Never say something is too hard,

[Fueki.4753]

> @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> Communication is key here. If I jump into a dungeon lfg and see everybody take off without a word, I assume they know what they're doing and take off, too. If I see somebody lagging behind or otherwise giving a clue of not knowing what's up, I ask if anybody's inexperienced and/or would like explanations. If somebody comes in and says they'd like to take it slow, I take it slow.

 

Communication is indeed the key there.

And that starts with the lfg post. If people want to rush, they should tell people in the lfg tool.

I even **expect** rushers to do so.

[Rasimir.6239]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> > Communication is key here. If I jump into a dungeon lfg and see everybody take off without a word, I assume they know what they're doing and take off, too. If I see somebody lagging behind or otherwise giving a clue of not knowing what's up, I ask if anybody's inexperienced and/or would like explanations. If somebody comes in and says they'd like to take it slow, I take it slow.

> Communication is indeed the key there.

> And that starts with the lfg post. If people want to rush, they should tell people in the lfg tool.

If I put up a dungeon lfg I usually put no requirements in, except if I have some of my casual guildies with me (in which case it goes as "everyone welcome"). If I end up with a party familiar with the path, then I "rush" through it because there's no reason not to. If I end up with people not familiar with the path, then I slow down, explain, try to carry, whatever it takes. If I end up with people trying to put me into categories and starting a drama because they expect me to play a certain way without talking about it, then you might just find me dropping party, but that rarely happens.

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> I even **expect** rushers to do so.

What gives you the right to expect people to behave in a specific pattern but not others?

[Fueki.4753]

> @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> > I even **expect** rushers to do so.

> What gives you the right to expect people to behave in a specific pattern but not others?

If people want a group to rush a dungeons, they need to tell that in the LFG.

Imagine you are a rusher, and then suddenly 4 non-rushers join your party!

And that only happens because you failed to tell them you are a rusher!

 

[sokeenoppa.5384]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> > > I even **expect** rushers to do so.

> > What gives you the right to expect people to behave in a specific pattern but not others?

> If people want a group to rush a dungeons, they need to tell that in the LFG.

> Imagine you are a rusher, and then suddenly 4 non-rushers join your party!

> And that only happens because you failed to tell them you are a rusher!

>

 

Every1 should tell their gamestyle in LFG. If lfg only says p3 without any other info every1 has their own expetations how to run should be.

[Rasimir.6239]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> > > I even **expect** rushers to do so.

> > What gives you the right to expect people to behave in a specific pattern but not others?

> If people want a group to rush a dungeons, they need to tell that in the LFG.

> Imagine you are a rusher, and then suddenly 4 non-rushers join your party!

> And that only happens because you failed to tell them you are a rusher!

You are still only seeing black and white. You can't separate the community into "rushers" and "non-rushers". There are a lot of inbetweens, people who know the dungeon paths well enough to go through with tried and tested strategies they've done hundreds of times if they end up with similarly experienced people but are just as likely to do things differently if they end up with a mixed bag.

 

I've been playing dungeons in this game since the time when dungeons were the endgame content, and I still love playing them today. I know all of the mechanics by heart. I know all of the tricks. I enjoy playing through them with similarly experienced people that go through the path like a hot knife through butter, where everything falls into place without thinking about it. But I enjoy just as much playing through them with people new to the path, that watch videos, ask for explanations, practice mechanics, whatever it takes for them to enjoy the thing. And I enjoy going through dungeons with everything inbetween, as long as people are cooperative and have fun.

 

What I won't do is keep everyone waiting at the start of the dungeon by holding a speech demanding each one state their experience and preference to running the path. If people look like they know what they're doing, there is no reason to do so. If they don't then it'll be apparent soon enough to stop and ask (if they don't take initiative and talk themselves).

[DesiRe.1348]

@"Fueki.4753" you've stated now - several times - that, since the game should not cater to the minority of disabled people or the like, it also shouldnt cater to the minority of "elitist" players. But there is one inherent difference that you never mentioned: The average player can step up to get better and eventually manage to do the "elitist" content, by learning and repeating. But there is absolutely no way that an average player suddenly gets worse and enjoys playing through faceroll content by pressing one button. So there is a very clear difference between catering to the "poorly playing" minority or the "better playing" minority. Now, I'm not saying every content should be catered to the top 2 % of players, but I just wanted to mention you cant fully compare both groups.

I do agree that the ONE sensible thing for Anet to do is to implement lets say 3 difficulties: Easy, Normal and Challenge Mode. But they will never do that it seems.

 

Anet really has destroyed their own game with the whole "everyone can do anything!" policy. You say that the game has been going strong for 7 years. Has it though? I'm not saying the game is dying or anything, but last time I checked population was declining in every game mode. Revenue was declining in every quarter. Why? Because they make the game easier. Everything is faceroll and auto play. There is no inherent meaning in playing the game. It doesn't matter what you do, everything is the same - one grey blob of "do whatever you want and you will get all the things". While for some people looking at it short term this may be great, for a big MMO this isn't sustainable, and we see that from day to day, week to week, month to month.

WvW? Just go stack up with big 50 man zergs and everyone just spams AoE and dies in either three seconds or wins the fight. Look at how it went down in Vanilla, without the power creep and vomit of condis/boons/skills.

PvP? So many auto triggering traits got introduced, every class essentially does the same in one way or another (e.g. no class identity), things got way too faceroll instead of skill based, reaction based combat.

PvE? Well, maybe open world is doing fine, I don't know. But FotM aren't developed it seems anymore, the raiding population has declined drastically and dungeons are essentially dead.

So yes, I would definitely say that Anet is on a good way to kill their own, FANTASTIC game that has (had) more potential to be THE next generation MMO out there than any other game on the market. But they fcked it up by catering to the lower end of skilled players, by driving away hardcore players, that even though they are a minority, usually keep games alive, because they create communities and content. By making content so faceroll that pressing one button is enough to complete it, by allowing everyone to do everything however they see fit. You want to play a Magi thief? Here you go, free content for you. By milking the cash shop and essentially shtting on their community with the increasing gem-shop content and their latest fiascos in the templates and their LS5 live event.

At the end of the day Anet is free to make the decisions they want. They are free to deliver content to the audience they want, and if that means the game is not made for "elitist" players, then so be it. But anyone thinking that all of these teddybear decisions haven't lead the game to the point in which it is in right now - declining player population, declining revenue, the layoffs earlier this year and an increasing feeling of doom within the community - is delusional.

 

[DesiRe.1348]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> > > I even **expect** rushers to do so.

> > What gives you the right to expect people to behave in a specific pattern but not others?

> If people want a group to rush a dungeons, they need to tell that in the LFG.

> Imagine you are a rusher, and then suddenly 4 non-rushers join your party!

> And that only happens because you failed to tell them you are a rusher!

>

 

If people want a group to chill in a dungoen and run it relaxed, they need to tell that in the LFG.

Imagine you are a non-rusher, and then suddenly 4 rushers join your party!

And that only happens because you failed to tell them you are a chiller!

 

You see how that's not an argument? There is no "status quo" in how the game is supposed to be played, and everything derivitive of that needs to be marked clearly. If you want a specific type of group - chill OR hardcore - it's your obligation to make that clear. For both ends of the spectrum.

[Finnkitkit.8304]

> @"Arden.7480" said:

> Just adjust to the difficulty.

>

> For the MMORPG GW2 has the best combat system and that should be shown with the creature fight design.

>

 

Nah, the combat system is pretty outdated and generic~. Which is not bad in itself.

And the game itself is as hard or easy as the community wants it to be. I'm not a fan of Anets dead nerf's. The only content where I have problems, because I've only done it 2 times so far and I got a headache from the effect thunderstorms, was 100 CM. Everything else is ... Average content for a average community ^^''.

And there's the thing, the majority of GW2's community are the legendary casuals and Anet simply adapts to them, because they bring the money.... More or less~.

 

For relaxed 1 1 1 1 pushing, GW2 is wonderful. If I had a sleepless night again and too much promille in my blood, GW2 is the perfect game ^^.

 

[Jimbru.6014]

> @"DesiRe.1348" said:

> > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > > @"Rasimir.6239" said:

> > > > I even **expect** rushers to do so.

> > > What gives you the right to expect people to behave in a specific pattern but not others?

> > If people want a group to rush a dungeons, they need to tell that in the LFG.

> > Imagine you are a rusher, and then suddenly 4 non-rushers join your party!

> > And that only happens because you failed to tell them you are a rusher!

> >

>

> If people want a group to chill in a dungoen and run it relaxed, they need to tell that in the LFG.

> Imagine you are a non-rusher, and then suddenly 4 rushers join your party!

> And that only happens because you failed to tell them you are a chiller!

>

> You see how that's not an argument? There is no "status quo" in how the game is supposed to be played, and everything derivitive of that needs to be marked clearly. If you want a specific type of group - chill OR hardcore - it's your obligation to make that clear. For both ends of the spectrum.

 

A big part of the problem with dungeon or fractal rushers is that they assume everyone else is a rusher. News flash: most people only play dungeons if they're a daily, and most people don't have them all memorized. Just a simple pause for directions every now and then is extremely helpful to most of us.

[Raknar.4735]

I'd rather have people tell Anet when something is too hard, than just simply leaving the game. We already had that with HoT and it was a huge blow to the playerbase.

 

@"DesiRe.1348"

I see people still try to push the "spam one skill" rhetoric, or the "hardcore players keep the game alive, because they create communities and content", while not doing a thing themselves. I wonder where they get that worth-more than the average player attitude. The majority does just fine creating their own communities, they don't need some self-inflated ego players to keep the game alive. As for the "content creation", barely anyone apart from really dedicated players does that, yet it's funny for me to see some players lumping themselves in with that crowd, without being content creators themselves.

 

I agree that dedicated players are able to create their own communities, but most of the time they stick to themselves. Just check out what happened to WoW Classic and their "Streamer-server", people were actively avoiding playing on that one if they didn't belong to the respective communities.

 

Anyone thinking a MMO game can just survive on hardcore content, or thinking it should define the game is delusional. Wildstar died because of that, WoW had to add different difficulties because their biggest audience wasn't mythic raiders. Most people during vanilla didn't even raid, they were happy just playing the game.

 

You can keep pushing your "teddybear decisions are killing the game" narrative, but if you really believe that is the reason, I'd have to call you delusional. Anet realised their push for Raids was slowly killing GW2, parts of the "casual" playerbase was leaving, just like they did with HoT, and now they're trying to salvage that type of content with Strike Missions.

The main reason for the declining playerbase is the slow content cadence for any type of content and the uncertainty of the future.

 

Any new information on expansions or new systems would be great, but as it stands now we only have episodes that are built the same to look forward to. At this point i wouldn't even be excited about new dungeons, new raids, new fractals, new meta bosses, new open world maps. I'm missing something completely new, that expansions normally add. Right now every release feels "automated, more of the same".

 

As for the "doom and gloom" in the community: I don't know why some people are trying to split up the community into "casuals" and "hardcore/elitists". It's a shame people are trying to ridicule people based on the content they're playing, or how good they are at that content. Driving away players "because they're just bad" or "they are too elitist" (using the term incorrectly, minmaxing/efficiency is not elitist, "i'm better than you"-attitude is) is never a good thing.

Thankfully the ingame community is much tamer in that regard, with some bad eggs here and there mixed in.

 

But i guess i'm also just delusional, since i think not focusing on the upper 3% is a good thing.

[Hashberry.4510]

> @"Raknar.4735" said:

> I'd rather have people tell Anet when something is too hard, than just simply leaving the game. We already had that with HoT and it was a huge blow to the playerbase.

>

> @"DesiRe.1348"

> I see people still try to push the "spam one skill" rhetoric, or the "hardcore players keep the game alive, because they create communities and content", while not doing a thing themselves. I wonder where they get that worth-more than the average player attitude. The majority does just fine creating their own communities, they don't need some self-inflated ego players to keep the game alive. As for the "content creation", barely anyone apart from really dedicated players does that, yet it's funny for me to see some players lumping themselves in with that crowd, without being content creators themselves.

>

> I agree that dedicated players are able to create their own communities, but most of the time they stick to themselves. Just check out what happened to WoW Classic and their "Streamer-server", people were actively avoiding playing on that one if they didn't belong to the respective communities.

>

> Anyone thinking a MMO game can just survive on hardcore content, or thinking it should define the game is delusional. Wildstar died because of that, WoW had to add different difficulties because their biggest audience wasn't mythic raiders. Most people during vanilla didn't even raid, they were happy just playing the game.

>

> You can keep pushing your "teddybear decisions are killing the game" narrative, but if you really believe that is the reason, I'd have to call you delusional. Anet realised their push for Raids was slowly killing GW2, parts of the "casual" playerbase was leaving, just like they did with HoT, and now they're trying to salvage that type of content with Strike Missions.

> The main reason for the declining playerbase is the slow content cadence for any type of content and the uncertainty of the future.

>

> Any new information on expansions or new systems would be great, but as it stands now we only have episodes that are built the same to look forward to. At this point i wouldn't even be excited about new dungeons, new raids, new fractals, new meta bosses, new open world maps. I'm missing something completely new, that expansions normally add. Right now every release feels "automated, more of the same".

>

> As for the "doom and gloom" in the community: I don't know why some people are trying to split up the community into "casuals" and "hardcore/elitists". It's a shame people are trying to ridicule people based on the content they're playing, or how good they are at that content. Driving away players "because they're just bad" or "they are too elitist" (using the term incorrectly, minmaxing/efficiency is not elitist, "i'm better than you"-attitude is) is never a good thing.

> Thankfully the ingame community is much tamer in that regard, with some bad eggs here and there mixed in.

>

> But i guess i'm also just delusional, since i think not focusing on the upper 3% is a good thing.

 

Excellent points

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Jimbru.6014" said:

> Just a simple pause for directions every now and then is extremely helpful to most of us.

 

Runs that include "pausing for directions" are usually labeled as training runs or at least they should. They don't exist anymore because dungeons are ages old content at this point, but training runs do exist for more recent fractals and of course Raids. Furthermore, talking before the run actually starts can do wonders for communication. A lot of those evil rushers can teach and will teach newcomers, provided those newcomers clearly state they are in fact not-experienced. There are two outcomes in that case, they will either get kicked and join another more relaxed group, or they will get taught how to play the content, in both cases the newcomer wins, but more often than not they stay completely silent and only start complaining when they are left far behind and the evil rushers engage the last boss.

[Fueki.4753]

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

There are two outcomes in that case, they will either get kicked and join another more relaxed group, or they will get taught how to play the content

Or they get too demotivated from being kicked and stop trying.

 

 

[maddoctor.2738]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> Or they get too demotivated from being kicked and stop trying.

 

If they get demotivated by being kicked for being rude and inconsiderate then it wouldn't be such a great loss for the game.

[nottsgman.8206]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> Or they get too demotivated from being kicked and stop trying.

>

>

good. sounds harsh, but regardless of a person's skill level, or how long it takes for them to learn something, if they are the type to give up after one failure/kick I'm not interested in having anything to do with them. I'd rather play with people who have a positive attitude, regardless of whether they have a disability, regardless of how well they play and regardless of how many times they fail. I wouldn't want to play with someone who'd give up so easily over something so minor

 

[DesiRe.1348]

> @"Raknar.4735" said:

> I'd rather have people tell Anet when something is too hard, than just simply leaving the game. We already had that with HoT and it was a huge blow to the playerbase.

>

> @"DesiRe.1348"

> I see people still try to push the "spam one skill" rhetoric, or the "hardcore players keep the game alive, because they create communities and content", while not doing a thing themselves. I wonder where they get that worth-more than the average player attitude. The majority does just fine creating their own communities, they don't need some self-inflated ego players to keep the game alive. As for the "content creation", barely anyone apart from really dedicated players does that, yet it's funny for me to see some players lumping themselves in with that crowd, without being content creators themselves.

>

> I agree that dedicated players are able to create their own communities, but most of the time they stick to themselves. Just check out what happened to WoW Classic and their "Streamer-server", people were actively avoiding playing on that one if they didn't belong to the respective communities.

>

> Anyone thinking a MMO game can just survive on hardcore content, or thinking it should define the game is delusional. Wildstar died because of that, WoW had to add different difficulties because their biggest audience wasn't mythic raiders. Most people during vanilla didn't even raid, they were happy just playing the game.

>

> You can keep pushing your "teddybear decisions are killing the game" narrative, but if you really believe that is the reason, I'd have to call you delusional. Anet realised their push for Raids was slowly killing GW2, parts of the "casual" playerbase was leaving, just like they did with HoT, and now they're trying to salvage that type of content with Strike Missions.

> The main reason for the declining playerbase is the slow content cadence for any type of content and the uncertainty of the future.

>

> Any new information on expansions or new systems would be great, but as it stands now we only have episodes that are built the same to look forward to. At this point i wouldn't even be excited about new dungeons, new raids, new fractals, new meta bosses, new open world maps. I'm missing something completely new, that expansions normally add. Right now every release feels "automated, more of the same".

>

> As for the "doom and gloom" in the community: I don't know why some people are trying to split up the community into "casuals" and "hardcore/elitists". It's a shame people are trying to ridicule people based on the content they're playing, or how good they are at that content. Driving away players "because they're just bad" or "they are too elitist" (using the term incorrectly, minmaxing/efficiency is not elitist, "i'm better than you"-attitude is) is never a good thing.

> Thankfully the ingame community is much tamer in that regard, with some bad eggs here and there mixed in.

>

> But i guess i'm also just delusional, since i think not focusing on the upper 3% is a good thing.

 

If you reread my comment, I do agree that not all content should be catered to the "elitist" playerbase. I also agree that splitting the playerbase in two categories is not a good thing, but it's what people usually refer too. There are good and bad sheep in both categories.

The problem in my eyes is that if you create harder content there will always be something to do for the casual players - since they are, by definition, playing the game less. They take longer to do things, longer to play through older content. They are more content with "easy to play" content. But if you dont release any content for hardcore players, you may not lose that many players, but you lose alot of _time played_ in your game. I dont want Anet to only cater to one end of the spectrum. I think, if they had made better decisions, they could cater to BOTH ends of the spectrum.

And yes, I do genuinely believe that the game would be in a MUCH better space if they had introduced proper, frequent endgame content - maybe even on a subscription based concept (the usual B2P model but additional e.g. Raid-Content thats locked behind a lets say 5€/month subscription) - you would draw A LOT of the big content creators to the game. Do you know how many internet-celebrities considered playing GW2 but ended up not playing, because there is essentially no repeatable endgame content thats worth playing, or goals worth playing for? Which also means its hard to create content for the game. And what do you think happens if people like Asmongold, Sodapopping or the likes play the game? They bring tens of thousands of people with them. Which means more money. Which means more developers, more content, more players...

The fact that Anet developed their whole template system with the most monetazition in mind, not delivering the best product, shows what has changed in their mindset, and it's not because the game is doing so well financially (and thus, in terms of playerbase). Fact is, the route they chose hasn't been super successful. Whether they're fine with that, or whether they even intended it, we can't tell. But I honestly think if they went with the direction of more traditional MMORPG elements they wouldve been more successful. Obviously, thats only speculation, but considering Wow Classic was such a Boom and generally alot of MMOs in development go back to the genre's roots its a good bet.

[voltaicbore.8012]

> @"Raknar.4735" said:

 

> Anyone thinking a MMO game can just survive on hardcore content, or thinking it should define the game is delusional. Wildstar died because of that, WoW had to add different difficulties because their biggest audience wasn't mythic raiders. Most people during vanilla didn't even raid, they were happy just playing the game.

 

I never played WoW, but I'd say we _certainly_ know that this is true for GW2. The vast majority of players don't seem to be interested in much of a challenge (which is perfectly fine), and seem happy grinding out a more accessible form of in-game existence. I agree that not catering to the desires of this mass of players, at least on some level, would be dumb.

 

> You can keep pushing your "teddybear decisions are killing the game" narrative, but if you really believe that is the reason, I'd have to call you delusional. Anet realised their push for Raids was slowly killing GW2, parts of the "casual" playerbase was leaving, just like they did with HoT, and now they're trying to salvage that type of content with Strike Missions.

 

Here's where you and I would disagree. I'm not sure how much of a detriment on developer resources this "push for Raids" (to the extent that there was really any appreciable push to begin with) turned out to be, but that would be the only way raiding could possibly harm population numbers. Other threads elsewhere have discussed, in great and tiresome detail, how nothing is really gated behind raids. From a non-raiding player perspective, the existence of raids is pretty irrelevant to the quality of one's gaming experience.

 

Raids aside, I really do think you can take "teddybear decisions" too far. Yes, I still agree that the vast majority of players probably are... pretty bad at the combat of this game, and appreciate getting rewarded for completing ever-easier content. However, I also believe that making things too easy leads to disillusionment as well, even in the casual crowd. The things they get or achieve just lack meaning when they're handed out for little to no work, and there's probably a point where the game fails to attract even this group's attention as well. We're not quite there yet (and I hope we never get there), but to pretend like there won't be problems with excessively catering to quite frankly a terribly low level of skill is shortsighted.

[sorudo.9054]

> @"Julischka Bean.7491" said:

> > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > > > @"Arden.7480" said:

> > > > Just adjust to the difficulty.

> > > Unless you count 'not doing the difficult content' as adjusting to it, some people simply can't adjust to every difficulty.

> > > Many people simply aren't good enough and don't have enough talent make up the missing expertise.

> > >

> >

> > Usually you make up for the lack of talent with practice.

>

> You have never had a physical disability have you?

>

> I had brain damage at birth. As a result, my hand/eye coordination is not that swift..which is why I like this game. It keeps me sharp. But, sharp for me, is not how other people define sharp. I can practice every day for weeks and I still will not be able to complete semi-hard jumping puzzles...trust me I tried.

 

i have this exactly, with a combo of ADD it is a hell to get trough certain parts of the game while others talk so simple about it as if it's a thing we can ignore.

[Ashantara.8731]

> @"sorudo.9054" said:

> > @"Julischka Bean.7491" said:

> > > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > Usually you make up for the lack of talent with practice.

> >

> > You have never had a physical disability have you?

> >

> > I had brain damage at birth. As a result, my hand/eye coordination is not that swift..which is why I like this game. It keeps me sharp. But, sharp for me, is not how other people define sharp. I can practice every day for weeks and I still will not be able to complete semi-hard jumping puzzles...trust me I tried.

>

> i have this exactly, with a combo of ADD it is a hell to get trough certain parts of the game while others talk so simple about it as if it's a thing we can ignore.

 

Which is why ANet _should_ add two game modes for instanced content: easy and hard mode. (I would like to point out that disabilities are _one_ thing, but most people who are complaining the content was "too hard" are those too impatient to learn the mechanics, and that's a completely _different_ story.)

[Raknar.4735]

> @"DesiRe.1348" said:

> > @"Raknar.4735" said:

> > I'd rather have people tell Anet when something is too hard, than just simply leaving the game. We already had that with HoT and it was a huge blow to the playerbase.

> >

> > @"DesiRe.1348"

> > I see people still try to push the "spam one skill" rhetoric, or the "hardcore players keep the game alive, because they create communities and content", while not doing a thing themselves. I wonder where they get that worth-more than the average player attitude. The majority does just fine creating their own communities, they don't need some self-inflated ego players to keep the game alive. As for the "content creation", barely anyone apart from really dedicated players does that, yet it's funny for me to see some players lumping themselves in with that crowd, without being content creators themselves.

> >

> > I agree that dedicated players are able to create their own communities, but most of the time they stick to themselves. Just check out what happened to WoW Classic and their "Streamer-server", people were actively avoiding playing on that one if they didn't belong to the respective communities.

> >

> > Anyone thinking a MMO game can just survive on hardcore content, or thinking it should define the game is delusional. Wildstar died because of that, WoW had to add different difficulties because their biggest audience wasn't mythic raiders. Most people during vanilla didn't even raid, they were happy just playing the game.

> >

> > You can keep pushing your "teddybear decisions are killing the game" narrative, but if you really believe that is the reason, I'd have to call you delusional. Anet realised their push for Raids was slowly killing GW2, parts of the "casual" playerbase was leaving, just like they did with HoT, and now they're trying to salvage that type of content with Strike Missions.

> > The main reason for the declining playerbase is the slow content cadence for any type of content and the uncertainty of the future.

> >

> > Any new information on expansions or new systems would be great, but as it stands now we only have episodes that are built the same to look forward to. At this point i wouldn't even be excited about new dungeons, new raids, new fractals, new meta bosses, new open world maps. I'm missing something completely new, that expansions normally add. Right now every release feels "automated, more of the same".

> >

> > As for the "doom and gloom" in the community: I don't know why some people are trying to split up the community into "casuals" and "hardcore/elitists". It's a shame people are trying to ridicule people based on the content they're playing, or how good they are at that content. Driving away players "because they're just bad" or "they are too elitist" (using the term incorrectly, minmaxing/efficiency is not elitist, "i'm better than you"-attitude is) is never a good thing.

> > Thankfully the ingame community is much tamer in that regard, with some bad eggs here and there mixed in.

> >

> > But i guess i'm also just delusional, since i think not focusing on the upper 3% is a good thing.

>

> If you reread my comment, I do agree that not all content should be catered to the "elitist" playerbase. I also agree that splitting the playerbase in two categories is not a good thing, but it's what people usually refer too. There are good and bad sheep in both categories.

> The problem in my eyes is that if you create harder content there will always be something to do for the casual players - since they are, by definition, playing the game less. They take longer to do things, longer to play through older content. They are more content with "easy to play" content. But if you dont release any content for hardcore players, you may not lose that many players, but you lose alot of _time played_ in your game. I dont want Anet to only cater to one end of the spectrum. I think, if they had made better decisions, they could cater to BOTH ends of the spectrum.

> And yes, I do genuinely believe that the game would be in a MUCH better space if they had introduced proper, frequent endgame content - maybe even on a subscription based concept (the usual B2P model but additional e.g. Raid-Content thats locked behind a lets say 5€/month subscription) - you would draw A LOT of the big content creators to the game. Do you know how many internet-celebrities considered playing GW2 but ended up not playing, because there is essentially no repeatable endgame content thats worth playing, or goals worth playing for? Which also means its hard to create content for the game. And what do you think happens if people like Asmongold, Sodapopping or the likes play the game? They bring tens of thousands of people with them. Which means more money. Which means more developers, more content, more players...

> The fact that Anet developed their whole template system with the most monetazition in mind, not delivering the best product, shows what has changed in their mindset, and it's not because the game is doing so well financially (and thus, in terms of playerbase). Fact is, the route they chose hasn't been super successful. Whether they're fine with that, or whether they even intended it, we can't tell. But I honestly think if they went with the direction of more traditional MMORPG elements they wouldve been more successful. Obviously, thats only speculation, but considering Wow Classic was such a Boom and generally alot of MMOs in development go back to the genre's roots its a good bet.

 

Yeah, in a perfect world there would be content for everyone, sadly there's no MMO able to do that. I just really despise sayings like "only one button", "elitists", "toxic casuals" and all the rest of those labels that don't even come close to the truth. (Now that i think about it, PoE is an actual "one button" game i enjoy)

 

I don't necessarily think "Hardcore" players and "end-game content" players are the same. Honestly, you can be a hardcore player but still suck at the game. You can no-life PvP and still never touch any other gamemode, I'd still call someone like that hardcore.

 

As for the content creator part: Asmongold creates his own content by doing things like Transmog Competitions / Mount offs, even if there's "no content" in the game. He's not really a endgame raider, he barely raids progression (3/8 bosses in Eternal Palace currently, didn't clear G'huun in Uldir on mythic, has been available since october 2018).

Soda is a PvP player, he also rarely raids (currently does in Classic for obvious gearing reasons) . He's currently playing Classic pretty much every day for the open world PvP. He's also more of a variety streamer, if he isn't having fun with WoW / there's no content he wants to show on stream, he just switches games.

High-end endgame is not done by the biggest streamers, they just dabble into it. Progression Raiders are people like Method, and they don't really come close to the viewership entertainment streamers get.

 

About traditional MMORPG elements: I can't really comment on that. I'd like new elements for new games like action combat, but there's simply no game where action combat, PvE content and PvP content is actually done well. GW2 comes closest for me. The trinity system is pretty much already here, but i can live without the grind and vertical gear progression of old.

 

Monetizing things like the template system is nothing new. They also monetized the custom heroes in GW1 (Own character heroes). It was obvious they would monetize the system, since it also brings more inventory slots.

 

@"voltaicbore.8012"

Sorry for only giving you a small response now, but the posts are getting ridicously long.

 

> From a non-raiding player perspective, the existence of raids is pretty irrelevant to the quality of one's gaming experience.

 

I don't believe it's that simple. It's the same way how raiders are saying "I only log in once every week since there's no content for me" (or something similiar). Seeing content being created for a gamemode that you don't actively play is a downer for a lot of people. That also includes Living Story being a downer for people not invested into the story. It's sad to think about it, but people (not everyone of course) are averse to content that isn't catered to them. They see it as a waste of resources better spend on their primarily played content, and demonize different content. So it can actually have an impact on ones gaming experience.

 

I myself acted somewhat similiar in LoL. Once they said Nexus Blitz isn't coming out as a permanent mode, TFT pretty much replacing it, it also dampened my desire to play Summoner's Rift and ARAM, albeit them being different gamemodes.

 

> I really do think you can take "teddybear decisions" too far.

 

Of course, I totally agree. I should have added to my other post that focusing on the lower 3-15% is also a bad thing. Focusing on the lower ends is actually worse than focusing on the high end. The difficulty curve of new content related to combat should generally be on the level of the median player or upwards. But that is also just my opinion.

[DesiRe.1348]

> @"Raknar.4735" said:

>

> Monetizing things like the template system is nothing new. They also monetized the custom heroes in GW1 (Own character heroes). It was obvious they would monetize the system, since it also brings more inventory slots.

>

Oh dont get me wrong, I knew they would monetize it, and I do agree on that. But it's the way the deliberately DESIGNED the system for the triple monetization. They didn't deliver the best product they could, but the product they could sell the most. They didn't have customer QoL in mind, but biggest monetization. And you can see that in the system. The triple monetization, the alleged "free" templates you had before anyways, the fact you have an account shared storage for no reason at all instead of making it character bound (why would I want to have my 10 Ele builds accessible on my Warrior?). The fact they did not split the templates to each gamemode when they already had the technology. The fact they didn't make it possible to store them locally, when you can just make a notepad with the build URL to go around the account storage. The fact they even made it give you inventory slots, which had nothing to do with QoL but ONLY so they could sell it more times, for more money.

It's the whole system that is only made to trick their players and have them spend money. They did not have the customers needs in mind with designing the system and you can feel it in every inch of it. That is not good practice, and there was a time when I at least thought Arenanet was not such a company. Either I was wrong, or things have changed. And that's what I'm blaming them for. Not the fact they monetized it at all, but the fact how they tried to milk every penny out of it and deliberately made the system worse in doing so.

 

>

> > I really do think you can take "teddybear decisions" too far.

>

> Of course, I totally agree. I should have added to my other post that focusing on the lower 3-15% is also a bad thing. Focusing on the lower ends is actually worse than focusing on the high end. The difficulty curve of new content related to combat should generally be on the level of the median player or upwards. But that is also just my opinion.

 

I agree. More leaning towards the high skilled players, so the average player can strive to become better. You can't strive to become worse.

[mbhalo.1547]

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> And then you have people with natural physiological and neural disadvantages, like slower reaction times, in which cases practices won't help at all.

> Practise never is a 100% solution to anything.

 

Bringing the global bar down for the 1% of 1% is never a solution.

[Raknar.4735]

> @"DesiRe.1348" said:

> > @"Raknar.4735" said:

> >

> > Monetizing things like the template system is nothing new. They also monetized the custom heroes in GW1 (Own character heroes). It was obvious they would monetize the system, since it also brings more inventory slots.

> >

> Oh dont get me wrong, I knew they would monetize it, and I do agree on that. But it's the way the deliberately DESIGNED the system for the triple monetization. They didn't deliver the best product they could, but the product they could sell the most. They didn't have customer QoL in mind, but biggest monetization. And you can see that in the system. The triple monetization, the alleged "free" templates you had before anyways, the fact you have an account shared storage for no reason at all instead of making it character bound (why would I want to have my 10 Ele builds accessible on my Warrior?). The fact they did not split the templates to each gamemode when they already had the technology. The fact they didn't make it possible to store them locally, when you can just make a notepad with the build URL to go around the account storage. The fact they even made it give you inventory slots, which had nothing to do with QoL but ONLY so they could sell it more times, for more money.

> It's the whole system that is only made to trick their players and have them spend money. They did not have the customers needs in mind with designing the system and you can feel it in every inch of it. That is not good practice, and there was a time when I at least thought Arenanet was not such a company. Either I was wrong, or things have changed. And that's what I'm blaming them for. Not the fact they monetized it at all, but the fact how they tried to milk every penny out of it and deliberately made the system worse in doing so.

>

 

I agree with the triple dipping. The only thing that should have been monetised are the armor templates. They should also have been account unlock, not per character, that's the reason why i'm not getting them.

 

Build templates / bank is just a notepad and should have been free like in GW1. I do actually like the idea of the build bank, since you can quickly share necro builds on your warrior to other necros, just like in GW1.

 

As for the functionality: It's designed great in my opinion and pretty good QoL. The only thing I'd change is turning the templates into actual templates, not only changing loadouts, and fixing the revenant utility bugs.

 

> >

> > > I really do think you can take "teddybear decisions" too far.

> >

> > Of course, I totally agree. I should have added to my other post that focusing on the lower 3-15% is also a bad thing. Focusing on the lower ends is actually worse than focusing on the high end. The difficulty curve of new content related to combat should generally be on the level of the median player or upwards. But that is also just my opinion.

>

> I agree. More leaning towards the high skilled players, so the average player can strive to become better. You can't strive to become worse.

 

Well, certain designs do actually push players into lazy tactics (finding out the "dumbest" tactic possible so that people can't mess up mechanics / don't have to care about mechanics), the boneskinner is a pretty good example now, instead of doing the mechanics, you can just stack healers. Same thing goes for gorseval and just nuking him down, instead of doing updrafts. And if the dps is missing for some reason chaos ensues, since people don't know how to do the mechanics correctly. I'd call that striving to become worse ; )

[Firebeard.1746]

> @"sokeenoppa.5384" said:

> > @"Arden.7480" said:

> > Just adjust to the difficulty.

> >

> > For the MMORPG GW2 has the best combat system and that should be shown with the creature fight design.

> >

> > GW2 began to storm with flashy effects that make more harm than the bosses themselves, and now Boneskinner is pretty all about mechanics whicb reminds me of old, good times in which you had to use your mind to get the mechanics.

> >

> > Instanced content should be all about different tactics, different approach, abundance of mechanics.

> >

> > If you look at the WoW's Raid/Dungeon tabs which show all the bosses, you can also see so many mechanics to learn, so many things to know, and it's simply fun, especially on the higher level of difficulty.

> >

> > It's cool, because there is fun in tactics as well, I mean that what makes instanced content unforgettable.

> >

> > I could see that, after such a long time yesterday, when the Boneskinner was actually challenging, because it has tactics that you have to learn to notice, and all you must do is to adjust to them.

> >

> >

>

> Proplem is this old gw2 phrase "play how you want."

>

> Players think that it means that they can do any content how they want and success. Even tho that phrase has nothing to do with skill lvl of instanced content.

 

It's more nuanced than that: Arenanet didn't create any sort of defined roles, and still refuses to teach them in game on any level. On the flip side, you have players who have done just that, to the point where if you have a coordinated group much of the previous "group content" is a joke. so now arenanet has 2 groups of people to satisfy: elite players and ones that just play the game as-is. Take a healer into any T1 fractal and you can almost AFK it. Take a group without a dedicated healer and some of them can actually be challenging. Arenanet's refusal to acknowledge and/or teach roles makes skill moot. Whose skill is being tested and how? What is every player actually bringing to the table? How do you balance anything in that scenario? That's why the open world is so fun for so many people. It's really the only thing that works in this role vacuum.

[zealex.9410]

> @"mbhalo.1547" said:

> > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > And then you have people with natural physiological and neural disadvantages, like slower reaction times, in which cases practices won't help at all.

> > Practise never is a 100% solution to anything.

>

> Bringing the global bar down for the 1% of 1% is never a solution.

 

+1 balancing around the best of the best the "1%" doesnt cut it but suddenly balancing around the "1%:" which struggle at otherwise trivial tasks makes sense?

 

In both cases its not 1% and should be taken into consideration when releasing content, but lets not be picky here.

 

Simply put 2 diff dificulties that cater to 2 diff demographics is whats needed.