Raknar.4735 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Casual players complained about HoT, Anet missed what their core complaints were, and did a complete 180 with the direction of the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Casual players left because of HoT, most didn't complain. Anet saw their new plan of catering to a niche failed, so they did a complete 180. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There was nothing niche about the direction they were going. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was niche enough to make lots of players quit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like how lots of players quit after POF? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drop off was way stronger after HoT. Also players that were scared off by HoT are hard to bring back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have a source? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > > > > > > > > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That shows nothing about player populations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TIL I can earn money with my game without a population. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are numerous other factors which affect game revenue than just player population. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet player population is a main factor. > > > > > > > > > > Source? Do you know how many players purchase gems? > > > > > > > > Only Anet/Ncsoft knows how many players purchase gems obviously. If you can't see a link between player population and revenue, then i'm sorry. Source? Just look at every game. Keep insisting that casual players "destroyed" GW2, it's funny, where's your source on that? > > > > > > I’m not denying that there’s a link. I’m denying your assumption that it’s a strong one and that it disputes what I initially stated in this thread. > > > > If you don't think players population is a huge factor for revenue, I can't help you. You can keep claiming casual player complaints are at fault, but I've yet to see someone proving that. In fact Anet went all in on endgame content after HoT for some time, yet their revenue didn't recover. > > You don’t know what percentage of players purchase gems and how much. Anet could add 100K new players and none of them could ever purchase gems. There are also other factors such as there being something worth buying in the gemstore, more players increasingly buying gems with gold, the cost difference between the two expansions, and so on. The quarterly reports are not concrete enough to back up your assumption about player populations. They're the only metric we have. At least that's something we can use to extrapolate, instead of saying baseless statements like what you initially stated in the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayrilana.1396 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Casual players complained about HoT, Anet missed what their core complaints were, and did a complete 180 with the direction of the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Casual players left because of HoT, most didn't complain. Anet saw their new plan of catering to a niche failed, so they did a complete 180. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There was nothing niche about the direction they were going. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was niche enough to make lots of players quit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like how lots of players quit after POF? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drop off was way stronger after HoT. Also players that were scared off by HoT are hard to bring back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have a source? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > > > > > > > > > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That shows nothing about player populations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TIL I can earn money with my game without a population. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are numerous other factors which affect game revenue than just player population. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet player population is a main factor. > > > > > > > > > > > > Source? Do you know how many players purchase gems? > > > > > > > > > > Only Anet/Ncsoft knows how many players purchase gems obviously. If you can't see a link between player population and revenue, then i'm sorry. Source? Just look at every game. Keep insisting that casual players "destroyed" GW2, it's funny, where's your source on that? > > > > > > > > I’m not denying that there’s a link. I’m denying your assumption that it’s a strong one and that it disputes what I initially stated in this thread. > > > > > > If you don't think players population is a huge factor for revenue, I can't help you. You can keep claiming casual player complaints are at fault, but I've yet to see someone proving that. In fact Anet went all in on endgame content after HoT for some time, yet their revenue didn't recover. > > > > You don’t know what percentage of players purchase gems and how much. Anet could add 100K new players and none of them could ever purchase gems. There are also other factors such as there being something worth buying in the gemstore, more players increasingly buying gems with gold, the cost difference between the two expansions, and so on. The quarterly reports are not concrete enough to back up your assumption about player populations. > > They're the only metric we have. At least that's something we can use to extrapolate, instead of saying baseless statements like what you initially stated in the thread. You’re using a “metric” that really has no bearing on what I stated so you shouldn’t be the one to accuse me of making baseless statements. Thanks. EDIT: I’ll add this final bit to this thread and my first post. The game’s challenge was increasing progressively. We saw this when players hit Orr, throughout LS1, LS2, HoT, and LS3. It’s with POF that they shifted directions and the game has gotten progressively easier resulting in what we’re seeing now with the new Living World season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raknar.4735 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > That's highly irrelevant to the discussion about the direction the game has NOW. This isn't Heart of Thorns vs Path of Fire, but rather Path of Fire vs Icebrood Saga. The direction in Path of Fire wasn't a 180 compared to the direction of Heart of Thorns, the expansion itself had more than enough challenging encounters, mobs more difficult that Heart of Thorns versions, Raids, Fractals and everything else. It's the Icebrood Saga that did a total 180 compared to every other year in the past with a complete lack of interesting mechanics/ideas and total disregard for instanced content. > > I'll wait for the Q4 2019 and Q1 2020 results to compare with the Path of Fire era, to see if this casuallification actually works out for Arenanet. It is relevant relative to @Ayrilana.1396 initial statement. Also OP's "ever since PoF " claim. Also saying Icebrood Saga did a total 180 is a bit early, isn't it? I mean, only one episode has released, after all. I know Anet stated there aren't any plans for Raids/fractals during the icebrood saga, but saying there's a total disregard for instanced content with the focus on strike missions is a bit dishonest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raknar.4735 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Casual players complained about HoT, Anet missed what their core complaints were, and did a complete 180 with the direction of the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Casual players left because of HoT, most didn't complain. Anet saw their new plan of catering to a niche failed, so they did a complete 180. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There was nothing niche about the direction they were going. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was niche enough to make lots of players quit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like how lots of players quit after POF? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drop off was way stronger after HoT. Also players that were scared off by HoT are hard to bring back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have a source? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > > > > > > > > > > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That shows nothing about player populations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TIL I can earn money with my game without a population. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are numerous other factors which affect game revenue than just player population. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet player population is a main factor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Source? Do you know how many players purchase gems? > > > > > > > > > > > > Only Anet/Ncsoft knows how many players purchase gems obviously. If you can't see a link between player population and revenue, then i'm sorry. Source? Just look at every game. Keep insisting that casual players "destroyed" GW2, it's funny, where's your source on that? > > > > > > > > > > I’m not denying that there’s a link. I’m denying your assumption that it’s a strong one and that it disputes what I initially stated in this thread. > > > > > > > > If you don't think players population is a huge factor for revenue, I can't help you. You can keep claiming casual player complaints are at fault, but I've yet to see someone proving that. In fact Anet went all in on endgame content after HoT for some time, yet their revenue didn't recover. > > > > > > You don’t know what percentage of players purchase gems and how much. Anet could add 100K new players and none of them could ever purchase gems. There are also other factors such as there being something worth buying in the gemstore, more players increasingly buying gems with gold, the cost difference between the two expansions, and so on. The quarterly reports are not concrete enough to back up your assumption about player populations. > > > > They're the only metric we have. At least that's something we can use to extrapolate, instead of saying baseless statements like what you initially stated in the thread. > > You’re using a “metric” that really has no bearing on what I stated so you shouldn’t be the one to accuse me of making baseless statements. Thanks. It only has no bearing in your eyes. You wanted me to give a source, so i honestly tried by linking it to the only metric we have that, in my eyes, does have a strong link. I only see one baseless statement here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > > > That's highly irrelevant to the discussion about the direction the game has NOW. This isn't Heart of Thorns vs Path of Fire, but rather Path of Fire vs Icebrood Saga. The direction in Path of Fire wasn't a 180 compared to the direction of Heart of Thorns, the expansion itself had more than enough challenging encounters, mobs more difficult that Heart of Thorns versions, Raids, Fractals and everything else. It's the Icebrood Saga that did a total 180 compared to every other year in the past with a complete lack of interesting mechanics/ideas and total disregard for instanced content. > > > > I'll wait for the Q4 2019 and Q1 2020 results to compare with the Path of Fire era, to see if this casuallification actually works out for Arenanet. > > It is relevant relative to @Ayrilana.1396 initial statement. > Also saying Icebrood Saga did a total 180 is a bit early, isn't it? I mean, only one episode has released, after all. I know Anet stated there aren't any plans for Raids/fractals during the icebrood saga, but saying there's a total disregard for instanced content with the focus on strike missions is a bit dishonest. I disagree with that initial statement, there was no 180 between HoT and PoF and I outlined why, also disagree with the OP about the post PoF era being "dull". It's the Icebrood Saga that I have a problem with so far. Also, the.... one episode we got had less content than the "Prologue" so there is that. So at least 2 episodes that were really dull and boring mechanic-wise (I liked the story and the atmosphere btw, not complaining there). The Boneskinner meta (the open world one) was the icing on the cake showing that the team designing content isn't the same, or they just got "orders from above" to make it so bland. The grind-y useless new mastery that was advertised as something "awesome" was another. I'll log-in when a new episode releases, play the 10 minute story with zero replay value, then logout. Although I do want to be surprised, Anet needs to try much much harder, the Icebrood Saga first two episodes have been pathetic. So I agree with the question of the thread "What happened to Anet?" but I disagree with the idea that something happened after PoF, it's much more recent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoriMoriMori.5349 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > > > That's highly irrelevant to the discussion about the direction the game has NOW. This isn't Heart of Thorns vs Path of Fire, but rather Path of Fire vs Icebrood Saga. The direction in Path of Fire wasn't a 180 compared to the direction of Heart of Thorns, the expansion itself had more than enough challenging encounters, mobs more difficult that Heart of Thorns versions, Raids, Fractals and everything else. It's the Icebrood Saga that did a total 180 compared to every other year in the past with a complete lack of interesting mechanics/ideas and total disregard for instanced content. > > > > I'll wait for the Q4 2019 and Q1 2020 results to compare with the Path of Fire era, to see if this casuallification actually works out for Arenanet. > > It is relevant relative to @Ayrilana.1396 initial statement. Also OP's "ever since PoF " claim. > Also saying Icebrood Saga did a total 180 is a bit early, isn't it? I mean, only one episode has released, after all. I know Anet stated there aren't any plans for Raids/fractals during the icebrood saga, but saying there's a total disregard for instanced content with the focus on strike missions is a bit dishonest. That's a kindergarten kind of instanced content comparing even to dungeons. Obnoxiously huge parties for a weak boss I could easily survive on my first run there on glass cannon Weaver build I haven't played for 6 months, doing tons of mistake and stupid moves. It's just simulation of actual gameplay which can be brute-forced with a crowd big enough, can't be compared to Fractals and Dungeons where teams are smaller and mobs hit harder, requiring higher level of individual skill. Not to mention raids, where you can't even advance far enough without proper planning and traning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > The game’s challenge was increasing progressively. We saw this when players hit Orr, throughout LS1, LS2, HoT, and LS3. It’s with POF that they shifted directions and the game has gotten progressively easier resulting in what we’re seeing now with the new Living World season. That's not true though. POF itself wasn't a downgrade in difficulty, I'm really confused when I read this as POF contains many enemies that are much harder than anything seen in HOT. Then we have the fight with Balthazar, the fight with Scruffy, the fight with Joko that weren't so bad in story instances. A Star to Guide Us story wasn't bad either. In my opinion, direction started shifting with Thunderhead Keep and then Dragonfall, the story mode parts at least, the zones themselves weren't bad at all. It was really weird that the epic final battle with the Elder Dragon Kralkatorik was less intense than the fight with not only Balthazar (who was at least the god of war) but Scruffy and Joko too. Also, we got the most difficult Raid during POF, although the next ones weren't so difficult for the "pro" players, they were harder for the rest due to the increased personal responsibility they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raknar.4735 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > > > > > That's highly irrelevant to the discussion about the direction the game has NOW. This isn't Heart of Thorns vs Path of Fire, but rather Path of Fire vs Icebrood Saga. The direction in Path of Fire wasn't a 180 compared to the direction of Heart of Thorns, the expansion itself had more than enough challenging encounters, mobs more difficult that Heart of Thorns versions, Raids, Fractals and everything else. It's the Icebrood Saga that did a total 180 compared to every other year in the past with a complete lack of interesting mechanics/ideas and total disregard for instanced content. > > > > > > I'll wait for the Q4 2019 and Q1 2020 results to compare with the Path of Fire era, to see if this casuallification actually works out for Arenanet. > > > > It is relevant relative to @Ayrilana.1396 initial statement. > > Also saying Icebrood Saga did a total 180 is a bit early, isn't it? I mean, only one episode has released, after all. I know Anet stated there aren't any plans for Raids/fractals during the icebrood saga, but saying there's a total disregard for instanced content with the focus on strike missions is a bit dishonest. > > I disagree with that initial statement, there was no 180 between HoT and PoF and I outlined why, also disagree with the OP about the post PoF era being "dull". It's the Icebrood Saga that I have a problem with so far. > > Also, the.... one episode we got had less content than the "Prologue" so there is that. So at least 2 episodes that were really dull and boring mechanic-wise (I liked the story and the atmosphere btw, not complaining there). The Boneskinner meta (the open world one) was the icing on the cake showing that the team designing content isn't the same, or they just got "orders from above" to make it so bland. The grind-y useless new mastery that was advertised as something "awesome" was another. > > I'll log-in when a new episode releases, play the 10 minute story with zero replay value, then logout. Although I do want to be surprised, Anet needs to try much much harder, the Icebrood Saga first two episodes have been pathetic. So I agree with the question of the thread "What happened to Anet?" but I disagree with the idea that something happened after PoF, it's much more recent. Well, I completely agree with you then. This first episode was a letdown compared to HoT and PoF. Especially the boneskinner, after it was hyped up by Anet themselves with teasers. I was merely arguing about PoF, comparing it to HoT, since that's were OP's and Ayrilana's focus was. Grothmar Valley as a prologue was ok in my books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayrilana.1396 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > The game’s challenge was increasing progressively. We saw this when players hit Orr, throughout LS1, LS2, HoT, and LS3. It’s with POF that they shifted directions and the game has gotten progressively easier resulting in what we’re seeing now with the new Living World season. > > That's not true though. POF itself wasn't a downgrade in difficulty, I'm really confused when I read this as POF contains many enemies that are much harder than anything seen in HOT. Then we have the fight with Balthazar, the fight with Scruffy, the fight with Joko that weren't so bad in story instances. A Star to Guide Us story wasn't bad either. In my opinion, direction started shifting with Thunderhead Keep and then Dragonfall, the story mode parts at least, the zones themselves weren't bad at all. It was really weird that the epic final battle with the Elder Dragon Kralkatorik was less intense than the fight with not only Balthazar (who was at least the god of war) but Scruffy and Joko too. Also, we got the most difficult Raid during POF, although the next ones weren't so difficult for the "pro" players, they were harder for the rest due to the increased personal responsibility they have. I found the difficulty started to drop with POF. None of the fights you listed were all that difficult. It may be for a new player, or one that didn’t improve over the course of playing the previous content, but POF and onwards didn’t increase the challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > Gonna leave this here, players on gw2efficiency have more playtime than the rest of the playerbase combined. About 30% of gw2efficiency accounts are left playing. That's quite telling about player activity. Not trying to snark, but how is this proved that players who link to gw2efficiency have more playtime than the rest of the base combined? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercury ranique.2170 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 We happend. They moment they started catering our demands was the moment the decline set in. Now it is just a copy of every other game in the genre that is no long original and very boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > Gonna leave this here, players on gw2efficiency have more playtime than the rest of the playerbase combined. About 30% of gw2efficiency accounts are left playing. That's quite telling about player activity. > > Not trying to snark, but how is this proved that players who link to gw2efficiency have more playtime than the rest of the base combined? Because gw2efficiency players combined had 62k years worth of playtime in mid/late November 2019, link: https://web.archive.org/web/20191119001327/https://gw2efficiency.com/account/player-statistics 548,129,625 hours, 22,838,734.375 days, 62,571.875 years. The game as a whole had 119k years worth of playtime in August 2018. link: https://i.redd.it/nemu88qycvi11.jpg Do the math. 119-62=57, Total: 119, GW2Eff: 62, non-GW2Eff: 57 Yes there is a over one year difference between the two, so at best you would remove 1/7th (the game's age at that point) which gives us the number 53, which is close to 57, meaning, at WORST, gw2eff users accumulated as much activity (Clearly seen in playtime) as the rest of the playerbase. However, there were only 44% of gw2efficiency accounts active in August 2018 and kept going down, reaching 24.8% (!!!) in November 2019, meaning their playtime numbers were significantly lower as a whole. How low? From November 2019 to January 2020, gw2eff users accumulated 212/month years worth of playtime, which looks like a lot, but the average is at 716/month, so it's nothing. Or a 1/4th of the activity, which is the same number as the 24.8% number from the episode completion rates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trise.2865 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 Seven years happened. You changed. They changed. The world changed. Life changed. That's how it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 OK, so that was way more math than I had wanted. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Healix.5819 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > Because gw2efficiency players combined had 62k years worth of playtime in mid/late November 2019, link: https://web.archive.org/web/20191119001327/https://gw2efficiency.com/account/player-statistics > 548,129,625 hours, 22,838,734.375 days, 62,571.875 years. It was 369,138,926 hours on March 18, 2018, which is 611 days prior to that sample and 163 days prior to the infographic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ugrakarma.9416 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > The game’s challenge was increasing progressively. We saw this when players hit Orr, throughout LS1, LS2, HoT, and LS3. It’s with POF that they shifted directions and the game has gotten progressively easier resulting in what we’re seeing now with the new Living World season. > > That's not true though. POF itself wasn't a downgrade in difficulty, I'm really confused when I read this as POF contains many enemies that are much harder than anything seen in HOT. Then we have the fight with Balthazar, the fight with Scruffy, the fight with Joko that weren't so bad in story instances. A Star to Guide Us story wasn't bad either. In my opinion, direction started shifting with Thunderhead Keep and then Dragonfall, the story mode parts at least, the zones themselves weren't bad at all. It was really weird that the epic final battle with the Elder Dragon Kralkatorik was less intense than the fight with not only Balthazar (who was at least the god of war) but Scruffy and Joko too. Also, we got the most difficult Raid during POF, although the next ones weren't so difficult for the "pro" players, they were harder for the rest due to the increased personal responsibility they have. Also almost POF regular mobs have boons and CC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasi.9065 Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 > @"Stand The Wall.6987" said: > seems like they abandoned the dungeon layout of gw1 which imo was more arpg (diablo, path of exile, grim dawn) like. went downhill from there. everything about the game world in gw2 is so weak and plain boring compared to the tried and true methods of olde. theres no sense of danger or urgency. I think this explains it best, though I dont like the arpg description, since its quite undefined. Diablo, PoE etc are your typical dungeon crawler or hns rpgs, GW1 went in that direction as well. GW2 imo was a sandbox rpg up until LS3, then Anet started turning it into a narrative or storydriven rpg. Which imo was a very bad choice. Theres a reason people caution against mixing the different rpg genres, they are just too different and people will always have something to complain if you add too much of another subgenre into your rpg. Someone expecting a narrative rpg like the Witcher series, but getting Dark Souls (dungeon crawler) will find the game shallow, while the Dark Souls fan will hate the boring combat of Witcher games. And I mean, thats what we've been seeing for quite some time now on the forums and reddit. The different genre fans are more and more discontent because Anet tries to create content that fits all, but really fits nobody well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaklex.6308 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Casual players complained about HoT, Anet missed what their core complaints were, and did a complete 180 with the direction of the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Casual players left because of HoT, most didn't complain. Anet saw their new plan of catering to a niche failed, so they did a complete 180. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There was nothing niche about the direction they were going. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was niche enough to make lots of players quit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like how lots of players quit after POF? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drop off was way stronger after HoT. Also players that were scared off by HoT are hard to bring back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have a source? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > > > > > > > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That shows nothing about player populations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TIL I can earn money with my game without a population. > > > > > > > > > > > > There are numerous other factors which affect game revenue than just player population. > > > > > > > > > > Yet player population is a main factor. > > > > > > > > Source? Do you know how many players purchase gems? > > > > > > Only Anet/Ncsoft knows how many players purchase gems obviously. If you can't see a link between player population and revenue, then i'm sorry. Source? Just look at every game. Keep insisting that casual players "destroyed" GW2, it's funny, where's your source on that? > > > > I’m not denying that there’s a link. I’m denying your assumption that it’s a strong one and that it disputes what I initially stated in this thread. > > If you don't think players population is a huge factor for revenue, I can't help you. You can keep claiming casual player complaints are at fault, but I've yet to see someone proving that. In fact Anet went all in on endgame content after HoT for some time, yet their revenue didn't recover. > Also, you're using strawman wrong. It isn't a strawman, since I'm sure revenue, player base and direction of the game are linked very strongly. > > It just seems you're calling "strawmanning" to discredit my argument. I'm calling all of your statements factually incorrect, and I'm going to explain it with a simple example: game A has a starting population of 100,000, out of that 100,000, 5% or 5,000 support the game with purchases of in game currency, they're dedicated players, slowly the game population decreases to 80,000, yet those 5,000 dedicated players still play and support the game as before...do you see where this is going? Until you reach that 5,000 population level and those players start leaving then population is not a huge factor into revenue, and that's how it really works in all businesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 > @"kharmin.7683" said: > OK, so that was way more math than I had wanted. ;) I could've given just some numbers but then they would feel random. Data is good when proving a point! And the point is that gw2efficiency accounts have half (or more) of the total playtime in the game and given how they are the "tiny minority", "small sample" or other phrases used to describe them over the years, it makes the numbers even more important. The "tinier" it is compared to the total accounts, the more significant each user is to the activity of the full game. > @"Healix.5819" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > Because gw2efficiency players combined had 62k years worth of playtime in mid/late November 2019, link: https://web.archive.org/web/20191119001327/https://gw2efficiency.com/account/player-statistics > > 548,129,625 hours, 22,838,734.375 days, 62,571.875 years. > > It was 369,138,926 hours on March 18, 2018, which is 611 days prior to that sample and 163 days prior to the infographic. > What's interesting there is that in those 611 days the population of gw2efficiency increased by almost 50%. From 167,230 went up to 243,391. This means that although the global playtime and activity goes down, the number of accounts registered is going up, which is just sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
particlepinata.9865 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > The game’s challenge was increasing progressively. We saw this when players hit Orr, throughout LS1, LS2, HoT, and LS3. It’s with POF that they shifted directions and the game has gotten progressively easier resulting in what we’re seeing now with the new Living World season. > > > > That's not true though. POF itself wasn't a downgrade in difficulty, I'm really confused when I read this as POF contains many enemies that are much harder than anything seen in HOT. Then we have the fight with Balthazar, the fight with Scruffy, the fight with Joko that weren't so bad in story instances. A Star to Guide Us story wasn't bad either. In my opinion, direction started shifting with Thunderhead Keep and then Dragonfall, the story mode parts at least, the zones themselves weren't bad at all. It was really weird that the epic final battle with the Elder Dragon Kralkatorik was less intense than the fight with not only Balthazar (who was at least the god of war) but Scruffy and Joko too. Also, we got the most difficult Raid during POF, although the next ones weren't so difficult for the "pro" players, they were harder for the rest due to the increased personal responsibility they have. > > I found the difficulty started to drop with POF. None of the fights you listed were all that difficult. It may be for a new player, or one that didn’t improve over the course of playing the previous content, but POF and onwards didn’t increase the challenge. I cant agree. In my experience the Pof difficulty (maps and story) was at the same level as Hot 2.0 (after rework), ls3 and the part of Ls4 i played (the first 3 episodes). everything gets easier after playing many times. Hot was only more difficult in its early times, with more mob density and harder mobs. I do see a downfall in quality (and difficulty) with the last episode of the Icebrood saga. It feels like a rehash of earlier content, and the creativity looks stagnant with design. And of course that since LS4 there was almost no challanging instanced content anymore (fractals and raids). Strike missions only serve as an easier to create mini dungeon and are no subsitute. I am worried about the future of gw 2 with the agressive gemstore push and no full expac on the horizon, and a mayor thinned out anet after all the people leaving last year. The next episode of the saga will make or break the game for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raknar.4735 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Raknar.4735" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Casual players complained about HoT, Anet missed what their core complaints were, and did a complete 180 with the direction of the game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Casual players left because of HoT, most didn't complain. Anet saw their new plan of catering to a niche failed, so they did a complete 180. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There was nothing niche about the direction they were going. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was niche enough to make lots of players quit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like how lots of players quit after POF? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drop off was way stronger after HoT. Also players that were scared off by HoT are hard to bring back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have a source? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only the NCsoft earning reports: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/quarterly.aspx?BID=&BC=&BNo=&SYear=&SType=&SWord=&PNo=1 > > > > > > > > > > Comparing post HoT and comparing post PoF. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That shows nothing about player populations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TIL I can earn money with my game without a population. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are numerous other factors which affect game revenue than just player population. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet player population is a main factor. > > > > > > > > > > Source? Do you know how many players purchase gems? > > > > > > > > Only Anet/Ncsoft knows how many players purchase gems obviously. If you can't see a link between player population and revenue, then i'm sorry. Source? Just look at every game. Keep insisting that casual players "destroyed" GW2, it's funny, where's your source on that? > > > > > > I’m not denying that there’s a link. I’m denying your assumption that it’s a strong one and that it disputes what I initially stated in this thread. > > > > If you don't think players population is a huge factor for revenue, I can't help you. You can keep claiming casual player complaints are at fault, but I've yet to see someone proving that. In fact Anet went all in on endgame content after HoT for some time, yet their revenue didn't recover. > > Also, you're using strawman wrong. It isn't a strawman, since I'm sure revenue, player base and direction of the game are linked very strongly. > > > > It just seems you're calling "strawmanning" to discredit my argument. > > I'm calling all of your statements factually incorrect, and I'm going to explain it with a simple example: game A has a starting population of 100,000, out of that 100,000, 5% or 5,000 support the game with purchases of in game currency, they're dedicated players, slowly the game population decreases to 80,000, yet those 5,000 dedicated players still play and support the game as before...do you see where this is going? Until you reach that 5,000 population level and those players start leaving then population is not a huge factor into revenue, and that's how it really works in all businesses. You're making some huge assumptions here: 1. dedicated players are the ones doing the purchases, and keep supporting the game "as before" 2. non paying customers leaving the game doesn't affect paying customers 3. all businesses operate in this way While true that invested gamers are more likely to use cash shops traditionally, it isn't the same in GW2. Invested gamers also have the option to use the gold --> gem conversion, since they have the time to farm the gold. Selling "progression" is a huge part of monetization. There are some that pay for "progress", buying gems, converting them to gold and then buying things like legendaries off the trading post. People that don't have the time to be fully invested in the game, but still want to look "pretty/hardcore". I wouldn't call them dedicated, yet they purchase a lot. A healthy population brings in new potential customers and keeps already paying customers happy. "Is this game dead?", "Is it worth it to play -MMORPG- in -Current Year-?" MMORPGs aren't single player games you can play at any time. Every player playing influences the games' climate. They thrive with their communities. A MMORPG without players or a small playerbase will not attract new players or keep "dedicated" players for a long time, since they'll see no future in it. Wildstar is a good example for this, it went into a death spiral of "Is it worth playing this game?" - "No, the population is low.", so it didn't bring in new players and kept leaking old players. The devs tried one last attempt to save it by going F2P, but the "No one is playing it anymore, game is dead"-narrative was already too strong. (Yes, i know the leveling was boring in that game, and the visuals and humor were off putting for a lot of players) About the " that's how it really works in all businesses." Volume vs LTV Candy Crush: "Huge volume of players, fairly modest lifetime value for each spender" That is the way Anet and most MMORPGs are trying to go. The hardcore model doesn't really work well for MMORPGs, as seen by Wildstar. More information about that in the "Let's go whaling" video, even though some practices are despicable, it gives a pretty good impression of where we're heading. The model you're offering is just too simple and completely ignores multiplayer interactions, which MMORPGs are based on. You'd be right if you were only talking about single players games without any multiplayer features. Games like Minecraft would have never made as much as they did, if it weren't for the community, the population keeping it alive, their community-crafted mods and all those Youtubers driving the population into high numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vayne.8563 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Anet evolved like any good developer would. They realized the hard core crowd, though loud, isn't quite so numerous. They lost people making HoT hard, even though the hard core crowd loved it, and made PoF the anti-hot. That was for a reason. You might not like the reason, but the age of the average computer gamer is mid 30s. They're not all sitting there on metabattle, or standing in front of a practice dummy. They want to come home, kill some stuff, see some kind of reward/progress and move onto killing something else. I'm 58 years old and I could care less about raids or PvP. But I'm sure I've put more hours into the game than most people, and I'm sure I've spent more money in the cash shop than most people. What happened to Anet? Like me, they changed. Change isn't always a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashantara.8731 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > They lost people making HoT hard, even though the hard core crowd loved it, and made PoF the anti-hot. Hah! Tell that to _those_ players who can't stop crying over how hard the story instances in PoF are (especially the Balthazar fight). ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasi.9065 Posted January 15, 2020 Author Share Posted January 15, 2020 Wildstar had other problems tbh, geoblocking on account creation, bad character developement, barely any story, steep progression, horrible marketing and customer management. When people started doomsaying the game, it was already dead. Ontopic: This isnt about Anets monetization philosophy. Imo, nothing really changed there, well... much. Why is it nobody values the ingame rewards? Easy. Value is a fictive number we, the players, assign on something. If its an ingame reward, that value directly relates to the amount of effort put in to get this reward. If its a gemshop item, its the money value. Since nearly all ingame rewards are participation trophies, theres no value to them. So this whole debate about who spends how much on the game is rather not what I meant when asking the question about what happened to Anet. And quite honestly, I dont think it even matters that much to Anet. They just need enough income to keep the company going - and NCSoft satisfied. Anet never was a greedy company and still isnt. No, the changes to the game, the famous "one-eighty-turn" after HoT. Thats about gamedesign. Something made Anet decide that they dont want GW2 to be a action-sandbox mmorpg anymore. Instead they quite drastically turned the game into a storydriven rpg, selfplaying scenes included. They minimized the community interaction to the point that GW2 is close to being a singleplayer game with voluntary multiplayer option. I just want to know why. What happened there. It cant be money, because revenues were best with HoT release if I remember correctly, before Anet changed the genre of GW2. Did player numbers drop so drastically that Anet got scared? But thats nothing special, and some fixing usually brings a lot of players back after a borked expansion release. Especially in a non-subfee business model. Was it the leadership change? Or all the devs that left around that time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasi.9065 Posted January 15, 2020 Author Share Posted January 15, 2020 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > Anet evolved like any good developer would. They realized the hard core crowd, though loud, isn't quite so numerous. They lost people making HoT hard, even though the hard core crowd loved it, and made PoF the anti-hot. That was for a reason. You might not like the reason, but the age of the average computer gamer is mid 30s. They're not all sitting there on metabattle, or standing in front of a practice dummy. They want to come home, kill some stuff, see some kind of reward/progress and move onto killing something else. > > I'm 58 years old and I could care less about raids or PvP. But I'm sure I've put more hours into the game than most people, and I'm sure I've spent more money in the cash shop than most people. > > What happened to Anet? Like me, they changed. Change isn't always a bad thing. Why is it people always think spending money on the gemshop has anything to do with what Anet focuses their gamedesign-time on? That line of argument would have seen WvW being main focus, since the amount of gems for servertransfers was huge. In my wvw active days, transferring was something everybody did every few months on EU. Some transfers we got sponsored by 1-2 people, others we had to pay ourselves. Mind you, that was before mountskins, even before gliderskins. Sorry to burst that bubble. Its nice that you spend money on GW2, but that doesnt influence Anets decisions. The age of the "average" computer game is sure not mid 30s. What nonesense. Anet likes to target that demographic, but that has nothing to do with it being the average. Even WoW Classic had an avg age of 27-29 in several polls, and that was quite "old" for a videogame. Also, "wanting to come home, kill some stuff, see some kind of reward/progress and move onto killing something else", what you described there is a typical dungeon crawler. Thats not what GW2 is nowadays. Nowadays, GW2 is more like an interactive movie, a narrative rpg with some repeatable quests to fill the time between story releases. What you described there, that was GW2 up until LS3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now