Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

El Duderino

Member Since 25 Jan 2013
Offline Last Active Today, 04:34 AM

#2344677 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted Haggus on Today, 01:00 AM

View PostEl Duderino, on 17 December 2014 - 11:26 PM, said:

Perhaps you should stop worrying and trying to change the way people feel and the merits of their feelings and argue the actual change. I understand that it is insignificant as far as players are concerned. However, as far as objectively grading its objectives and motives, it falls flat on its face. It is neither good game design - as it has nothing to do with game design - and it is a rather bad incentive to get people to play. I mean, that is exactly what it is - an incentive to get people to log in. As such, it doesn't really address any of the core reasons why someone may not be logging in.
This.  You could almost argue it's a way to generate more Raptr votes to make it look more successful.

As far as game issues, I think the Silverwastes is a better step in the right direction.  Interesting side stories, multi-layered exploration possibilities, cray-cray events on a continuous loop... If they expanded on the things they did there, fleshing out stories and putting in challenges that are more than whack-a-mole-while-surviving-condi-my-character-wishes-they-had, they would keep people for more than a log-in or three hours of living story.


#2344641 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted Konzacelt on Yesterday, 06:41 PM

View PostEl Duderino, on 16 December 2014 - 05:45 PM, said:

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 wouldn't say it's completely desperate, merely rather desperate. :P

As an amusing comparison, GW1 actually encouraged you not to play the game too much.  I still remember those "You have been playing for X hours, please take a break." reminders.  Not a chance in hell GW2 ANet would have the balls to implement that.  One can almost hear the pinkslip from NCSoft landing on that poor employee's desk in Bellevue.


#2344626 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted Kymeric on Yesterday, 04:11 PM

View PostKamatsu, on 17 December 2014 - 03:20 AM, said:

B. I'm personally sad to see the new daily system go back to the way the old daily system was - in that to actually achieve the daily & get your 10 AP... your forced to go all over the place, and can NOT finish it just by playing the game normally anymore.


Yet another indicator that there is a lack of good leadership at ArenaNet.  Since launch, they've revamped dailies a couple of times (including the first implementing of them), and they keep bouncing back and forth between a more transparent, immersive design and a heavy handed, checklist design.  IMO, the #1 problem with GW2 is the lack of a clear design vision against which they judge their "iterations" before implementing them.  Everything smacks of a reactive, rather than proactive development process.

Instead of leaders with a vision and direction for the game, they design around problems that pop up by throwing ideas at it in hopes that something will stick.  It should be "how could dailies fit into what we want this game to be?"  Instead it seems to be "login numbers are down, maybe we can patch that hole with a revamp of the dailies."

It's not that unusual for any of us to get stuck putting out fires instead of spending our time setting and working toward clear goals.  ArenaNet seemed, however, to be more vision-driven in the past, so it's hard to swallow that they've moved so far into reactionary development.


#2344611 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted raspberry jam on Yesterday, 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.


#2344578 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted Baron von Scrufflebutt on 16 December 2014 - 07:56 PM

View PostCaptain Bulldozer, on 16 December 2014 - 06:01 PM, said:

Well said.

For comparison purposes here, I'll walk in and add the following observation:

The original Guild Wars game did not add anything in the form of daily rewards until the daily Zaishen quests; something which happened more than 4 years AFTER GW1 launched, and more than 2 years after the last major purchasable content release.  Also, from my recollection, a significant portion of GW1's playerbase started playing the game (and contiuned to do so) somewhere around the 2 year in mark. Though I doubt it's anything new to say, how can anyone not acknowledge the difference in quality between those two games given these two striking difference?

Personally, I still consider ZQuests to be a pretty decent model of how to incorporate dailies. I always found them to be a way that promotes doing content, whereas GW2's dailies are about doing non-content, or filler. GW2's requirements such as  "salvage items", "apply conditions", "dodge", "craft items", "kill non hostile creatures", ...are nowhere near as intriguing as  "Do Vizunah". Even ZBounties were more intriguing because of the instanced nature of GW1: the boss was designed with a specific party(size) in mind, so the fight could push the player much more. In GW2, the fight in open-world basically need to be able to be played by 1 person or 30. It's simply impossible to design these encounters as tightly and precisely as you can an encounter where you know exactly how many people are going to go against it.

And it was that tight design that kept the content intriguing and allowed the dailies to be an extra incentive to do it, rather than the sole reason for doing it. In GW2, on the other hand, the reward is the sole reason to do something, because without it, you might as well not be doing it.


#2344566 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted Captain Bulldozer on 16 December 2014 - 06:01 PM

View PostEl Duderino, on 16 December 2014 - 05:45 PM, said:

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.


Well said.

For comparison purposes here, I'll walk in and add the following observation:

The original Guild Wars game did not add anything in the form of daily rewards until the daily Zaishen quests; something which happened more than 4 years AFTER GW1 launched, and more than 2 years after the last major purchasable content release.  Also, from my recollection, a significant portion of GW1's playerbase started playing the game (and contiuned to do so) somewhere around the 2 year in mark. Though I doubt it's anything new to say, how can anyone not acknowledge the difference in quality between those two games given these two striking difference?


#2344539 Introducing the New Daily Achievement System

Posted raspberry jam on 16 December 2014 - 01:56 PM

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

You are playing the game almost daily anyway. Now you get a small gift upon login in, like when you go to your favourite shopping mall or something and upon entering you get a little present. This is neither in conflict with your activities nor does it cheapen your actual accomplishments (the "final" reward chest is what... ascended mats, clovers or skill tomes? Please, my bank is fully of this stuff already).
The shopping malls I frequent almost never gives me presents for merely entering them. A simple video game is thus better than reality! This is an outrage! I will sue!

Quote

Getting upset over this is along the lines of shouting abuse at the employees offering you a cookie in front of the shopping mall instead of thanking them for the added value. This is not a B2C problem, but a lack of manners.
You know the "money-saving offers" that you get in your email? Well, not anymore since nowadays we have decent spam filters. But yeah, these people really do offer you very cheap viagra. Or, maybe they really do offer you a really cheap alternative to something that you actually wanted to buy anyway. And you still don't like spam. Why don't you like a good offer? You should be thanking them for the added value! Deactivate your spam filter right now, anything else is a lack of manners!

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


#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:


#2311792 Nexon CEO: " Going after whales is [...] misunderstanding of what [F2P]...

Posted raspberry jam on 27 March 2014 - 07:58 PM

View PostMordakai, on 27 March 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

Allowing people to speed up a process (for a fee) that naturally happens in game is fine.
I completely disagree, good sir.

Doing that builds in a profit motive to make the game frustratingly boring to play without paying.


#2344497 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted Cutthroat on 15 December 2014 - 05:06 PM

GW2 is like Finland - there are lots of introverts & melancholic people. I don't want to play a game which reminds me of real life. :P

But yeah.. I expect content for guilds; PvE & PvP instances for 10-20 people. Whatever. It's still a decent game for... chatting. Guild halls would be so great.. but I don't believe they can make GvG fun.

GW2 is dead to me till they release decent content for guilds.


#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


#2344485 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted raspberry jam on 15 December 2014 - 01:32 PM

View PostI post stuff, on 15 December 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

It did in context of the discussion I had with that other user. I think that both GW and GW2 were a success in terms of bringing something fresh to the genre, setting records and the critical acclaim they got for it.

GW is an odd blend of MOBA and sandbox RPG genres, while GW2 is basically Soviet Russia of MMORPG world. That's fine by me.

What I would like to discuss is why they failed to establish a genre with GW or at least cement themselves in a kind of niche like CCP did with EVE. I don't think the answer "They wanted WoW" cuts it.
Different agents make different decisions. GW did create a niche of the same sort as CCP. However certain design decisions (likely driven by business motive) made the original game untenable to continue to develop in the same manner. Also, in growing, ANet changed, its original creativity diluted. I'm not saying that GW2 isn't creative, but it is a creativity of design of stuff that is in the game, which is completely different from creativity of design of the game itself. Therefore, when they set out to create a GW2, they chose not to make a GW1 part 2 (since taking the original design and just avoiding the pitfalls with it would take not only creativity of game design but also understanding of said original design, neither of which existed within the studio at that point), but they chose to make a game that was - in their own words - "a real MMO".

Now what is "a real MMO"? Before you reply: the answer doesn't matter in the least, since design decisions are always driven by business decisions. If your business wants to make a four-wheel general-purpose vehicle for private consumers, your design is going to design a car because that's the sort of vehicle that fulfills the business goals. The only thing that is percieved as a "real" MMO (and is not on the lines of Runescape or Maple Story) and is also widely successful, is WoW. Now it doesn't strictly matter that WoW's game design is basically an online sandbox version of a JRPG, because it's good business and that's all that really matters.

But I agree: they didn't want WoW. But they made WoW anyway because they didn't have any choice: anything else would require both creativity (of game design) and freedom of business decision, and they didn't have either of those two.

Also, yes. They said that they wanted to make a better GW, without the flaws of the original design. But that's not true, is it? Because if that's what they wanted, they would have kept things that worked just fine, such as massive instancing and the (old) conditions system. But they changed those things, clearly indicating that they didn't want to build on the old genre. Instead, they wanted a brand new thing. Unfortunately, due to lack of creativity, that brand new thing turned out to be an old thing.

The Soviet Russia meme is quite well known, I don't know why you linked to it. I also don't know how you can be fine with GW2 being the Soviet Russia of the MMO world though. It's an awful situation.


#2344479 Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

Posted raspberry jam on 15 December 2014 - 11:24 AM

View PostI post stuff, on 14 December 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

A forum is not a young adult novel. I could give you everything on a silver platter, but that wouldn't solve the problem.

You say that Half Life sold 6.5 units in 2004 alone, but if you look at top 2004 best sellers list you will notice that Half Life would beat GTA:SA in sales if that was the case. Clearly there is something not quite right with your deduction.

Half Life sold 6.5 million copies in 4 years, having been ported to some consoles along the way, but its release was an important milestone for PC gaming as it brought us Steam.

Console games were more popular back in 2004 compared to PC games. You could say that PC gaming in general was niche, but to me it wouldn't sound right. In recent years PC gaming has surpassed console gaming in profits. So I'd rather say it was an emerging market or something along those lines.

Check this out, but you may need some form of referer control to get past the paywall.

At any rate, in my opinion, in order to understand why GW failed and WoW succeeded, we should look at it from planning and innovation standpoint.
GW is the 8th best selling PC game in history, it has outsold Diablo 2, where do you get that it "failed"? The only thing it "failed" at was establishing a genre, and that's only because if a company wanted to make an MMO-like game, they'd just copy WoW because it was bigger. Or do you mean GW2?


#2311498 The Trinity, Roles, GW2, and You

Posted Feathermoore on 27 March 2014 - 01:06 PM

View PostImprovavel, on 27 March 2014 - 08:16 AM, said:

But since I'm talking about holy trinity I'm not sure why you started interacting with me in the first place then.

And yet Jam's post that started this little conversation off was talking about roles in general, not the trinity, just as I am. In fact, the point was to show that the role definitions you had stated in your original post were too constrained. The conversation has always been about roles in general from the very beginning. Your very first post in the thread even recognizes this by differentiating between the two. Every single post of Jam's and mine has revolved around this point. You are stuck on an example. An example that does not encompass the entire argument at hand. Like I said, red herring (not necessarily intentional but a red herring none the less).


#2309188 The Trinity, Roles, GW2, and You

Posted Feathermoore on 21 March 2014 - 02:19 AM

View Postmaster21, on 21 March 2014 - 01:04 AM, said:

snip

I never said.... any of this. None of it has more than a slightly tangential relation to what I said.

View Postmaster21, on 21 March 2014 - 12:39 AM, said:


Also next question about your example is
Is it really that important which skill healer will use in that situtation? Game isn't balanced around min/maxing so you always have enough space for not that good decisions. So maybe this choice isn't that important? If target survived it's good.

Also why you always show dodging as some kind of easy, dull, stupid and lacking any though, skill etc action?
Why you think that choice between 3 or 4 healing spells is "more complicated, better" than using dodge at the right moment?

In GW1 the exact skill you used was immensely important. With spells having a single common resource, using the correct spell would mean the difference between a death now, a death later, or no death at all.

The resource management is the reason why the healing system mentioned has more depth. That and dodge is every prot skill rolled into one ultra skill with a resource that only it uses. It is undeniably simpler.