Jump to content

  • Curse Sites


Member Since 10 Sep 2012
Offline Last Active Sep 09 2013 05:30 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: minimum rank to join tpvp

26 August 2013 - 03:37 PM

Posted Image

Average player with high rank demanding minimum rank requirement, ridiculous.

In Topic: Anet on why there is vertical progression

17 December 2012 - 02:02 PM

How far should horizontal progression go then? I understand that people want horizontal progression because it doesn't take them any work to get results other than learning the basics and just a bit more. How much of horizontal progression is enough? GW1 had so much different skills added throughout it's lifetime that it became convoluted and some of the skills were useless and/or outdated. Besides of skill utility increase, what other horizontal progression could there be added? New kind of problems most likely, but how much of that can be kept up without rehashing old mechanics? One of the good points of horizontal progression would be that all new and old content would be relevant and coming in to do anything would require no prerequisites. I think a game going for pure horizontal progression would require some serious innovation and implementation that no one has even given thought about yet. It sounds great on paper and as an ideal, but getting it to work on an MMO that's supposed to draw millions of players in is not very likely.

In Topic: Anet on why there is vertical progression

17 December 2012 - 11:42 AM

View Postraspberry jam, on 17 December 2012 - 10:45 AM, said:

For example, Tetris is a game without any progression at all.

I think that is false but I see what you're pointing out. Since there are 'levels' in Tetris, there is progression and it's vertical, correct? How about horizontal progression on Tetris? You would get new blocks in each level that you haven't seen before.

Would GW2 benefit from increased tools (skills) for characters? I know it would be a pain in the ass to balance out in the long run, but do you think the added horizontality would outweight the cons?

In Topic: Anet on why there is vertical progression

17 December 2012 - 09:41 AM

View PostXPhiler, on 14 December 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

In fact I would like to post this question to everyone. Whats horizontal progression to you?

I'm not quite sure. Can we say that when I'm getting better at the game, that it's horizontal progression? Or does horizontal progression only entail the progression of my character and it's capabilities? Regardless of my capabilities in the gameplay itself?

In Topic: Anet on why there is vertical progression

07 December 2012 - 09:44 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 07 December 2012 - 04:36 PM, said:

Yes, it's valid. It's called a thought experiment. In fact, you can compare two fake events. Example: let's say you are near some train tracks (let's say two meters away). A train is passing by at high speed. That is one event. Another would be the same tracks, same train, now you stand on the tracks. It's obvious what would happen in each case, and what caused your demise in one of the cases. The train? Well, yes and no. In this example, the changed variable was your position, so you stepping onto the tracks was the cause. What XP (and maybe you) are saying is that it was maybe the train that killed you. Yeah, in this case, in a way it was, huh? But then again, the train was there in both cases, and in one of them you didn't die. Of course, standing on the tracks when the train isn't present is perfectly safe, but that is immaterial because it is not the two cases that we are considering.

Disclaimer: I do not advocate standing on train tracks. It's up to you though.

I cannot control for example the RNG, but that doesn't matter. If I had been wearing exotic armor, the RNG would still have spit out the same numbers at that moment - unless armor type is used as feedback to the RNG. I don't think it is.

I stand corrected then. I'm still a bit weary of a claim like this but since it's valid I have nothing to argue against it.