Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

Craywulf

Member Since 20 Aug 2009
Offline Last Active Today, 12:23 AM

#2314253 Pay-to-win

Posted Trei on 05 April 2014 - 01:47 AM

Let's put it this way:

Say this guy bought from a cash shop a nuclear blade of Doom in a hypothetical game.
With this blade he can do twice as high damage as the best dropped weapon in the game.

In PvP, this would be undeniably P2W.
He had an unfair advantage bought with money that skill alone may not suffice to overcome.

In PvE? Hell I want him in my group!
I sure as heck isn't competing with him here; his advantage is mine too because we're on the same side - against mobs.

It takes two hands to clap, two accepting players for a competition.
There is no competition between you and me if I don't give damn if you "win" or "lose".


#2313986 Pay-to-win

Posted Dahk on 04 April 2014 - 03:27 AM

There is absolutely no 'pay to win' in GW2 and I have yet to see a single argument for that point that isn't totally ridiculous, so I'm not sure why there's a need to put up such a big post about it.

Really, it boils down to two points:
1) You can buy gems with gold and, hence, can buy anything from the gem shop without spending a penny.

2) Yes, people can buy gold with gems and can then gear up faster than someone farming gold, but this is the case with every MMO.  The only difference is that your cash goes to the people building the game instead of to an underground market unless you deliberately choose to feed that beast instead.  Many people don't think of it this way, but you could 'pay to win' in WoW even before they had additional cash shop items just by buying accounts or buying from gold sellers.

It's also worth pointing out that since gems = gold and gold = gems, it doesn't matter if the gem shop has skins or legendaries for sale.  The only thing to argue about that is whether the net cost after considering the conversion value is justified.

@ OP's TLDR: I chuckled, but TLDRs are good for finding out whether the big discussion is worthy of reading or now.  It may come as a shock to some, but many lengthy posts on forums are actually pretty terrible.


#2313314 Introducing the Megaserver System

Posted Wonsavage on 02 April 2014 - 02:16 PM

It's going to be a nightmare for the RP servers.  The fact that a city map may potentially go into overflow cuts much of the RP community off from one another.  And each server is going to be full of players who aren't RPing which will likely increase the amount of trolls and break immersion in common RP spots throughout the cities.


#2309365 Traits Unleashed: Forty New Traits and More!

Posted Kymeric on 21 March 2014 - 02:54 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 21 March 2014 - 02:05 PM, said:

"Learning curve" is just such a weird excuse... Is it really that difficult to learn what a trait does? And what's the point of learning how to play with no traits or with just a few? In fact playing with just a few is more difficult than playing with a full set. And how are you supposed to learn how to play with full trait points unless you have full trait points?


Agreed.  The problem with learning GW2 has never been that too much is thrown at you too quickly.  It's that the game lacks methods of communicating its systems and then training people in how to use them.  For example, dodging.  There is a lot of content where you never really need to dodge, and content where it is required to really be successful.  The game does a poor job of introducing the dodge mechanic, demonstrating mob telegraphs, and then slowly making it more and more necessary.  Suddenly deciding that dodge needs to be unlocked at level 20 does nothing to fix this.


View PostVeji, on 21 March 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

I agree with this.  I think the reason given for ANet to decide to revamp the trait sets is a copout or a lie for some other purpose.

I'm not sure it's deception.  I'd guess it's just a unsophisticated attempt to solve an issue.  People have been giving feedback since launch that it feels like you have pretty much explored the full abilities of your character by level 30 or 40, and the rest of the leveling process seems redundant.  My guess is that this is a kneejerk response to that criticism.  "Let's spread the growth process!"

Of course it doesn't solve the problem.  It doesn't add more progression that really takes 80 levels to learn, it just spreads the thirty levels of character growth over more time.

Why they should be offering this simple and ineffective of a solution a year and a half after the problem was identified is anyone's guess.

--------------------

As for the free respec, I appreciate it.  If I was still playing, however, it'd do very little to how I actually play the game until some sort of template system is implemented.  I like the idea of customizing my build to content, but spent too much time moving between areas of the game to manually reset my point distribution every single time.

The fact that they are doing it, as well as trying an account-bound dye system, gives a glimmer of hope that someone at ArenaNet is looking back at the pre-launch vision.


#2309347 Traits Unleashed: Forty New Traits and More!

Posted raspberry jam on 21 March 2014 - 02:05 PM

View PostKymeric, on 21 March 2014 - 01:03 PM, said:

If the whole idea is to give people an easier transition into the game by spreading out the learning curve, this is a step in the oppposite direction.  It means new players will have to put up with handicapped professions even longer before they can get key traits that make the profession play like it is supposed to play.  Instead of "wait until you get into your twenties and get some traits" it'll be "keep going, the profession gets good about level fifty five."

This is just another change that cements the impression that ArenaNet has no idea what it's like to play their own game.
"Learning curve" is just such a weird excuse... Is it really that difficult to learn what a trait does? And what's the point of learning how to play with no traits or with just a few? In fact playing with just a few is more difficult than playing with a full set. And how are you supposed to learn how to play with full trait points unless you have full trait points?

GW2 starts off at the very highest difficulty and then gets progressively easier and still get away with claiming that it's "learning curve". Well sure, a lot of MMOs do just that, but that doesn't mean that it makes sense.


#2308423 The Trinity, Roles, GW2, and You

Posted raspberry jam on 19 March 2014 - 06:20 PM

View PostCraywulf, on 19 March 2014 - 06:09 PM, said:

CPCs
The problem with CPCs is that they trigger speficially, not generally. Which means that every time you want to use a CPC you (or actually not just you but also someone else) need to do the exact same thing. To base gameplay around it you'd need to do the exact same thing over and over. Not to bring GW1 into this, but it separated existing effects from what produced these effects, which created "emergent CPCs" so to speak. For example rangers using Winnowing or Winter to affect other party members' damage output (bad example? no, think about it), warriors intentionally killing their own pets to become stronger, rangers using their pets to allow necromancers a supply of minions, mesmers using their opponents' buffs to damage them, etc etc.

ANet obviously wanted to keep these synergies but made the mistake of scripting them instead of allowing them to emerge organically.


#2253260 Why am I getting dissed for only wanting zerkers in my party?

Posted Bosman on 01 November 2013 - 04:31 PM

View PostDakan, on 01 November 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

It seems you didn't read the quote so let me tell you what you missed.
Actually it doesn't. It clearly states "a player who is handicapped by self-imposed rules". A self-imposed rule is for this matter "I won't ask other players to use a specific type of gear."

I also do not like the d/d backstab thief and play a high tirckery build nothing wrong with that.

But let me quote once again what you have clearly missed: "The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. That is true by definition of playing to win." Because winning does not only mean "getting a task done" but also "getting it done as fast as possible" the definition is quite correct. For example: Is everyone who is able to sprint 100m a winner or only the one to arrive first? Also this is not my definition but the one of David Sirlin.

Okay, post got eaten because I pressed the back button on my mouse, so this'll be somewhat short.

I don't know Sirlin, but his definition of 'playing to win' is false, because his definition of 'winning' is off. Winning is achieving victory. As long as you try your damn hardest to achieve  victory, you're playing to win. It doesn't matter if you lay further handicaps on yourself and your party.

How do you 'win' in PvE? By beating the dungeon. It doesn't matter how fast, or if you do it with a 0/0/0/0 build and only grey gear. As long as you eventually beat the dungeon, you win. Saying it needs to be done fast and efficiently, or without forcing people into an optimal build are all just conditions which you pose onto yourself and/or your party, each of which being completely unrelated of whether you 'play to win' or not.



View PostEl Duderino, on 01 November 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

Playing with a self-enforced handicap, while noble, or even more fun, does kind of mean that you are doing it in lieu of being optimal. And, it is often the case that doing something less optimal on purpose, would put you at odds of trying to win.

There is nothing wrong with doing this, not at all. Just like there isn't anything wrong with running a mile in an hour. However, it isn't really "winning" it is just competing at that point. Anyone can complete a dungeon. Doing it fast and efficiently is often more of a win condition than just completion - at least given the ease with which people can complete content/dungeons in this game.

Yes, dungeons are quite easy, but that doesn't mean the win condition changes. Even if you're running against comatose quadriplegics, you still win as long as you finish before the others do.

Quote

There is nothing wrong with either side, and I think that is the important take away from the post you quoted. The problem, however, arises, when someone gets angry with the other side for feeling slighted. People who want to play "optimally" shouldn't have to feel the wrath of people that don't and vice versa. However, I would be willing to bet that more people feel slighted at the sight of a "zerker only" group forming than vice versa - because of some contempt that "elitists" are ruining the game. Unfortunately, that is a part of playing games, especially online ones like MMOs. There is no reason to take offense to something you can simply ignore.

Except I haven't been raging against the OP for a while now. I still think it goes against the idea of the pugging system, but I can accept it if you actually tell people about it beforehand. What I have been raging about is those people who say that they kick others when making a mistake, which segregates the playerbase and makes upwards mobility on the skill ladder much harder, since you get kicked or blocked from games because you're not able to learn due to that kicking and/or blocking.


#2253242 Why am I getting dissed for only wanting zerkers in my party?

Posted Bosman on 01 November 2013 - 03:57 PM

View PostDakan, on 01 November 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

I just have to quote it: http://www.sirlin.ne...ates-guide.html

It's about "the scrub" which in my opinion isn't really deregatory term because we all start as such.


What did we learn? Some players play to win. Some don't. That in and of itself is not a problem. The problem arises when the two meet, because the ones Sirlin calles top players are getting their satisfaction from winning in contrast to scrubs who get theirs from playing with selfimposed rules (in case of GW2 e.g. the notion that they cannot ask other people to use zerker gear).

I believe that both are necessary to a gaming community but I am also tired of "scrubs" telling me I cannot ask for zerker parties. An advertisment in the LFG tool is just that. I search for players with a similar mindset. Noone forces you to play with me but if you do join my party and I see you playing bearbow I will ask you to adapt. If you do not depending on my mood and your attitude I might or might not kick you. (I won't kick new players that are willing to learn but everyone telling me to stfu.)

Which is a bullshit definition of both 'scrub'  and 'win'. This definition implies that everyone with handicaps doesn't play to win. Guess what. I like clearing dungeons. However, I don't really like using the current thief meta build, because I think it's boring. Unless you say that you only want to win when you want optimal efficiency, which is patently untrue, your definition is false.


#2240519 Does GW2 need damage meters?

Posted Darkobra on 04 October 2013 - 06:59 PM

Honestly, I don't see a reason for a team damage meter. It doesn't enforce "I have to be better." Instead, it enforces "They aren't as good as I am."

It also really encourages damage above all else. If I wanted that, I'd go to a game that does it better.


#2239868 I can't keep up

Posted Kurr on 03 October 2013 - 03:05 PM

View PostXRay, on 03 October 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

Content is content. I'll take temporary > no content any time. Besides a lot of the new content will be staying in the game, which has been stated already multiple times.



I like how you read it the way that suits you and your mindset. So I'm gonna rephrase it - I chose to try to it the first day, then decide it wasn't interesting to me due to the huge ordeal that I'd need to go thru only to get to my home server map, then I decided not to do it. Is it right to judge anything without trying it out first? Don't think so. But I still was able to complete the achievement for Boss Week through other means than participating in the Tequatl encounter. And that's the beauty of it. Options. Hate it love it go away I don't care. But having options on what to do is pretty sweet in my book. Who doesn't like it, as I said before, there's a plethora of other mmos with nothing to do in them, so feel free to take your pick.

cheers~

Why do you insist on telling me to find a different game to play? I already said in my OP that I love Guild Wars 2 and that gameplay wasn't an issue for me at all. I find it frustrating that instead of using arguments as to why you disagree with me you just dismiss my opinion without a real rebuttal.

If you re-read my posts, I never claim that I don't want any content updates. In fact, I was very satisfied with the rate it was going at prior to June.


#2239820 I can't keep up

Posted XRay on 03 October 2013 - 01:27 PM

View PostSatenia, on 03 October 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

Temporary content. Important difference.

Content is content. I'll take temporary > no content any time. Besides a lot of the new content will be staying in the game, which has been stated already multiple times.

View PostSatenia, on 03 October 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

No, you chose to do it, but gave up after you failed to complete it successfully. I guess I'm not sharing your definition of beauty there. "Just lol".

I like how you read it the way that suits you and your mindset. So I'm gonna rephrase it - I chose to try to it the first day, then decide it wasn't interesting to me due to the huge ordeal that I'd need to go thru only to get to my home server map, then I decided not to do it. Is it right to judge anything without trying it out first? Don't think so. But I still was able to complete the achievement for Boss Week through other means than participating in the Tequatl encounter. And that's the beauty of it. Options. Hate it love it go away I don't care. But having options on what to do is pretty sweet in my book. Who doesn't like it, as I said before, there's a plethora of other mmos with nothing to do in them, so feel free to take your pick.

cheers~


#2240057 Anyone figure out the secret sauce to Aether Key Piece drops?

Posted raspberry jam on 03 October 2013 - 09:45 PM

It's all in the wrist.


#2239097 Would you play GW 2 with Oculus?

Posted FoxBat on 02 October 2013 - 02:45 AM

Text is still a major problem with virtual interfaces. Alot of the new development around the rift involves removing traditional HuDs altogether. For many genres this is OK, but it's a real problem for what continues to be a primarily text-oriented socialization process in MMOs. VoIPs whether integrated or not have not managed to hold a large community together the same way, I think much of that has to do with no-one really working on the issue of how you create true virtual positioning/mixing of voices. In an actual room you can have a hundred people carrying on multiple conversations at once (with those near to them) but you can't do this in any of the popular VoiP rooms at all. It also is usually difficult to switch between speaking on multiple levels at once. (I.e. manage private conversations, guild conversations, and server conversations all at the same time - be able to talk to one while listening to all, and quickly switching between them.) The ideal solution might even involve delaying an individual listening to these multiple levels of communications so they can be heard in sequence, but this can create some serious asynchronisity problems too. So until anyone takes a reworking of VoiP seriously I think we are stuck with text, which plays poorly with the Oculus right now.


#2238686 Preview: Twilight Assault and New Hairstyles

Posted Zedabi on 01 October 2013 - 11:12 AM

View Postaonn45, on 01 October 2013 - 11:02 AM, said:

hmm lets see, we got unbalance, we got no content for the spvp, some chars are left behind in pve and pvp, we got some bugs...
Lets add some hairstyles
GG anet GG

Yes, we should get the artists and modellers who probably don't have any experience in programming or gameplay balance to fix bugs and help balance the game.


#2237900 Ramblings about Personal Progression in MMOs

Posted raspberry jam on 29 September 2013 - 09:09 PM

View PostFeatherman, on 29 September 2013 - 08:29 PM, said:

I hear that, before the days of Final Fantasy and WoW and its clones, leveling was a mechanic introduced in D&D. I'm assuming it was there as either a pacing/immersion mechanic, but I'm not really old or experienced enough to know its real purpose in that game.
It was not. It was intended as mechanic to simplify progress book-keeping, as well as a way to easily create encounters that players were supposed to be able to handle.

Today we are able to use computers for managing stats, so levels are really not needed. And CRPGs rely more on execution than pen & paper D&D does (especially the older editions of that game), so it is ok to let encounters depend more on player skill than stats and random number generators.