Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

Baron von Scrufflebutt

Member Since 02 Jun 2012
Offline Last Active Private

#2318674 Unlocking traits.

Posted Save 4 Less on Today, 08:04 AM

It's funny because didn't Anet say that they were trying to make it easier to have diverse builds? The way they implemented this makes it harder to experiment with builds because the restrictions are really heavy for newer players. Every new player is just going to find out what the "best" traits are and only do those specific events and dungeons for them.

Mixing Traits with WvW is a very terrible idea. WvW needs more people playing the game and less people who just come for the Map Completion and Traits while taking up precious slots from those who actually want to win the match up.

Once again this screws over SPvP and makes it even harder to get into if you're new. This feature pack is the final nail in the coffin for the rotting corpse that is SPvP.


#2318512 Unlocking traits.

Posted Shayne Hawke on Yesterday, 04:13 PM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 19 April 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

Well, you're right. It's not a 1:1 translation of the system, but since weapon skills and utility skills already have a system of unlocks, it made more sense to do this with traits.

Tell me: if they did this with utility skills instead of traits, would you feel any differently about the system?

My interpretation of such a system adapted to utility skills would be to have specific tasks unlock specific skills with the alternative option of buying the skills for piles of silver/gold and some skill points, more than what they cost now.  To be clear, this would apply to healing skills and elite skills.  The convenience payoff found in the new trait system has no equal with this utility skill system, so there is no trade-off of price or time investment for convenience.

The problem with this system is that it's wholly worse.  You don't even get anything out of changing the current utility skill system to this new one.  Maybe the option of doing a specific thing to unlock the skill rather than pay for it seems like a plus, but doing that one thing will probably cost you more time and effort than what it would take to farm up the skill point(s) you needed under the old system.

Thinking of it another way, if the game had been like that from the start, it wouldn't be such a bad thing as long as it made sense how to get those skills.  PvE players would want a means to get those skills from doing PvE, PvP players from PvP, and WvW players from WvW.  The system in Guild Wars of skills learned in PvE being unlocked in PvP worked because the original design was for players to move from PvE to PvP, so you would expect people to unlock their stuff in PvE before moving on to use it in PvP.  If they just played PvP though, they had a fallback of unlocking the skills through Balthazar faction earned by playing PvP.  In Guild Wars 2, it's anyone's guess what ANet intends players to do, but what has happened is that three separate communities of people who only do one of the three game modes exist.  Each skill would therefore need six methods of unlocks, two for each game mode, one being task-based and the other being a purchasable unlock with currency specific to the game mode, which would then open up the skill for that character in other game modes.  Players that like to experience more than one game mode would be encouraged to unlock everything in a single game mode, because their progress in one mode would not amount to anything in another mode.

After all that, when you then consider changing it to the old system, where utility skills cost a few skill points and everything is automatically unlocked in PvP, everything about that old system feels better, particularly how skill points in themselves can be earned or worked towards for doing all kinds of things in either PvE or WvW, and PvP just gets the skills for free.  The same attitude applies here - if the system now was the system at launch, and we suddenly went to the old system where you buy one book and it unlocks everything in PvE and WvW, and PvP just has their unlocks for free, everything about that feels better, apart from the new re-spec limitations and costs, and then that's what people would be complaining about and asking for the reasoning behind such a change.

View Postdavadude, on 19 April 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

As Poe already said, in GW2, skills are unlocked by simply killing three or four foes, and could be likened to the attribute points in GW1.  Where as the elites in GW1 could be compared to the traits in GW2.  Identical.

"GW2 skills could be likened to the attribute points in GW1" - This is just wrong.  Guild Wars 2 weapon skills are earned haphazardly and are like skills from the earliest of quests in any of the Guild Wars campaigns.  Utility skills in Guild Wars 2 are like any skill you can buy at trainers in Guild Wars.  Attribute points in Guild Wars are like trait points (not traits) in Guild Wars 2.  There is no relation between Guild Wars 2 weapon skills and Guild Wars attribute points.  To say attribute points in Guild Wars are unlocked in the same way as weapon skills in Guild Wars 2 is to say that attribute points are earned by farming mobs in Guild Wars and care nothing of their actual method of acquisition of leveling and point quests.  Statements like these speak volumes of your familiarity with Guild Wars, to the point where I would even doubt you ever touched the game.

"elites in GW1 could be compared to the traits in GW2" - Barring the new method of unlocking that ANet introduced not even a week ago, please make this comparison of Guild Wars elites to Guild Wars 2 traits.


#2318470 Unlocking traits.

Posted Shayne Hawke on Yesterday, 02:06 PM

The way people keep describing this system as being similar as to what was in Guild Wars almost makes me think that you had to unlock attribute levels with your Signets of Capture.


#2318268 Expired infractions still show up in my profile

Posted Kattar on 18 April 2014 - 10:22 PM

There you go.


#2318143 Tera Rising & Guild Wars 2 - new classes

Posted raspberry jam on 18 April 2014 - 03:13 PM

View PostTevesh, on 18 April 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

Stealth is a forced and contrived gimmick which is illogical, toxic to game's health and the community. Obviously it has many fans, as every easy mode class, build or ability does. Oh, and most people, thankfully not usually present in gw2 community, enjoy stealth just for the ability to gank low level unaware noobs. Must be the kinds of people ganging up on women and elders in the backstreets at night.

But regardless of the stealth players and the community, it's obviously unimportant for gameplay and thus should be removed from the game completely. Visibility advantage full stealth provides is insurmountable by conventional tools without making other classes overpowered to compensate. Stealth offers little to no gameplay in itself and only forces people out of their preferred build to be competitive, while itself adding nothing to balance and diversity.

An example of stealth done right would be Planetside1, where being a stealth class limited your weapon choice to pistols and your inventory to 4 slots, compared to 16-24 slots other classes have. When translated to gw2 terms, it means reducing thief damage by 70-80%, removing utility skills altogether and slicing the health bar in half. Of course all of the stealth fan crybabies will instantly bail, since the only reason they are playing stealth is because it is inherently OP.
Stealthily standing right in front of someone in broad daylight in an open field is of course something that have no place in any good game. That's why it's in GW2.


#2318074 Tera Rising & Guild Wars 2 - new classes

Posted Tevesh on 18 April 2014 - 12:19 PM

Stealth is a forced and contrived gimmick which is illogical, toxic to game's health and the community. Obviously it has many fans, as every easy mode class, build or ability does. Oh, and most people, thankfully not usually present in gw2 community, enjoy stealth just for the ability to gank low level unaware noobs. Must be the kinds of people ganging up on women and elders in the backstreets at night.

But regardless of the stealth players and the community, it's obviously unimportant for gameplay and thus should be removed from the game completely. Visibility advantage full stealth provides is insurmountable by conventional tools without making other classes overpowered to compensate. Stealth offers little to no gameplay in itself and only forces people out of their preferred build to be competitive, while itself adding nothing to balance and diversity.

An example of stealth done right would be Planetside1, where being a stealth class limited your weapon choice to pistols and your inventory to 4 slots, compared to 16-24 slots other classes have. When translated to gw2 terms, it means reducing thief damage by 70-80%, removing utility skills altogether and slicing the health bar in half. Of course all of the stealth fan crybabies will instantly bail, since the only reason they are playing stealth is because it is inherently OP.


#2318140 GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

Posted raspberry jam on 18 April 2014 - 03:10 PM

View PostMCBiohazard, on 17 April 2014 - 10:38 PM, said:

I can empathize with that position as it is fairly similar to my own. I guess I just feel less bitter about it because I don't feel any particularly deep attachment positive or negative to any one specific game anymore. I don't have the time and energy to devote myself that deeply to a video game ideal though I still play and enjoy them when I can.

But I am continually amazed by the amount of Tigger syndrome that exists in MMO playerbases and communities that I've noticed over the years that I've dabbled in them. It's a never ending stream of "I don't like this, it should be like that!" and when it's more like "that" they move onto "I don't like that, it should be more like this!" They bemoan every single change and complain about every single static status quo, it's uncanny.

View PostKymeric, on 18 April 2014 - 03:04 AM, said:

I wonder, though.  Is that due to the MMO players, or due to MMO developers trying to please everyone, all the time?

For the most part, I don't see individual players bouncing back and forth on forums asking for something only to turn around when they get it and ask for the opposite.  I do see part of the player base asking for more elite, difficult content, followed by casual players complaining about things that exclude them.  PvP players complain about PvE focus, and PvE players complain about their class getting balanced for PvP.

There are many choices that will naturally favor some part of the player base, and instead of deciding what kind of player they are making the game for, developers of many games seem to create a revolving schedule of which players they are going to throw a bone to, and which will get shafted, hoping that all of them will feel placated enough to stick around.
I think that it's because - and this will sound crude, but bear with me - no one actually wants to play an MMO. And by that I mean, the games that currently makes up the MMO genre. They are in many cases the textbook example of how to make a bad game, in any other genre. The standard complaints that appear on every MMO forum ever all point in the same direction: the parts of this game that are unique are fairly good, but the parts that are the same as every other MMO sucks ass. Yet those parts are what every MMO has in common.

It's difficult for players to realize that they are not tired of the unique parts, but of the generic parts, because while doing those generic parts they had fun. But they had fun not because of those generic parts but because while doing that, they were also socializing (actually socializing, that is interacting with other players, not just their characters), exploring, finding out about the unique parts of the game.

So since players can't realize that they are bored of the generic parts of MMOs, they complain about details, about how unfair it is not not be able to access content due to difficulty, and so on. Imagine that in some other genre. The majority of players is expected to never complete Dark Souls. Does that mean it's too difficult? IMO, no, and I think a lot of people agree.
But MMO players are bored, they stick with playing something that bores them, and that makes them annoyed at completely irrelevant things. Players that actually have fun don't complain.

How different the genre would be if MMOs actually were fun.


#2317561 Feature Patch Update Notes

Posted Feathermoore on 17 April 2014 - 01:10 PM

Remember that the megaserver algorithm works off of a scoring system. If you are finding that the system doesn't seem to be scoring you correctly, figure out exactly what it is that seems off with your zones and give feedback. Tweaking that scoring system is easy. Equally important is actively taking note of who is around you. Try and remember names that stick out and see if you see people regularly over time. This is especially true of people who have a regular play schedule. The system is way too new for any of us to be able to say it isn't putting the same people together regularly.

View Postchefwaffle, on 17 April 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

It worked because everything was instanced in GW1, it's not open world like here in GW2. No one's grieving or bothering players like what's happening now.

Game wide communities are perfectly viable in open world games and were common in the older MMOs. The issue being that game wide communities build from smaller communities as a whole. You don't go from no community or just guilds to massive, all inclusive community. MMOs build entire online societies at their peak (not my words, these come from the community development panel at PAX) and these come from interaction between smaller groups. A game wide community is even easier in GW2 than in the older MMOs since the servers aren't distinctly separated.

View Postchefwaffle, on 17 April 2014 - 03:13 AM, said:

As for having a game wide community being better, it's not. There's a saying that "Birds of the same feather, flock together" and we all know how true that is. Trolls, PVPers, RPers, PVErs, and WvWers will argue and cause drama in map chat. And yes, the megaserver is failing in who goes with who. Also, it's a slap to the face to the people who just transferred, mostly RPers and PVErs.

This is a misconception. Colin and I actually talked about it when we discussed the megaserver. Encouraging diverse player groups to communicate and interact is healthier for the game than separating them. Separating them is even counter to the base design goals of MMOs.

It depends on why the person transferred. The only person it is a "slap in the face" to is someone that transferred because they felt their server was underpopulated.


#2317633 Feature Patch Update Notes

Posted Feathermoore on 17 April 2014 - 03:43 PM

View Postchefwaffle, on 17 April 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

snip

There is absolutely no way, and I mean no way, that a day or two is enough to make any of these statements in relation to the megaserver. The sample size is too small, the system is being tested, and for christ's sake it hasn't even been a week. I have seen 0 instances of trolls increasing, in fact I have run into less caustic people in map chat than before. I also haven't run into any issues with roleplaying either. My experience so far has been nothing but positive and have had no issues with the system "not working."

I remind you that they have been turning the megaserver on in different locations for periods of time before it was even announced and no one even noticed. This is the type of change that can only be tested live.

All of the issues you bring up existed before with guesting and you only have to look at the old MMOs to see what a healthy global community looks like. A community that is limited to individual servers and doesn't cross does not survive. Players self police themselves. You admit that people naturally control trolls yet for some reason ignore the fact that this doesn't change when you move to a single server system. Heck, the system is a PvE exclusive version of EVE with instances instead of single maps now and EVE's community is the strongest of any MMO. It has been proven to work. The dynamic will change and there will be bumps along the way. But thinking you can say it isn't going to work after two days is nonsensical.

The birds of the same feather thing is unhealthy for the overall community. That seems to be the general consensus of the big name community managers I talked with at PAX about just that.


#2317779 Feature Patch Update Notes

Posted Datenshi92 on 17 April 2014 - 06:10 PM

View Postchefwaffle, on 17 April 2014 - 04:21 PM, said:

Really, you didn't encounter any problems? What time did you play? Official forums stated otherwise. It does exist in guesting before, but it's milder compared to what we have now.
EVE being the strongest MMO community is a trivial matter, it's not a fact. It's just someone's opinion about it. This is also not EVE. The people who are playing this game are not the people from EVE so time will tell if it will be succeed or not. As for birds of the same etc. etc, is unhealthy, tell that to the likes of SoR. It imploded because their community don't see eye to eye.

I think you're making a storm in a glass of water about this matter. The community in the official forums are always make a fuss about something and there's really no way to measure up their opinion with everyone else's, because those that are playing the game and enjoying it are not taking the time to voice their opinion - its just a vocal minority that makes it sound worse than it actually is. Besides, like Feathermoor said, how can one come up with any conclusive facts and proof that this mega-server is going to bring in more problems than not, when it has only been partially and temporarily implemented?

The people on the official forums are most likely posting their theories and possibilities of what could go wrong, just like you're doing. I wouldn't take everything they say to the letter, as many of them in there are either biased towards something, like a class, or are making the forums their private "letter-senders" to the devs themselves. Pointing out the flaws in something is the easiest thing any random Joe with half a brain can do, so how about you (and other people who have a problem with it), actually coming with with viable and constructive suggestions to improve it then?

Like I said before, the mega-server is not the problem here, the problem lies in correcting people's attitude in the game. If its elitism then the root of it lies somewhere in the content and how its shaping the players to develop an elitist mindset. If people are being trolls then there are not enough measures to discourage such behavior.


#2318059 GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

Posted Tevesh on 18 April 2014 - 11:30 AM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 18 April 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

If I am not mistaken, the term "high floor" describes a situation where players are able to do a lot, with a very minimal input on their part. And at the same time " a low ceiling" means that even if you are more skilled than your fellow player, that skill won't show because the design of the game limits how much value skill has.
So, when talking about a "high floor, low ceiling" game (or balance, as you point out), I was talking about a game where even the dumbest player is able to win, while the skilled players are unable to showcase their skill. So in a game like that, there's basically no reason to improve.

I probably should have said that to avoid confusion. :D

It's just that 'high skill floor' is commonly used to refer to a situation where there is a high demand on player skill, advanced knowledge of the game and awareness just to be baseline competitive in the environment. 'Low skill ceiling' means there is little depth to the game and little to master in the combat system, meaning an experienced player will not have much advantage over a novice player since there is basically nothing to it. Together it means that the game is rather difficult, but shallow. This usually translates to a purely mechanic difficulty, though, as advanced combat systems usually have a lot of room for improvement.

What you meant is usually called low skill floor + low skill ceiling, and on this one I agree throughoutly. Combat is extremely dumbed down in gw2 and it is not getting any degree of reasonable treatment with all the content designed basically to be a cakewalk for crowds of auto-attacking half-afk, half-brain dead ppl.


#2317678 GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

Posted MazingerZ on 17 April 2014 - 04:24 PM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 17 April 2014 - 04:17 PM, said:

I've never met a single person that bought a game on launch and hated it, only to come back and play it regularly after purchasing DLC content.

Must never have played Diablo 3 then... I honestly wonder what D3 did to turn that around, however...

Or Mass Effect 3... tho to be fair, no one had to pay for the DLC that turned it around.


#2317690 GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

Posted MazingerZ on 17 April 2014 - 04:35 PM

View PostMCBiohazard, on 17 April 2014 - 04:28 PM, said:

All MMOs rely on that hype. Every single one of them. Can you name one MMO that had a launch that met your every expectation of what it should be like? I am fairly sure you can't though you can probably name quite a few MMOs that eventually grew into what you wanted from them. That's how it goes for MMO development. The best laid plans and all. And while I heartily agree with you that A-net had to change course early post-release, that's not outside of the realm of possibility for any new MMO launch and certainly not unexpected. This keeps happening time and again and players always feel more disappointed than they reasonably should be given the history when they should just learn to manage their expectations and figure out if they want to hold interest in it as it develops or let it lie.

And here's the crux of it.  What ArenaNet doing is standard practice.  There is nothing special about what they're doing.  Its not to be lauded and to be barely acknowledged.  Is what they're doing great for the game?  Yes.  But that means they get to keep us as players.  When an MMORPG actually manages to meet their own hype at release is when they should be applauded.  No one should applaud when obligations are met.  They should applaud when 'above and beyond' is done...


#2317645 GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

Posted raspberry jam on 17 April 2014 - 03:55 PM

View PostMCBiohazard, on 17 April 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

Not going expansion based means you won't have to pay for another box to see any new stuff that you actually want to see.
I see it the other way around. Going expansion based means you can pay and actually get to keep content instead of it being deleted from your game.


#2317564 GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

Posted Feathermoore on 17 April 2014 - 01:15 PM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 17 April 2014 - 07:42 AM, said:

The PvP changes are atrocious, but since A.Net seems hell-bent on making GW2 into a PvE game, even that shit makes sense. It's not good, but it makes sense.

GW2 is a PvE game. They don't have to do anything to make it that. But I understand the sentiment.


I agree to an extent, but I am a strong proponent of filling in holes in game systems or adding things that support future updates. One of the "side effects" (really design reasons) for the megaserver is that it allows ANet to be more aggressive with adding zones. Colin explicitly stated this in our interview as one of the goals of the system.

So while it is lacking content, this patch specifically does patch (heh) a few holes that will actually allow for more aggressive expansion of content in the future. Think of it as a foundation for a new wing or something. Hopefully the new season starts off with a bang, taking full advantage of the changes.