Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

Bryant Again

Member Since 20 Aug 2009
Online Last Active Today, 09:50 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

17 July 2014 - 07:18 PM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 16 July 2014 - 06:17 PM, said:

Fluff in the sense that it's of no consequence. Killing Tequatl and Wurm aren't reliant on ascended gear. Being successful in WvW is not reliant on ascended gear. Completing any dungeon in the game is not reliant on ascended gear. There's only one area of one section of the game where ascended gear matters, and that's in fractals.

Yeup, I understood what you meant. What I meant was how powerful, how "good" would a new set of gear have to be to make it of consequence, when it's no longer 'fluff'? What if Ascended 2.0 was released and it was 3% stronger than the previous? Well, how about 30% stronger than exotic? What about 60%?

That line right there - the point where it's "too good" - is really murky, and it's a line I fully expect ANet to pursue at a point in the future. That's my main concern with introducing more vertical progression to the game.

View PostPhineas Poe, on 16 July 2014 - 06:17 PM, said:

If you still don't believe me that crafting ascended gear and legendaries doesn't drive player participation, reflect on the the fact that content that isn't profitable isn't popular. Look no further than dynamic events.

I wouldn't even need to do that. Look at the free content we've received for almost two years and the gemstore, put two and two together and it's fairly obvious that GW2's reward-driven focus is doing very well for them. But, I'm not sure which is driving more player interest: The 'content' or its rewards, and I doubt the game would be at the same place if it focused solely on one or the other.

Personally, I'd like to hope most people are more interested in the gameplay that arrives with this free content. Then again I'm not a terribly extrinsically reward driven player. Maybe that's why I find that the game has incredibly little replayability.

In Topic: GW2 has a content, not a feature problem.

16 July 2014 - 05:41 PM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 16 July 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

Without fractal weapons and ascended gear being introduced as an alternate form of progression, this game would have died. Players would have reached level 80, played for a week and gotten their exotic gear, and then quit afterward. And a lot of people did this before the fractal/ascended patch. By the tens of thousands.

I'd certainly like to hope that the past two years of additional content have done more for player activity than furthering the vertical progression ever has.

Regardless, ascended is no longer a concern of mine, it's whether or not it remains the 'height' of vertical progression. How 'strong' does a new set of equipment have to be for it to not be considered "fluff"? It's a question I fully except the developers to pursue in the future, and honestly it makes a lot more sense to pursue it in GW2 - with it's open-world, open-party focus - than in other MMOs.

View PostEphraimGlass, on 16 July 2014 - 03:57 PM, said:

As I sometimes do, I'd like to interject the ultra-casual perspective.  You say 400g is nothing?  I'm not sure that I've made that much across all my characters, since Day 1.  I currently have about 110g banked.  I'm sure I've spent a decent amount getting six characters to level 80, outfitted in exotic gear, and all the crafting professions to 400+.  Probably not 300g, though.  I don't really have enough time to play to fit into many guilds.  With just my wife and me playing as a duo, making money isn't easy.  I can show up for world events but grinding dungeons with just two people is a nonstarter.

I'm going to have to second this. 400g seems way more than "nothing". The most expensive things I've been able to acquire is a set of cultural armor, the corrupted avenger, and Adventure Box mini pets. 400g seems like a massively daunting task especially when it warrants farming mostly two year old content.

In Topic: The Gates of Maguuma

27 June 2014 - 05:37 AM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 26 June 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

I have to wonder if the engine will be able to handle such locations; it looks stunning, but as soon as one doesn't have massive, open fields the camera in both GW1 and GW2 has consistently gone berserk. Walls need to become see-through, or they simply need to stop making content that takes place in corridors.

Camera issues are going to be one issue, but you know what I'm more concerned about? Mixing that with a horde of players, which is always going to be an inevitability, megaserver or no. Sadly that kind of pigeonholes them into not putting much emphasis on content like that.

This is why I'm -really- hoping this incoming price-tagged content can make up for that.

PS: First-person camera, please.

In Topic: Will we see more Zerk conent in the future?

22 June 2014 - 10:48 PM

I don't have much of an issue with it. The concept of "zerking" doesn't offend me, as the "glassiest", or riskiest approach should be the most rewarding. Is it not "glassy" enough? Is most of the combat lacking a large amount of "risk"? Maybe yay, maybe nay, but I don't have any issue with it.

I also don't have much issue with the "all damage go" approach, it ties into how GW2 eliminates the need for specific classes or roles. I'd rather they just make that more challenging and interesting. It's just very jarring go into GW2 expecting it to contain anything from its predecessor.

When it comes to damage in PvE, I'm much more concerned about the way conditions play. Amongst all the other features in PvE, the way conditions work stick out like the sorest of thumbs.

In Topic: Unlocking traits.

18 June 2014 - 07:33 AM

View PostI post stuff, on 17 June 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

BA our conversation won't go anywhere as long as you carry on replying to bits of my posts taken out of context. This seems to be a common practice on this forum and it's why most discussions end up spinning out of control.

Look, this:


Isn't the same as this:


And sure as hell not the same as this:


Because the third quote is not what I wrote, it does not reflect the full point I was trying to get across and it doesn't reflect my view fully. When making a reply, to me at least, fit the reply to the quote, not the other way round.

I could go back and edit it to include the rest of your post in your quote, but otherwise my post would remain pretty much the same. What I said was in reply to everything you said; I just chose to include that portion of your post for formatting reasons. It's really no different than me saying "@I Post Stuff", I just think including an actual 'quote' looks nicer.

I'm not ignoring the rest of what you say, nor am I attempting to misrepresent you. It's impossible to do so since anyone who actually cares about what's being discussed will read the conversation, not just the quotes.

View PostI post stuff, on 17 June 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

Now, about the pav. Anet isn't organizing these runs, the community is. As such the community makes the rules for those runs. Without rules, they simply won't work. You won't get banned from the game if you violate them, but you may get banned from entire guilds, taxis or community TS. Like I said these events aren't easy to organize, and people that can do it out of kindness and willingness to do something nice as a community rather than a guild. Say what you want, but people that bring upscaled can really harm certain runs, and in turn all of the community. Mind you because of this some people stopped making community anything, doing it only with their large guilds as it's a more controlled environment.

I don't disagree with any of this. I'm saying that if there is a certain area of the game that's causing social distress, ANet is completely in their power to help remedy or fix it. That's exactly what they did with the Queensdale farm, and it's what their doing in allowing only 80's in the new content.

View PostI post stuff, on 17 June 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

My theory is that they tried to reduce the amount of "dead" events and increase the population on some maps. Because that was the name of the game for that update it seems, since it also saw the introduction of megaserver system. Plus they may have wanted to re-create the elite skill capping mechanic of GW1, in a way trait unlocks are similar to it. Honestly we will never know unless some anet employee sheds some light on it. Cash shop wise it doesn't give them any benefit, none I can actually see anyways.

As for the costs I think they wanted to introduce a gold sink to the game apart from the gem exchange. I don't understand why they attached a skill point cost to it too, I suspect it may have been an attempt to introduce a skill point sink because they thought there weren't enough of those. Beats me. Maybe too many people with "great ideas", too few that could say "that's enough". They seem to be a very ambitious bunch of people, but very unfocused and with an uncanny ability to bite more than they can chew.

Pretty much agree with all this.