Jump to content

  • Curse Sites


Member Since 19 Jul 2012
Offline Last Active Private

#2328299 Would you pay?

Posted I'm Squirrel on 16 June 2014 - 03:50 PM

wouldnt pay for anything arenanet releases after what gw2 has become in the past 2 years

#2332154 Don't you dare, ANet! [slight patch spoiler]

Posted MCBiohazard on 15 July 2014 - 06:28 PM

View Postdakka dakka, on 15 July 2014 - 06:01 PM, said:

Well seeing as how Trehearne is the leader of the pact and they get attacked in this episode it makes sense that he would get involved. I don't see him having a huge part to play as he is vulnerable to this dragons corruption.

And personally I feel all the rage thrown at him is overblown and unfounded. Every GW game has a character like him. Rurik, Togo, Kormir, Ogden just to name a few of the mains.

Why the shock and anger over Anets well entrenched plot devices confuzzles me honestly. Did you REALLY expect to be "THE HERO"? we the players have NEVER been the hero in any GW game, the story has always been about someone else. That is how its always been and it works well for the lore writers.

Trahearne is more egregrious a writing mistake than any of the other examples you listed. He is the archetypal Gary Stu because he hijacks your story and also is never allowed to fail. The second part is important. Every one else got some humbling through their story, Rurik died and got turned into a revenant, Togo got murderated, Kormir got her eyes plucked out for her hubris and Ogden really isn't even in the same category, he's a side character and a source of dwarf flavored comic relief at times. Meanwhile, Trahearne gets a sword of destiny from his mom after some other guy lost it, he gets to lead the Pact without any major setbacks along the way, and he finishes his epic quest and leaves you to clean up the mess. Not cool.

#2326388 Introducing the Story Journal

Posted Senatic on 05 June 2014 - 02:19 PM

So a new player wants to start playing gw2 a few years from now. lets say 3 years from now after an expansion. After he's done with all the normal stuff in the core game/expansion content he wants to catch up on what happened in the living story up to that point. Now he has to buy what, lets say an average of maybe 15 epiosdes/year ? That's 60 episodes, at 200 gems each he's looking at 12,000 gems, the equivalent of 150$/110£.

Yeah sure anet, makes perfect sense. Season packs incoming?

I mean, this is just more greedy shit. Why have to pay for content that is free to those who play the game? Just to try to bully people to stay in the game? What happened to "We have no sub fee, it's okay if you wanna pause for a few months and then come back to see what's new!".

Looks like now it's becomming "We have no sub fee, so we're gonna nickel and dime you on everything we can!"

#2326385 Introducing the Story Journal

Posted Miragee on 05 June 2014 - 02:17 PM

First I thought "finally, good feature". Then I read the part with the gem purchases. So it's basically either loging in and playing in that time frame or you have to pay for the content. Seriously, anets marketing department should be hanged.

I thought about playing the LS2 when it's over so I have the whole without breaks. But now if I want to do that I need to pay or I play broken scraps like in LS1. Just stop this wanna-be free content and give us either a full fleshed out story add once through an paid expansion or the scrap-like content but for free and forever. But don't try to force players into login schedules. I'm seriously pissed about this.

#2317876 GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

Posted Konzacelt on 17 April 2014 - 09:56 PM

View PostMCBiohazard, on 17 April 2014 - 09:05 PM, said:

How would it not still be this theoretical slap to the face if they came out with a Canthan/Elonian expansion and it didn't live up to your expectations? Wouldn't it be an extra slap to the face since you would be hyped up enough about such to buy said expansion?
It still would be, but at least I'd know something about it beforehand from utube if I waited a week.


There is nothing but a price wall in difference between an expansion model and the current buy once free to play model. The content would be the same either way, whatever A-Net decides to release.
Doubt it.  How it is now they are forced to uberly promote gem-store stuff to stay viable.  I really don't see how you think that given the current content of GW2.


You're saying you would rather pay more money to be potentially disappointed than wait to see to it for free. That seems off to me.
I'm saying I'd rather pay money on a system that promotes solid, quality content rather than one that promotes trite, temporary content.

View PostFoxBat, on 17 April 2014 - 08:28 PM, said:

Half of them working on a long-term actual expansion, but some people have trouble believing that unannounced projects exist in the game industry.

If that's true, why not say so?  What do they have to lose?

#2318383 Unlocking traits.

Posted Improvavel on 19 April 2014 - 10:58 AM

Another amazing feedback from forums that couldn't keep their mouths shut about "how amazing it was to cap elite skills in GW1".

It wasn't amazing. It was incredible boring, dull and annoying. That is why skill tomes, elite or otherwise, were hot items in GW1.

#2315000 How Players are Permanently Changing Guild Wars 2's Living World

Posted swordmagic on 08 April 2014 - 02:13 PM

Well... if they are gonna continue with LS and NOT bring an expansion into GW2, i am most likely to quit the game in a month or so.
I want new area's to explore, new enemies, new sights.

Whatever is the plan with LS, it's not for me.
Its a little quick content - sometimes nice, most of the time annoying - which i really don't care about anymore.

Lately, i find myself logging in to the game, do some dailies, maybe a few world events and then ... i get bored.
Could be only me, but thats the way it is for me atm

#2290929 What's the thing with GW1?

Posted Desild on 05 February 2014 - 02:25 PM

View PostHaruka Zahm, on 05 February 2014 - 02:05 PM, said:

It's mostly due to rose-colored glasses.  These people are unhappy with their expectations of GW2 and revert back to the "golden years" of GW1.  It's impossible to please everyone, and those who are most upset happen to be the most vocal.

It most be due to jade-colored glasses that you must feel the need of diminishing those that truly enjoyed the original, were upset when they announced they were going to cease all development in favor of a sequel, got ensured that the sequel would be just as good, and got something else entirely.

This is not a matter of being pleased. We were robbed!

#2279699 ArenaNet to "address [...] the dominance of Berserker/DPS"

Posted Noob Alts Ringleader on 13 January 2014 - 04:04 AM

I have serious reservations about this.

In an ideal world, this is a fine step, if it's done by buffing other types of classes.

Knowing Anet, however... Anet is terrible at balancing anything. These are the people who seem to have serious issues letting rangers have decent condition cleansing and pets that work, engineers have working turrents, et cetera while seeing no problems with warriors have a variety of condition cleansing, easy access to high damage and tough defense, and incredible mobility. Oh, and Signet of Healing. WHAT they will do to berserkers scare me.

#2267162 Now, how do you feel about the Living Story? (11/13/13)

Posted Konzacelt on 03 December 2013 - 05:58 PM

I think the idea of the living story is completely at odds with a B2P model.  I mean...the whole point of B2P is that you don't have to keep playing everyday like a sub tries to force you to do.  This wouldn't be an issue if the LS element of GW2 was trivial or not very relevant.  But it just happens to be the main focus of the game now...and for the foreseeable future.  The fact that almost none of this content is permanent totally nullifies one of the prime benefits of the B2P model.

The LS/Gemstore duo is not really B2W because little of it is actually needed for gameplay purposes.  It's all aesthetic.  Yet the end-game content is almost entirely centered around aesthetics so what else can you do besides the LS skin grind?  TP speculate?  Outright buy it off the gemstore?  It's like they want the revenue of a F2P cash shop game...without calling it that.  They stop juuuuust short of it by the simple fact that it's almost all cosmetic.  But what else is there?

The LS is simply a means to an end for ANet.  The means to get revenue.  There's nothing inherently wrong with wanting to make a profit, it's a healthy thing actually.  But there is something wrong with going about it in a backhanded way.  If they want more money from us, give us a good friggin reason to.  This LS crap doesn't even come close.  And yes, it is crap...despite what ANet thinks passes for good story these days.

"Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining." quote from Josey Wales

#2244812 What Happened to the Direction of ANet?

Posted El Duderino on 15 October 2013 - 06:06 PM

View PostLordkrall, on 15 October 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

That would only matter if they were EXACTLY as skilled, had EXACTLY the same latency, used the EXACT same profession, weapons, skills and stat-combos.
A good player will defeat a decent player even if he have a few more stat-points.

As a developer yourself, do you compare balance based on two unequal opponents, or on two equal opponents? Just curious? Because, and I'm not a developer, but it seems that when two people play a game, one side shouldn't be at an initial disadvantage because one side just might happen to be better than the other.

Of course, there is also the flip side, what if the better player has the ascended gear? Do you like the fact that it would then be almost impossible for the underdog to win? Me, I'm an underdog kind of guy, so I like to make sure they get a fair chance.

My guess is that being fair and balanced isn't a design principle you hold dearly. Makes sense why you defend GW2 so much then.

#2243813 What Happened to the Direction of ANet?

Posted SZSSZS on 13 October 2013 - 08:11 AM

View Postdavadude, on 13 October 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

Although changed, look at the similarities in both games that are different from standard MMOs:
  • GW1 levels and GW2 levels features a close to linear progression (where x is last level, each next level is x * 1.2.  GW1 had this, and GW2 has it, too).
  • Both games have the usable and decent weapons unlocked by completing the campaign.
  • Both games have armor which is decent to the highest available by completing the story (karma earned completing PS is enough to get temple armor, money earned in GW1 campaign is enough for elite armor).
  • The best upcoming/available armor is earned through an extreme or high grind (GW1's obsidian armor, GW2's ascended armor).
  • Both games had in-game stores that provided statistical or luxury benefits (GW2s gem store v.s GW1s in-game store with PVP, PVE, skill, summon stone, and armor unlocks)
I feel the philosophy has not changed, only the way in which they implement it (GW2 is a bit more obvious in the implementation than GW1 was, see above), but both are still here.  If you find the implementation part to be a change in direction (which I could understand), then I guess I simply don't find it big enough to be worth worrying about.

You're right, there is a clear continuity in philosophy moving from GW1 to GW2, but I'd just like to point out a few key differences I feel were glossed over. These, I feel, go beyond mere implementation.

Linear progression is something both share. But the fact that GW2 inflated progression to 80 levels, where GW1 allowed you play much of the campaign at the maximum level of 20, was a significant departure in my opinion.

Completing a campaign in GW1 afforded a weapon of max stats, whereas the Pact Victory Token provides only rare weapons. However, this isn't such a big deal as Dungeons tokens readily provide exotic weapons.

Obsidian Armor was entirely cosmetic, and regardless of whether or not Ascended Armor provides a significant boost, it isn't in any way cosmetic. Comparing the two, I don't believe is really fair.

As for pvp titles, rather than comparing them to Ascended Armor, I'd look no further than our current spvp/WvW titles. Both in GW1 and GW2 the progression is pretty steep, and while it may not be the case for WvW, people do gate teams with phrases like:

"r40+ only"

Finally I'd like to add that as they are now, PvE titles in GW1 progress no further than rank 5. Any further rank is simply cosmetic, and r5 can easily be achieved by simply playing the campaign. This of course wasn't always the case, but if they recognized it as a mistake, and made the change, why does GW2 repeat similar mistakes?

People always say that comparing GW1 in it's 7th year isn't fair, as GW2 is still young. Regarding subjects of this nature, I tend to disagree. I feel Anet should have learned from their decisions in the original game.

#2264198 Why GW2 needs an Expansion

Posted raspberry jam on 26 November 2013 - 12:36 PM

View PostIllein, on 26 November 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:

Yet judging by what friends and guild mates told me about GW1 - it seems that ANet always had a knack for meaningless grinds over actual challenge? I don't know how much frustration actually funnels into their latest statements, but they pretty much agreed that both those games are basically purely meant to be one big achievement grind that you either like or you don't and move on.

Which is disappointing, because I genuinely love GW2's aesthetics and graphics and part of its gameplay, but the most important things for a MMO, it lacks. Which would be:

- A variety of builds
- Challenging content
- Team-orientated gameplay
- Long Term Goals that seem feasible (Maybe I am a hypocrit on that one, because I like LTGs but at the same time, WvW Rank 9999 holds absolutely no appeal to me, despite fitting the bill.)
- Rewards based on time AND skill invested - rather than time alone.

If they are going that direction, I could see myself playing more regularly again.
Actually, your list is exactly what GW1 was. Yes, at some points it had meaningless grinds, but the core of the game was all about build diversity, high challenge and team-oriented play. Long-term goals/rewards such as titles and FoW armor existed as well, and were "meaningless" only insofar as that they didn't give any advantages in play other than looking good (well, apart from the LB/EotN titles). Also, they were well constructed, because many of them gave freedom of how to achieve the goal (for example, you could get a FoW suit without setting foot in FoW except for buying it, if you so liked) without having to introduce so many in-game currencies that a separate feature had to be added just to keep track of the currencies!

About variety of builds: One "good" idea that ANet had when they hade GW2 was to limit the number of builds by reserving a healing and elite slot, and by gluing weapon skills to the weapon. In retrospect, they not only failed because it's still possible to make a bad build, they also limited build diversity and creativity compared to GW1. And I'm not talking about how it's impossible to make very stupid builds such as MS warrior, 4-element elementalists or minion master monks. I'm talking about how diversity of good builds is extremely limited in GW2.
My conclusion is that when it comes to build systems, you need to give people enough rope to hang themselves in order to let them run free.

Team-oriented gameplay: In GW1, you had to have people with you. Even if those people were AI-controlled bots (henchmen/heroes). Alone, you could usually do stuff only in certain circumstances with specialized builds. GW2 on the other hand is built around soloing, most of the content is soloable. Open-world content is supposed to scale up and down depending on how many people are present and that is supposed to make people play together, but in reality that just makes people solo together, so to speak. Since content scales up there is no real reason to work together. People play their own little game independent of people who might or might not be nearby.
My conclusion: if you make a soloable game... People are going to play solo.

Can this be handled by an expansion? Well, not without changing the core gameplay... So no. Therefore, I think it would be best for the existing game if there wasn't an expansion. (For me personally, it would be even better if they just released a true sequel to GW1 instead.)

#2264441 The Great MMO Migration -- 5000 Free Copies of GW2

Posted MazingerZ on 26 November 2013 - 07:06 PM

Relevant... the woman in the video is Meg Turney, an apparent Internet personality.

Google's first hits on her turned up two pictures in her underwear.

Glorious.  I'm sure she cost a pretty penny to employ in the video.

#2264420 The Great MMO Migration -- 5000 Free Copies of GW2

Posted Arkham Creed on 26 November 2013 - 06:58 PM

View PostLordkrall, on 26 November 2013 - 06:24 PM, said:

What are these MASSIVE bugs you talk about?

How about, just as an example, the engineer turret skill line having over twenty confirmed bugs that make turret based builds basically unplayable? Including but not limited to overcharging randomly not working and turrets refusing to attack world bosses.