content with hard and easy levels. Why would anyone consider a different approach that's likely more work for affecting difficulties? I don't think you have the proper perspective here. This isn't an exercise in making things harder with all these conditions that you decide to impose on it ... if that's the case, there isn't any reason take your ideas seriously.

> >

> > Here is my biggest problem. People have offered you a way to try to make the game harder for yourself ... and you blew them off like they were some kind of ridiculous idiots. The reality is that the ideas they suggest to downplay your stats are very likely to be part of how difficulty levels would be implemented in a game that never intended for them to exist in the first place. So instead of blowing them off, go do it and see what you don't like about it so if this ever DOES become something Anet would consider, you know what you're talking about instead of daydreaming how you think you want it.

>

> That suggestion will never accomplish the goal. If you, and others, cannot see from my viewpoint that a handicap does not equal content, then that's too bad.

>

> Additionally, I very much know what I want, there's no "how I think I want it" about it. I've had enough of you. Good day.

 

Unfortunately for you, I'm not quite done :)

 

The fact is that handicapping yourself DOES make the game harder, so yes, it does accomplish the goal. Whether that's an acceptable method to you to make it harder is irrelevant. It's not that we don't see your viewpoint ... it's that we recognize your viewpoint isn't as relevant as you think it is. You aren't the sole client to this game. Somehow you have convinced yourself that because it's your suggestion, only what you want matters. I can assure you that's not how this works. You sound like the kind of person that might be surprised to find exactly how little your opinion matters and this game isn't an academic exercise in seeing how closely Anet can implement the FrigginPaco.4178 version of the game.

[FrigginPaco.4178]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > > > How precisely would that be carried out without feeling cheap?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > I don't know ... how do you even begin to qualify what feeling cheap means? Is that just a phrase your going to hit people with when their ideas aren't what you consider valid ways to make the game harder?

> > >

> > > I mean, let's be clear here ... you are not the sole client of this game, so it's not about implementing what you want. It's about offering a solution that works. Time for some honesty ... either the stats on the player gets a nerf or the stats on the mobs get a buff ... that' s going to be easiest way to implement the same (existing OR future) content with hard and easy levels. Why would anyone consider a different approach that's likely more work for affecting difficulties? I don't think you have the proper perspective here. This isn't an exercise in making things harder with all these conditions that you decide to impose on it ... if that's the case, there isn't any reason take your ideas seriously.

> > >

> > > Here is my biggest problem. People have offered you a way to try to make the game harder for yourself ... and you blew them off like they were some kind of ridiculous idiots. The reality is that the ideas they suggest to downplay your stats are very likely to be part of how difficulty levels would be implemented in a game that never intended for them to exist in the first place. So instead of blowing them off, go do it and see what you don't like about it so if this ever DOES become something Anet would consider, you know what you're talking about instead of daydreaming how you think you want it.

> >

> > That suggestion will never accomplish the goal. If you, and others, cannot see from my viewpoint that a handicap does not equal content, then that's too bad.

> >

> > Additionally, I very much know what I want, there's no "how I think I want it" about it. I've had enough of you. Good day.

>

> Unfortunately for you, I'm not quite done :)

>

> The fact is that handicapping yourself DOES make the game harder, so yes, it does accomplish the goal. Whether that's an acceptable method to you to make it harder is irrelevant. It's not that we don't see your viewpoint ... it's that we recognize your viewpoint isn't as relevant as you think it is. You aren't the sole client to this game. Somehow you have convinced yourself that because it's your suggestion, only what you want matters. I can assure you that's not how this works. You sound like the kind of person that might be surprised to find exactly how little your opinion matters and this game isn't an academic exercise in seeing how closely Anet can implement the FrigginPaco.4178 version of the game.

 

I haven't convinced myself of anything. You, and others, have taken it upon yourselves to ascribe whatever ideas you want onto my stance. That is your doing for conflating my stance and your own. And yes, it isn't that you don't see my view point, instead talking past me appears to be the method to achieve Hard Mode. Enjoy having the last word.

[thepenmonster.3621]

> @"Trise.2865" said:

> Use Masterwork instead of Ascended. Congratulations! you're in Hard Mode.

 

Yeah, I can't take seriously any complaints about the game being too easy from players who have been playing for years with toons clad in the best gear the game has to offer.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > > > > How precisely would that be carried out without feeling cheap?

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > I don't know ... how do you even begin to qualify what feeling cheap means? Is that just a phrase your going to hit people with when their ideas aren't what you consider valid ways to make the game harder?

> > > >

> > > > I mean, let's be clear here ... you are not the sole client of this game, so it's not about implementing what you want. It's about offering a solution that works. Time for some honesty ... either the stats on the player gets a nerf or the stats on the mobs get a buff ... that' s going to be easiest way to implement the same (existing OR future) content with hard and easy levels. Why would anyone consider a different approach that's likely more work for affecting difficulties? I don't think you have the proper perspective here. This isn't an exercise in making things harder with all these conditions that you decide to impose on it ... if that's the case, there isn't any reason take your ideas seriously.

> > > >

> > > > Here is my biggest problem. People have offered you a way to try to make the game harder for yourself ... and you blew them off like they were some kind of ridiculous idiots. The reality is that the ideas they suggest to downplay your stats are very likely to be part of how difficulty levels would be implemented in a game that never intended for them to exist in the first place. So instead of blowing them off, go do it and see what you don't like about it so if this ever DOES become something Anet would consider, you know what you're talking about instead of daydreaming how you think you want it.

> > >

> > > That suggestion will never accomplish the goal. If you, and others, cannot see from my viewpoint that a handicap does not equal content, then that's too bad.

> > >

> > > Additionally, I very much know what I want, there's no "how I think I want it" about it. I've had enough of you. Good day.

> >

> > Unfortunately for you, I'm not quite done :)

> >

> > The fact is that handicapping yourself DOES make the game harder, so yes, it does accomplish the goal. Whether that's an acceptable method to you to make it harder is irrelevant. It's not that we don't see your viewpoint ... it's that we recognize your viewpoint isn't as relevant as you think it is. You aren't the sole client to this game. Somehow you have convinced yourself that because it's your suggestion, only what you want matters. I can assure you that's not how this works. You sound like the kind of person that might be surprised to find exactly how little your opinion matters and this game isn't an academic exercise in seeing how closely Anet can implement the FrigginPaco.4178 version of the game.

>

> I haven't convinced myself of anything. You, and others, have taken it upon yourselves to ascribe whatever ideas you want onto my stance. That is your doing for conflating my stance and your own. And yes, it isn't that you don't see my view point, instead talking past me appears to be the method to achieve Hard Mode. Enjoy having the last word.

 

Oh so you aren't done. I'm so happy you came back :)

 

It's not a valid dismissal just because don't like the answer you are given. You think hard content should equate to some kind of thing that isn't just a scaling; scaling is to pedestrian a solution for you. The difference is that the people that disagree with you, at some level, recognize the impracticality of your idea, it's appeal to some fringe players barely hanging into the game anyways. It's not time well spent by Anet to create what you are asking for. it would be of such low impact to the game that it would ignore people that don't value it, it would feel like a token and thin effort to those it attempts to appeal to. NEITHER of those is a good thing. Your idea is a BAD strategy.

 

 

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Here is my biggest problem. People have offered you a way to try to make the game harder for yourself ... and you blew them off like they were some kind of ridiculous idiots.

 

Because those "ideas" are actually not working at all. Self imposed penalties don't equal challenge. The biggest problem is that some people don't understand this and keep posting this "idea" as if it has any kind of merit.

 

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> Your idea is a BAD strategy.

 

The idea of making a "hard mode" for the open world is indeed bad strategy, that doesn't make the idea of having self-imposed penalties any better though.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"thepenmonster.3621" said:

> > @"Trise.2865" said:

> > Use Masterwork instead of Ascended. Congratulations! you're in Hard Mode.

>

> Yeah, I can't take seriously any complaints about the game being too easy from players who have been playing for years with toons clad in the best gear the game has to offer.

 

Did you know that a pocket raptor has 1/4th the health of a Risen Brute in Orr? Yet the raptor is much more challenging foe to fight. Because they come in groups and surround the player. Without area of effect skills they can be hard to kill.

Did you know that a Smokescale has about 1/3rd-1/2nd the health of a Risen Brute in Orr? Yet it's a much more challenging foe to fight. Because once they start teleporting you cannot target them, however due to their low health they can be killed instantly if you use a bit of crowd control first.

 

Damage and health scaling do not make "hard" foes, they make boring and tedious fights. Yet that's what you get if you downgrade your gear. I can go solo a champion in core tyria and kill it after wasting 10 minutes of my time. Was I challenged? No, I barely stayed awake fighting it. On the other hand veteran mobs (and even some normal ones!) in the expansion areas provide more interesting fights. Compare a Veteran Awakened Abomination with literally any Core Tyria Champion mob... it's not even a contest. The Abomination will provide an interesting challenge, while the champion will challenge your will to stay in the fight for the long period required to kill it.

 

For some reason players here equate challenge with boredom.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Konig Des Todes.2086" said:

> It can work for story instances, but when responding to the idea of giving more challenge mode instances, ArenaNet has stated it's a lot of work, as they're effectively doubling every boss fight for one-time rewards.

 

I think that's one of the points behind Strike Missions, take a story instance and turn it into a repeatable more challenge group version. Given how Mike Z said they want to re-use good encounter mechanics from now on, it's more than likely their future encounter design will be re-used in the Strike Mission version. If I recall he talked about the flying battle with Kralk when we were riding Aurene, that was an awesome mechanic but used only once and rather "wasted", similar mechanics in the future might become Strike Missions so they are repeatable and have more longevity.

[Fueki.4753]

If they give us multiple difficulty modes for raids, hard modes for Open World would be fine.

[thepenmonster.3621]

This thread... MMOs are the only game genre where players whine about getting too skilled.

[FrigginPaco.4178]

> @"thepenmonster.3621" said:

> This thread... MMOs are the only game genre where players whine about getting too skilled.

 

First of all, that happens in many other genres. And secondly, skilled or not skilled, overcoming a challenge feels good.

[thepenmonster.3621]

Good luck with your current challenge of imposing your personal desires upon the rest of the player base.

[FrigginPaco.4178]

> @"thepenmonster.3621" said:

> Good luck with your current challenge of imposing your personal desires upon the rest of the player base.

 

If only people would see that the same thing is happening by the section of people who see nothing wrong with the status quo.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Xeno.1298" said:

> > @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > > @"Xeno.1298" said:

> > > There's already a hard mode, it's called Challenging Yourself. You can enable this mode by not wearing armor, or not using runes or sigils, or using only two specializations, or using a limited number of traits, or starting a new character and using only items they find, or limiting the number of skills you can use, or never using a heal skill, or using low-level gear, or... etc.

> >

> > I'd say that's more "Handicapping yourself" rather than challenging. If the game offers you all this stuff to use in order to execute combat why would you insist to remove it? It's one thing to admit the game has space for more difficult content, which I think most people would agree. It's another thing to patronize the idea by submitting a counter point that simply doesn't address the problem.

>

> It's the same difference. It doesn't matter what the source of the challenge is, if challenge is what you actually want instead of just more rewards. There's nothing patronizing about pointing out currently viable options for what you consider a "problem", that really isn't. If you want the challenge to include other players, make a hardcore guild or the like and set whatever gameplay rules are desired, there's that issue solved. GW1 was a completely different game. In GW2 maps aren't all instanced, there are no henchmen/heroes, non-story instance maps can't be "cleared", resurrection works differently, etc., so expecting GW2 to offer something comparable to the GW1 hard mode experience is unlikely and would rob the core game of a lot of development resources.

>

 

Yes it does matter what the source of the challenge is. If I want to see what challenges I can overcome with my character at his best then playing him not at his best doesn't serve.

 

It would be like a runner trying to see how fast he can run, not by running faster but by tying himself to the starting blocks.

[Anchoku.8142]

I would not object to a hard mode for open world PvE that offers better rewards at risk of failure. A challenge mode in OW PvE is not that hard to implement.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > Here is my biggest problem. People have offered you a way to try to make the game harder for yourself ... and you blew them off like they were some kind of ridiculous idiots.

>

> Because those "ideas" are actually not working at all. Self imposed penalties don't equal challenge. The biggest problem is that some people don't understand this and keep posting this "idea" as if it has any kind of merit.

 

OK, but this isn't an academic exercise and scaling isn't some far out there idea about how to make things harder for people. So what do you think is most realistic here? Anet go rework a very small fraction to increase the challenge of some OW area for a small fraction of PVE people ...

 

OR ... they simply allow players to scale so ALL content is more difficult, by your choice? You know the answer. This isn't about the BEST way ... because as you even admit below ...

>

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > Your idea is a BAD strategy.

>

> The idea of making a "hard mode" for the open world is indeed bad strategy, ...

 

Right ... so in other words ... the whole idea is nonsense, which is what everyone has told he OP anyways. I'm not against the idea of some hard mode OW ... but if we start being realistic here, we know that's not likely to happen at this point (or debatably, ever for this game because of it's audience). I would bet on it. Anet barely has LS every 4-5 months ... but they are going to deliver the current levels of content AND rework the game for a hard mode (not scaling because apparently, that's not good enough) so a few people can redo things harder? That doesn't make sense.

 

As much as you don't like it, scaling is literally the only sensible approach to this problem and because it's 'bad', even less likely to happen. So I really don't get what you are arguing with me about because basically you agree. I guess you see the name so you go on attack mode or something.

[thepenmonster.3621]

> @"FrigginPaco.4178" said:

> > @"thepenmonster.3621" said:

> > Good luck with your current challenge of imposing your personal desires upon the rest of the player base.

>

> If only people would see that the same thing is happening by the section of people who see nothing wrong with the status quo.

 

I'm sorry for oppressing you by doing nothing.

[Anchoku.8142]

Leveling from 1 to 80 in August through September 2012 on a thouroghly post-beta nerfed Necro with un-nerfed Orr and dungeons was a lot more challenging than today.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> or debatably, ever for this game because of it's audience

 

I'm sure you've played both expansions and the LS content around them so the "audience" isn't a very good argument. Because all LS content ever since Season 1 has been more challenging than Core Tyria.

 

As for Scaling, do you honestly believe that if a player uses white gear while fighting the Shadow Behemoth will somehow get a more challenging experience? Because I don't. Same for any core tyria boss, they lack any teamwork mechanics, or most of them -any- mechanics worth talking about anyway. Scaling and using lower quality gear will never lead to more challenge in this game, due to how it is designed. It would only work inside instances, but this was a suggestion about the open world. And I'm talking specifically about Core Tyria here, the expansions+seasons have more than enough good mechanics.

 

> So I really don't get what you are arguing with me about because basically you agree.

 

I agree that a hard mode OW for this game makes no sense. I'm arguing against this constant argument of self punishment as a way of making the game more challenging. As much as asking for a hard mode OW is dumb, saying "use white gear" is equally dumb.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> I agree that a hard mode OW for this game makes no sense.

 

Great, because that's all you got to say. You can disagree that self-punishing is a way to make the game more challenging if you like ... but every game I've played does exactly that; it's the whole premise of different tiers of gear and even endgame progression for some games. So call it whatever you want; it's an established and accepted approach.

[Rogue.8235]

I’d like to bring all sides of the conversation to a mutual understanding.

 

GW2 is a game about active combat mechanics, c.f. much older MMO’s and RPG’s which are mathematics with cool animations. Simply altering the numbers, such as reductions via lower-tiered gear would not introduce new difficulty to the combat of GW2. It’s simply far more complex than just a numbers game. The OP appears to be asking for increased complexity in combat mechanics as a means of increased difficulty, which cannot be simulated by merely altering numbers.

 

On the other hand, others are stating that this kind of content already exists in the form of dungeons/fractals/raids (heretofore known as instanced content). In these modes, players must tackle a variety of complex combat mechanics, making it much more difficult to succeed. The argument here is that complex mechanics are reserved for instanced content, which are the gameplay modes that challenge seekers should play (given a lack of interest in fighting other players).

 

A key factor to keep in mind is the experiential difference between the open world and instanced combat. If you completely ignore combat mechanics, the two experiences are still very different. Instanced content is pre-meditated, linear, and has a clear objective. You set up your group, follow the path, and accomplish the objective. After that the instance is essentially over. With open world, the experience is more about exploration. You can go wherever and do whatever on a whim. There are no singular objectives to win the map, you just go around doing whatever you want and explore.

 

The OP appears to be expressing a desire to combine the complex combat mechanics of instanced content with the experience of the open world. This combination is not satisfied with the mere alteration of stats (via different gear). Handicapping your build via traits and skills also does not satisfy this request. Altering builds in this fashion reduces the combat mechanics involved. The desire is to increase the complexity of combat mechanics. These are two very different things.

 

The conversation should be on the merits of an open world experience with the complex combat mechanics seen in instanced combat. It may be argued that this already exists, or it may be argued that such a feature may be an impediment on the game. It could also be argued that the game does not satisfy this desire, or the introduction of such a feature would be beneficial for the game.

 

I hope this clears things up and puts the discussion back on track.

 

[VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.]

anet gave raids the pretty legendary armor and pvp and wvw players crap, just to entice people to try/do raids.

 

Still raids seems to be niche smaller than fractals.

 

So it did not work.

 

Why introduce a 'hard mode' that will also not work? A lot of people don't want a hard game. A slight challenge, to keep it fun, yes. But memorizing the perfect path and rotation? That is not fun. That is work. People who work tend to want to relax, not have to do more work - IN A GAME.

[AgentMoore.9453]

Not sure how you could implement something like this in open world and still call it optional.

 

If you're Tanky McHardcore with Elite Bonecrusher Mode active in, say, Queensdale, how do you reconcile your beefed-up mob groups with new players, low-levels, or others who have not activated the challenge mode? The closest we have to something like this now are the bandit bounties and the legendary executioners who are purposefully placed out of the way as not to interfere with casual gameplay; this is the point.

 

In GW2, challenges are separated in such a way that you can pick your path: Raids are their own game mode. PvP is its own game mode. Dungeons are their own game mode. Champions and world bosses are set to spawn in specific places or in reaction to player concentration to ensure that they can always be avoided or defeated.

 

At the moment, I see no way to implement a world-wide 'hard mode' that wouldn't disrupt other people or open the door for serious abuse using upgraded mobs against players who aren't interested.