Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

Baron von Scrufflebutt

Member Since 02 Jun 2012
Offline Last Active Private

#2347256 What will need to be announced on Saturday...

Posted raspberry jam on 23 January 2015 - 09:04 AM

  • Level cap reduced
  • Monk (primary healer) class introduced
  • World is now fully instanced except cities/villages
  • Crafting skills replaced with crafter NPCs
  • Freely selectable skills for weapon instead of a locked bar
  • End of LS: we'll stop removing content from the game
Any of these might make me want to take a serious look at GW2 again. In general though I agree with above that regardless of what they announce it probably won't be as good as it sounds once they release it, if they even release it in the form that they talk about.


#2346300 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted raspberry jam on 14 January 2015 - 12:54 PM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 14 January 2015 - 09:13 AM, said:

GW1 feels like grabbing a bunch of friends, shoving them into a car and going on a road trip. GW2 feels like bumping into people in the mall.
Is one better than the other? Depends on what you are looking for. Personally, I agree with RJ; GW1 felt more meaningful and I prefer it over GW2.
I love how GW1 actually gives the feeling you have when you sit down with a group of friends and play D&D.

The GW2 version would be playing D&D on your own, surrounded by people that you might or might not know and who are also playing on their own, and then some of those people suddenly joins in your game and leaves at random.


#2346135 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted raspberry jam on 13 January 2015 - 03:20 PM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 12 January 2015 - 04:08 PM, said:

Guild Wars 1 wasn't really an MMO. One could call it that only in the loosest sense of the term. What you call an exception--replacing persistence with instancing--is precisely what makes it not one.

The "meaningful" element of MMOs isn't about personalized experience but interacting with a community.
What is your problem with genres? If the meaningful element of MMOs is about interacting with a community, GW1 was certainly an MMO because there was a community, players interacted with it all the time. Sure, they could choose to play on their own, but when was choice a bad thing? Or is it choice that you object to, since you apparently don't like personalized experiences?

The reason I mentioned personal experience is that, as I explained if you even bothered to read the post, that personal experiences appear more meaningful. If you kill a boss together with 6 other guys that you just spent three hours together with trying to reach said boss, it feels meaningful. If you randomly run around and then a dragon appears for reasons that you don't know about and then you attack said dragon together with 30 other people who might or might not - you don't know - have been running around as randomly as you and know as much about the dragon as you, well that might be fun the first time (but not the 7th or 19th, especially if it happens while you are trying to get other things done), but certainly won't feel as meaningful.


#2345730 This is why Guild Wars will always be great

Posted raspberry jam on 08 January 2015 - 03:31 PM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 08 January 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

Honestly, this


is starting to rival Tasca's Demise as my favourite GW-related piece.
This thread is not called "Why Guild Wars 2 will always be sappy and trivial".


#2345370 Arenanet PAX South appearance

Posted Kymeric on 02 January 2015 - 03:16 PM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 02 January 2015 - 09:06 AM, said:

It would be shocking if it's not an expansion: announce an expansion, release the next LS season to hype and tie it into the current world and then release it in the fall. The big question though is how they plan on delivering it: GW2's cash shop model really works best with a low entry barrier, so forcing the playerbase to buy the expansion, just so that they keep exposing themselves to the cash shop might not be the best idea.

I honestly wouldn't find it surprising if the expansion is simply a massive, free patch.

Release new zones and "story" as a massive free patch so that everyone who is still playing can keep playing, but drop some of the biggies that people want into the cash shop for the revenue to support the expansion.  Things like a new playable race, new profession, new weapon unlocks for existing professions wouldn't lock non-payers out of continuing with the game, but would be tantalizing enough to get a lot of players to fork over some money.


#2344710 Gaming Sales & Deals - Now in six zesty flavors!

Posted Lemming on 18 December 2014 - 09:10 PM

Steam winter sale is live.

Go read /r/GameDeals' threads so that I don't have to put the effort into doing the same stuff.

$6 is an alright price for MGR. Buy Civ 5 Complete for $12.50 instead of vanilla for $7.50. DS2 has a DX11 rerelease next year, so consider waiting another year.


#2344611 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted raspberry jam on 17 December 2014 - 01:29 PM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 17 December 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

I have to wonder if that's actually the case. Now, I am not disputing that it's done in a way that does not benefit the game, but I wonder if GW2's playerbase even cares. GW2 is seemingly in a position where its core players are either forced to suck it up or give up on the MMO genre. And as the declining profits show, there are people that are giving up, but as the profits themselves show, there seems to be a lot of people that aren't willing to give it up. (Heck, we probably wouldn't be discussing it here if we weren't still attached to it. ;))
You have a point. They are doing it badly, but it doesn't matter because it represents an investment great enough for players to not switch to some other game - so they really have nowhere to go (except giving up).
I wonder what effect a game in the same genre as GW1, but released 2015 or so, would have on the market.


#2344563 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted El Duderino on 16 December 2014 - 05:45 PM

View PostSatenia, on 16 December 2014 - 03:02 PM, said:

What evidence do you have of the contrary? Such speculation is pointless. If you want to believe an official statement, they said that the NPE was done based on euro/us feedback and not just cause of the china launch. Why put so much effort into that if not to accommodate new players?

Personally I think that for us veteran players it's easy to forget that you can put a lot of hours (and money) into the game just casually playing through the campaign and the zones. A MMO today can attract a far broader crowd then a few years ago.

The fact that they have yet to have announced hitting 5M Western sales. Seems like it would be an important milestone that would be announced. The fact that revenue is stagnant. I mean, there certainly is more pointing to the fact that they aren't attracting new players rather than the opposite. But, that was never my point. You were the one that was using ANet attracting new players as a point - therefore,  it is on you to prove that point or concede that you can't use it as support for your argument.

Quote

This would only be relevant if the upcoming daily achievement change was replacing additional content. However, it is not. The actual content is the recycled wintersday from last year (and the one before) and by all means you can complain about that as much as you want, but it is entirely unrelated to the daily achievement system change.

I still don't think you understand my point. Giving people incentives just to LOG IN to a game is a completely desperate attempt at, well, getting people to log into a game. If the game was good enough, you wouldn't have to dangle a carrot in front of the customer simply to get them to engage with it, regardless of actually needing to play the game - which is the whole point of a game's existence.

I feel this really may be going over your head, because you think I am complaining. I'm not. I don't really care. I just think it is an incredibly sad state of affairs for GW2 if they have to give people rewards simply to log in. In fact, you can add this back to my first point as another reason why it seems the game isn't gaining new players and is stagnant.


#2344536 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted El Duderino on 16 December 2014 - 01:20 PM

View PostSatenia, on 16 December 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

Actually, I said they do well to stick to the spenders as well as new players which can result in the former. Obviously, just sticking to what you have won't work long-term, that was never my point. However, not chasing after the ever-complaining one-time purchasers clearly was. To differentiate between profitable as well as unprofitable customers is entirely legitimate.

How are they gaining new players if they aren't doing anything different? What evidence do you have that they are actually gaining new players enough to make up for attrition of old players?


View PostSatenia, on 16 December 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

I'm not even sure why you think they are doing a bad job based on these numbers. An average is to be considered with care in a f2p environment due to the previously mentioned gap between those who spend a lot and those who don't spend anything (or close to) at all. LoL for example is very far down the list, simply because it has so many players, so the average value gets butchered. I do however believe it would be a mistake to claim that the game is doing bad.

You were the one that brought up the fact that ANet only makes $3.88 a player and that is the reason why they can't/won't make better content. Seems to me that a company that can't innovate because they aren't making enough money... isn't doing that well. Also, ANet has not only said that they will never make an expansion, they also haven't done so in 2 years. Thinking that they will at some point is just wishful and naive thinking.

Quote

A handful of scenarios spring to my mind:

I think you missed the point of my post completely. I'll try and make it more clear. A Skinner Box != a game. Hence, making your game more like a Skinner Box (E.g. giving people rewards for simply logging in and not actually playing the game) is rather boring, and pointless, game design. In fact, it can't even really be called game design, because it has nothing to do with actually playing or implementing anything to do with a game.

But, I suppose that not everyone expects much out of MMO's and GW2; whereas there are some of us that actually expect game designers to make objectively good game design choices. Such is life.


#2344530 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted raspberry jam on 16 December 2014 - 09:32 AM

View PostNerfHerder, on 16 December 2014 - 12:33 AM, said:

When you reduce the argument to "login = win game", it seems derpy. However, some players have busy lives. Ive been in the middle of my dailies and been called in to work, family stuff, etc. Now you get a reward, thats not game breaking, if you dont get time to play or have to leave in a hurry. At least we get a QoL improvement than no update at all, right?
I don't know where to begin. But I'll try to skip the part about how you literally get a reward for a repeating, repetitive quest in a game that was touted as not being repetitive and grindy (I failed, I guess), and go right on to the part where it is apparently QoL to get rewarded for not playing the game. I mean what did you pay for anyway? Not playing the game is sort of the default state that you had before even buying it! So what is being rewarded here exactly? Doing family stuff instead of playing the game? But wait... :eek: It is, isn't it?? Is this finally the Extended Experience update we've been waiting for?!?!? Of course!!!! Thank you Arenanet for rewarding us in every part of our lives!!! :angel:

View PostEl Duderino, on 16 December 2014 - 04:14 AM, said:

Seems to me if people like the game, they don't need to be incentivized just to log in.
Not be incentivized? What is this I see? Heresy?

All hail S:t B.F. :angel:


#2344524 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted El Duderino on 16 December 2014 - 04:14 AM

Doesn't it just seem so desperate to have to give people rewards simply for deciding to turn on the game? I mean, do people have no other reason to turn on the game than to simply get a reward? And, then what? Is that all they care to actually do and then they log off? The whole thing seems derpy to me as if it is some last ditch effort to try and push people to play the game.

Seems to me if people like the game, they don't need to be incentivized just to log in.


#2344476 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted raspberry jam on 15 December 2014 - 11:17 AM

On second thought, I feel that this update is a bit lacking. Yes, it's all good and well to get rewarded for logging in. But what about all those players that are making their very best effort at logging in, but can't click that icon? Maybe they have Parkinsons and when they try to move their mouse cursor to the Guild Wars 2 shortcut on the desktop their hand will be like shaking all over the place and they will fail to click the right thing and because of that accidentally start up some other interesting game such as The Binding of Isaac or Notepad instead. I know that happened to me several times and I don't even have Parkinsons. I feel that these people should at least get a silver reward for attempting to participate.

tl;dr: is reward for opening Notepad a good idea? y/n


#2344332 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted raspberry jam on 12 December 2014 - 01:22 PM

View PostNerfHerder, on 11 December 2014 - 09:39 PM, said:

By itself, this is a welcome change. I dont see any downside from here. I like the signing in for a reward. Because sometimes I sign in, decide I dont really want to do the same stuff over and over, then log out. And I like the idea of being rewarded for playing the I want. Win for me.
They said "GW2 rewards you for anything you do in the game". It rewards you for doing dungeons, quests, talking to people, fighting things, crafting things. It even rewards you for visiting places. Now with this - the reward for logging in - GW2 only needs to reward players for accepting rewards, and this paragon of interesting game design will be complete!! :)


#2344284 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted El Duderino on 11 December 2014 - 03:20 PM

View PostSatenia, on 11 December 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

Contrary to this, I asked to consider what you get - the stuff I've mentioned above - and compare it to how much you've spent - in this case zero past the initial purchase. The question is entirely based on ethics. The only reason you are getting the content is that other customers are paying instead of you. This is really a weak position from which to bargain.

Not for nothing, but what you are describing, from a company perspective, is really a case of diminishing returns. If a company is only going to cater to the people that spend the most, without trying to innovate or attract other players, there is still going to be attrition in those numbers which will lead to less and less sales over time.

Remember, it's not the consumers job to fund a company's innovations. Most products come to market severely underfunded from the public and rely on debt and investments in order to bring that product to a point where it turns a profit. Therefore, it is never problematic for a consumer to demand from a company what they want or expect. It is up to that company to decide how they want to handle that information and how they want to create wealth through new products and innovation.

If their sales per customer is as sad as you say they are, then it seems to me that they are doing a poor job of finding ways to bring in and keep new customers and that their overall business plan and execution is rather lousy. I don't think what you are saying makes a very good case for customers not being allowed to tell a company what they will pay for - but a much better case for a company refusing to innovate and create sales where there were none before.

Also, the idea that a game can't make money through expansions or new content is utterly ridiculous. There are plenty of game companies out there that don't have micro transactions and come out with expansions or new iterations of themselves every 12-24 months - and they are making money hand over fist.


#2344202 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted El Duderino on 10 December 2014 - 07:46 PM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 10 December 2014 - 07:05 PM, said:

That's part of the problem: previously new content was the incentive to log in, now we are looking at a month without content and "Log in to get the reward! JUST LOG IN!" is the replacement for it.
Give us new content, give us something we'll enjoy logging in for. Instead, we get a reward for logging in!?

Not just that, but I also have to wonder what kind of a player this will appeal to? If they are trying to appeal to the people that require a reward for simply logging in, what kind of future content can we expect? Will these players even want content that requires them to overcome challenges to gain the reward?

I think this is the underlying problem with the MMO genre, which is a byproduct of the themepark style MMO. Fun has largely stopped being the main influencer in MMOs and has been replaced by rewards. This is seen over and over again with the discussions we have about MMOs, their development and how developers use rewards to drive log ins and interactions.

I suppose that it really boils down to just another dopamine injections from the brain. Whether it is rewards, winning a PvP battle, completing a story: it is all just dopamine hits to the brain that make people coming back for more like Pavlov's dogs. Which makes me wonder if there is something that separates these things as being more important or better than the other in any objective way. Perhaps, it is the way in which you achieve the dopamine bump that should matter. So, for simple daily rewards, you basically are forced to log in and grind a bit, with a PvP match - you actually have to deftly find a way to win said match. If that is the case - I go back to my original statement then - sounds like a bore.

Sorry for the stream-of-consciousness rant...