Jump to content

  • Curse Sites

raspberry jam

Member Since 19 Jan 2010
Offline Last Active Mar 02 2015 09:56 AM

#2348219 Mastery System = vertical progression?

Posted Mordakai on 27 January 2015 - 06:04 PM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 27 January 2015 - 05:28 PM, said:

Note: several.

The key is that they just greatly expand on what they have. And if they attach masteries to defeating raid bosses, they will have effectively added raid progression without alienating players that choose not to participate in it (basically the same as fractals). Think of it more like you have to defeat Teq before you can do Wurm. Or that you need a particular utility skill to defeat Wurm that has no place elsewhere but requires killing Tequatl first to unlock it.

I really don't like gated content, period.

Example:  I really want to do the latest LS with my brand new Sylvari character, but have to wait until level 80.  I see no reason not to bump up characters for at least the instanced personal story bits (especially if I'm just going to be magically reduced in hit points or turned into Caithe anyway).

#2348192 What will need to be announced on Saturday...

Posted Mordakai on 27 January 2015 - 05:25 PM

View PostHobbesqt, on 27 January 2015 - 05:15 PM, said:

Okay, allow me to address why I still think you are only able to see things from the perspective of GW1, rather than how someone like me sees GW2.

GW2 is nothing but dps classes. That is a core philosophy of GW2. No trinity. Healers and tanks are part of that trinity, and asking to introduce healers is tantamount to asking to remove leveling, Hotkeys abilities, or gear. These are core principles the game was founded on, and while you may feel they are more conducive to a good MMO, they are simply not things Arena Net will ever do, nor is it what most of the playerbase wants.

GW2 is doing better than most other MMOs simply because it dares to be different than other MMOs, especially the nameless titan. Any back-stepping to introduce things contradictory to their core philosophy is going to be seen by the public as just copying them and giving up on an ideology that has actually served them well.

How is adding Greatswords with Necros not nearly equivalent to adding a new weapon entirely? You get brand new attacks, brand new skills, and a new playstyle just like you would with spears, or any other weapon. Whether it is packaged as a spear or a greatsword is irrelevant in my opinion. It isn't like they are limited in any way by the weapon. It just allows them to not add a large amount of art assets, allowing the team to focus on other expansion content.

For example, mesmers use greatswords as ranged weapons. It is awesome as hell from a visual perspective, and Arena Net can do the same with any weapons.

The same applies to the new class, only more so.

To you, the trinity is what engaging gameplay is. That was GW1, and other MMOs. That is not what GW2 at a design philosophy level, and it is simply not going to change.

Gah, DPS only was NOT intended!  Anet has said multiple times they don't like it, they want each profession to have the ability to DPS, support, or control.  Bad thing is: only DPS really matters, and apparently Anet has no idea how to fix that.

The ideal of GW 2 would be people switching roles to meet certain situations.

#2347919 The new allies. In the new expansion

Posted Kymeric on 26 January 2015 - 08:52 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 26 January 2015 - 05:41 PM, said:

Yeah, 250 years ago, the average human had 7 to 19 eyes and now almost everyone has just 2!!

But.. but... Magic™!

#2347823 I’ve been playing GW2 wrong, and loving it.

Posted Shayne Hawke on 26 January 2015 - 05:03 PM

View PostArkham Creed, on 26 January 2015 - 06:36 AM, said:

Here is the thing; the GW2 content/gameplay problem isn’t an issue of design or mechanics. One of these days I’m going to have to get my act together and start that youtube show “Blame the Fans” I’ve been dreaming up….anyway, the deal is we’re the problem. Or I should say you’re the problem, since I’m not doing these things. You see I am the head of a very small semi-casual guild. Not one of us has a single piece of Ascended gear, only one of us bothers with zerker stats, we rarely read the wiki or boss guides, and often don’t know what we’re doing in dungeons. Yeah; we’re bad. But you know what else? It’s a freaking blast.

This attitude is so quintessentially "I play-for-fun" that it makes my stomach turn.

You and your friends are so blinded by being entertained by shallow gameplay that you can't even see the contradictions in your own opening statement.  It somehow isn't the fault of the developers that people find problems in the game, and yet you admit to/claim that

"content is so zergy and everything can be DPSed down in seconds... a lack of challenging content or defined player roles... someone is going to find the right place to stack to EXPLOIT AI pathing or targeting bugs, everyone is going to repair their zerker gear, and the whole server is going to break the game and then complain that its broken."

...which is all entirely the fault of ANet because it's the way they chose to make their game.  ANet is (together with NCsoft) solely responsible for every decision they've made about how to build and present their game, and you somehow have the audacity to fault the playerbase when they call out ANet for having not designed the game in a manner which meets the studio's own touted goals and objectives.  If ANet wants players to behave a certain way, and players end up behaving differently, it's because ANet, as the one in charge of all of the interactive bits and systems and laying everything out to manipulate player behavior, did not design a game that makes players behave that way, and that is their fault.  Video games as a medium are all about shaping player interaction, and you are like someone who would blame clay for not turning itself into a vase rather than the potter that can't figure out how to work their wheel.


When you DON’T use an optimized zerker build, and when you DON’T stack in exploitive areas, and DON’T mindlessly zerg the game is great.

Again, there are all these things you point out that players have figured out and regularly do that demonstrate how poorly thought out and designed this game is, and if only players didn't do these things, they could see how great the game really is.  You would rather blame the player for playing too efficiently than the designer for designing poorly, because it's not as though the designer could possibly have made the game in some other way that didn't allow for or encourage that behavior.


Play the game wrong. You just might find that you like it.

If playing like shit is the way you get through the game, then something else is shit - the game or your standards, or both.  Bad games have bad solutions which are bad for any number of reasons (cheap, simple, lazy, easy, obvious, etc).  Not caring that those bad solutions exist or that the developer should do anything about them is a bad standard.

Go cram your casual guild in some corner of the world and keep playing terribly with your thoughts to yourself.  It's obvious that you don't care about the condition or quality of the game or about improving it, or you'd otherwise have some understanding about why and how the game is where it is and who to hold responsible.  Stand down and let other people challenge ANet for a better game.  You and your friends will find a way to gimp yourselves into finding it fun anyways.

#2347829 The new allies. In the new expansion

Posted Miragee on 26 January 2015 - 05:20 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 26 January 2015 - 10:18 AM, said:

I actually think it's mursaat too except that why would mursaat be all glowy and transparent? These guys are hovering (check) and have weird appendages that doesn't look like feathers but then again this is GW2 so ♥♥♥♥ lore (check) and that portal is definitely mursaatish.

Buuuuuut mursaat are fleshy, solid creatures, or at least look like it. These guys are glowy. Margonites are glowy too and they were humans that were corrupted by Abaddon. Maybe these mursaat were transformed in a similar way.

Or it could be that this was their true form all along and they just looked fleshy in GW1 because reasons.

You have to remember that anet has to design for the majority of gw2's audience, which are in fact skritt.

#2347793 I’ve been playing GW2 wrong, and loving it.

Posted typographie on 26 January 2015 - 02:44 PM

View PostArkham Creed, on 26 January 2015 - 06:36 AM, said:

That’s the issue; when you play the game wrong (IE; as intended by the developers) its one of the best on the market these days. But the meta killed GW2.

The intent of the developers was to have an RPG combat system that makes healing and tanking optional at best. We could debate whether or not they foresaw the consequences of that, but I think it's obvious that if you can successfully complete dungeons with no healer, no tank, and no defensive stats, the variable you have left is how fast you can do it. While handicapping yourself can sometimes be fun to introduce a new challenge, you can't blame the players for generally wanting to take the easiest available route to their goals.

I think you're also ignoring the possibility that build optimization is a huge part of the enjoyment of this genre for a large number of people. Despite playing in a casual guild similar to yours where I could probably get away with running anything I want, I still usually choose direct DPS, and I still want to min/max it.

#2347796 The new allies. In the new expansion

Posted Konzacelt on 26 January 2015 - 02:44 PM

View PostCrimsonknith, on 26 January 2015 - 02:22 PM, said:

The glowing parts could be armor, like our zodiac armor.

Zodiac armor has the neato-silly skin change that has nothing to do with actual armor.  I mean...it turns your body into blue jello.  It's not supposed to represent anything real(in-game), I thought everyone assumed that.  :unsure:

#2347742 I’ve been playing GW2 wrong, and loving it.

Posted Baron von Scrufflebutt on 26 January 2015 - 10:51 AM

View PostArkham Creed, on 26 January 2015 - 06:36 AM, said:

Here is the thing; the GW2 content/gameplay problem isn’t an issue of design or mechanics.

The fact that A.Net is selling the game's main progression currency in the cash shop is a design mistake. The fact that A.Net implements content in the shape of JPs or narrow passages, when the game's engine still (it has has this exact problem since GW1!) is unable to play well in those situations (think of CM basement or the Wayfarer frozen lake skill point) is a design mistake. The fact that the game places massive emphasis on levels (as a lvl 10 you are not going to be killing lvl 20 foes) and then introduces the main source of XP in the form of dynamic content (meaning the content is not available on demand, yet the game requires you to do it) is a design mistake. The fact that the game requires you to stand in a very small location to reap the benefits of a number of skills (boon sharing, condition removal, heals, ...) is a design mistake if stacking isn't desired.

Now, playing the game "wrong" mean that players simply stop focusing on the game's flaws.  But that doesn't mean that those flaws do not exist; it just means you pretend that they do not exist. Now, I absolutely agree that players should play the game this way: if you are not having fun, it doesn't make sense to do something. But at the same time, this advice is completely and utterly useless on a discussion forum: because the "fun" of a discussion forum isn't in playing the game, it's in discussing it. Pretending that some issues don't exist is a good way to play the game, but a really shitty way to discuss it.

#2347748 I’ve been playing GW2 wrong, and loving it.

Posted Alex Dimitri on 26 January 2015 - 11:21 AM


Dude i know your heart is in the right place, but your facts are messed up.First of all if you ever take a closer look to (so called) skill tree you gonna aknowledge that no matter how you spend those 14 points you simply ain`t gonna make big change. So in general there is one build that has slight variations. You want variety then you need competitive bleed builds (which their not since ridiculous stack cap). You want variety then make Guardians be able to at least hold mobs if not tank them properly.This way you will have sinergy of a team with different roles and tasks !
Is this supposed to be players to sort out ? Can we change core game design ? Can we actually influence any change ?
Anet wanted to kill of trinity and they did, but end result was not exactly what they imagined, simply because people turned to only effective way to play and that`s pure DPS (thus zerker as only viable option) !

In GW1 i played Necro with SS and minion bombs, then i would switch for blood magic and some wierd mixes for PvP/GvG here in GW2 this is not an option. So I like many others switched my favourite class for pure DPS !

Talking about how PEOPLE play it wrong and it`s not fun is just ridiculous, fault lies to game creator and their short sight when it comes to core game mechanics, half baked condition builds, pure DPS and imaginery support are all their doing, and if they fail to see/recognize that GW2 is not "evolution" but just crippled MMO !

I would love to have HUGE skill tree that has bunch of options so u can fine tune your character, make it trully uniq !
But i don`t have that option all i have is 14 crappy points and to be honest perks that are very hard to see if they even work !

Only explanation we got for coditions cap was "it would be hard for server to make calculations" really ?? that`s the answer, man it`s like we play this game on pocket calculators, wtf do they think we are retards or something, plenty of games don`t have those caps and work fine their servers don`t take a dive when Necros start to play !

If you want to call a BS, pick a line and stand infront Anet booth.......

#2347295 What will need to be announced on Saturday...

Posted Baron von Scrufflebutt on 23 January 2015 - 01:31 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 23 January 2015 - 09:04 AM, said:

  • 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.

I'd probably just add heroes and "bring back quests" to the list.  Other than that ... perfect!

#2346926 [Answered] About to start play GW2 - Few questions.

Posted cobalt on 19 January 2015 - 09:41 PM

They got rid of equipement repair costs last april. Wiki reference http://wiki.guildwar...om/wiki/Repairs

#2345952 [Answered] About to start play GW2 - Few questions.

Posted tariel36 on 12 January 2015 - 12:12 PM

  • What impact on the game microtransactions have?

  • Is group playstle required to progress through leveling process and endgame? / Can I still get best equipment when playing solo or I have to group for that? (I want to play with few (< 5) friends, too tired of raids, guild progression, others f*** up things etc like WoW)

  • Does game punish me? - Exp/item/lv loss when I die, etc?

  • PvP - Optional or Must? (or like WoW?)

  • Servers - As mentioned ealier I want to play with few friends. Can we choose the one server or we'll be rolled around like in most browser games?
That's all for now. When something more gets on my mind I'll edit/post again.

@edit fixed the list, thanks @raspberry jam

#2346944 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted Miragee on 19 January 2015 - 11:06 PM

View PostI post stuff, on 19 January 2015 - 08:03 PM, said:

It really depends on the team to be honest, wipes usually happened because someone pulled too much aggro or was severely out of position. In those cases it was very hard to do anything to improve the situation apart from running away to res the fallen allies later.

When someone failed during speedruns it was also very hard to recover since everyone had a very specialised role to play. I actually don't think that speedruns were a bad thing, it was just odd how 3h content became doable in less than half an hour, with enough practice.

Because of multiple things:

1. Power Creep added a ton of overpowered and broken skills that didn't exist during the design process of those dungeons.

2. GW1's skill system was so deep that the devs couldn't possibly forsee what would happen with hundreds of thousands of players pumping in their brain energy. Builds changed years later to make the clears even faster.

3. People learn stuff and are always better, stronger and faster than the devs expect. That's in every game in existence. I don't think the Diablo 1 developer ever expected their game to be completed in ~3 minutes via speed run.

#2346829 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted Miragee on 18 January 2015 - 09:17 PM

View PostI post stuff, on 18 January 2015 - 09:06 PM, said:

I just don't understand how, back in GW days, a large part of community screamed for large scale boss encounters and now an equally large part of the community is complaining about how they are dull afk fests.

We have Wurm and Tequila which are anything but, and the rest might as well be less taxing because this isn't Dark Souls goddamit.

I honestly never understood why people were screaming for big boss encounters in GW. The interesting part in GW's PvE combat was that it was actually team vs team. I guess it's just because people think "big must be cool" but don't think about the deeper meaning of it. Now they got big and realise that it is just that: big.

#2346754 [Living Story SPOILER] I might have found the pax announcement.

Posted Trei on 17 January 2015 - 02:18 PM

View PostShayne Hawke, on 15 January 2015 - 07:22 AM, said:

Do you even know of any game that has the kind of dynamic scripting you are talking about, or at least works in such a way that you could reasonably assume it was programmed dynamically?

Procedural generation is not new either.

Even just simply dynamically changing the route from which certain bandits attack and what they attack out of a few dozens permutations would have made a huge difference.