Jump to content

  • Curse Sites


Member Since 21 Sep 2010
Offline Last Active Dec 27 2013 02:12 AM

#2272040 ArenaNet's Official Oath Compilation Video

Posted El Duderino on 16 December 2013 - 11:32 PM

This is my favorite comment so far:


Wait did they actually say that they are against poorly designed, grindy, and extortionist games in this video with a straight face? Five minutes looking at the lack of a UI will tell you how far behind those sub fee and even many free 2 play games this title is, likewise the sheer amount of grind it will take any new player to grind out the newly added ascended gear tier (something they promised not to do btw), And the extortionistic system they use in their process of adding expensive items to the store which all are overpriced and usually use the same templates as in game armors. This is a mockery of the truth about this game, and anyone who believes this hype is deserving of losing their money to these jokers who aren't serious about managing their title with honesty or integrity.

Sot sure about that whole UI part, but the rest is spot on.

#2270393 Good job on the new healing skills /sarcasm

Posted Arkham Creed on 11 December 2013 - 08:27 PM

So I fully support adding more skills to the game, and even support Arena Net’s reasons for starting with healing skills. However I have a problem with their current implementation. Two problems, actually.

1; Why in the ‘effing eff can’t I slot the skills in the Heart of the Mists and test them out like EVERY OTHER SKILL AND TRAIT IN THE GAME? I’m not going to invest that many skill points into a new skill just to see if I might like it and might be able to work it into a build.

2; Why does this thing cost 25 skill points? Are you honestly trying to tell me that Water Spirit is as valuable as a tier two elite skill? I get that the point cost is no big deal for some people, that is exactly the kind of narrow-minded thinking that I am against. It seems to me that this skill’s point cost is just a way to help all the level 80s out there dump some of their hundreds of unused skill points. Nicely done. Unfortunately that makes these skills just one big middle finger to new players, players who took a break and are coming back, and players trying to raise alts. Good job Arena Net. What, are you under the impressing that you just don’t have any new/returning players to worry about?

#2262065 Why GW2 needs an Expansion

Posted Feathermoore on 21 November 2013 - 01:37 PM

View PostLordkrall, on 21 November 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

But would an expansion actually change that?
Wouldn't we most likely have gotten exactly the same content, but bunched up in a big pack rather then spread out?

Well I personally don't do most of the personal stories. Why? If I am playing a story I prefer to play through it over a long period of time but going through the entire story in one go. The living story stutters the story and makes it annoying for me to play and detracts from my experience. Since the gameplay isn't spectacular in of itself and the story is not being given in a player friendly manner (to me), I just don't play it at all. An expansion would allow me to slowly work through the entire chain of events in my own time without having to get on when Anet wants or wait for the next installment.

It is the same reason I hardly ever watch TV shows as they air. I am always a season behind because I don't like waiting for next week's episode. It doesn't give me a good experience unless the show is truly riveting.

Big chunks of content is a better experience for me than these small limited time content patches.

#2269049 Why you Can't Ignore Ascended Gear

Posted El Duderino on 08 December 2013 - 02:21 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 08 December 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

None of that makes sense, so I agree, I think they just noticed that people suddenly wanted more of what was never supposed to be there at all, and then pushed out something that didn't fit in the original vision at all. Then again I think they have been doing that for a large part of the development of GW2, even before release.

I really think that the old founders either did a really bad job at hiring and promoting their philosophy for the design of GW1, or had a massive change of heart. Either way, when the devs were taking about how GW1 wasn't fun or was boring because level 20 was the level cap or that there was no room for gear progression, it makes me shake my head. I don't think I ever heard that when playing. From anyone. Ever. And I was in both the PvP scene and a giant PvE guild at times.

It really makes me think that the idea of this fake progression is so hard programmed into MMO developers' and players' heads that it would take a miracle to make an MMO without it.

#2222404 Election Standings - July 26 2013

Posted Sovi on 27 July 2013 - 02:09 PM

For Kiel, down with promoting the sale of keys and putting a thieving char into the Pirate councel!

We don't need another Garrosh!

#2222392 Election Standings - July 26 2013

Posted st0rmie on 27 July 2013 - 01:14 PM

View PostXRay, on 27 July 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure that a fictional character in an mmo is not the one to blame for coxboxes, but the anet staff. I could ofc be wrong.

A sale of discounted Black Lion Keys isn't fictional, though, it's a real thing that we will get if more people vote for Gnashblade.

And imho that would send a strong message to ArenaNet that the playerbase like the gambling boxes. I hope that's not actually true.

#2218197 Update Notes for July 9th

Posted jayson on 09 July 2013 - 07:59 PM

In GW I have all the costumes and I paid one price for guaranteed use on any character at anytime (minus pvp) as many times as I choose to create them. The same goes for bonus weapons. Going from that to what you have in GW2 is horrible.

#2218066 Update Notes for July 9th

Posted Illein on 09 July 2013 - 03:47 PM

I hope the fact that they now offer this "If you have a ton of bad luck, you will get it eventually though"-aspect means that less and less people are falling for that particular scam and soon they will just offer cosmetical items at reasonable prices, drifting away from the shady predatory gambling practices we've seen from Nexus' teacher's pet.

#2209536 Do you still play GW2, and why?

Posted Arshay Duskbrow on 06 June 2013 - 03:52 AM

Very little. Every day it's like a debate with myself, asking myself what reason I might have to log in. Sometimes I get a "high tide" of motivation where I'll log in and do a few things, but I inevitably get tired of endlessly spamming the same ten weapon skills (and it has to be those ten, as the other weapons are even worse/more boring).

There are no armor skins I want, no weapon skins I could ever actually get with a reasonable amount of effort, and the content-based goals are just a chore. I haven't finished the personal story and have no desire to, I can't finish mapping Straits of Devastation because there is never, ever, ever anyone there to help take the Balthazar temple. Even if I could, it wouldn't matter because I hate WvW so much I'd never complete the mapping there anyway.

I'm tired of taking 10 minutes to kill a ridiculous damage-sponge world boss only to be "rewarded" by an endless stream of worthless blues and greens. All guilds are filled with foul-mouthed teenage brats who expect me to get on voicechat and listen to their harangue even while doing content that in no way requires close coordination (almost all PvE, in other words). I've done all the dungeoning I care to, was dissuaded from ever even trying fractals due to the elitism and gearcheck...I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea.

I don't usually permit myself the luxury of such unfocused whining (as opposed to more specific point-by-point whining, which I do a lot of), but you asked, so.

#2203066 Consortium is Nexon/NCSoft?

Posted ben911993 on 17 May 2013 - 05:27 PM

View PostKymeric, on 17 May 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

In the list of hidden message conspiracies, don't forget the theory that Fractals of the Mists was named so that any player who has any experience with MMORPGs sees it abbreviated and reads "Flavor of the Month".

This as well. Can't believe I forgot to mention that, as it was the biggest thing that stood out to me with the Lost Shores/FotM update. It's really disappointing after GW1, one of my most beloved games that I poured some 3.5k hours into, to see GW2 be such a starkly different game in monetization design.

I actually bought all the upgrades and costumes I could in GW1 because I absolutely loved their model of being completely honest about what's being sold in the cash shop. Just pay a few bucks for a costume, and all of your characters can have it. Not pay a few bucks to get a key to open a chest that'll have a slim chance of giving you what you're looking for, but will instead probably have jack in it. But hey! Your luck might be better next time! Only one way to find out!

For those of you interested, there's a thread about the BL chests, gambling, and rng here: http://www.guildwars...tery-rng-boxes/

#2202852 Welcome to Paradise

Posted Arewn on 17 May 2013 - 03:54 AM

Nice little bit of story, but perhaps nicer had it actually been in game.
Bits of story implementation of this sort would be awkward to add in game to say the least under their current system, but if they added some small quest system for this kind of thing I think it would do wonders for the game. I'm all for dynamic events, but there are some small little tid bits that can only be delivered in game through a quest or similar system.
A dynamic event wouldn't work since the two NPCs would end up having their "first meeting" over and over again, or having it missed by far to many people by making it one time event, and it's not something that's worth ripping someone out of the world and into an instance for a personal story step either (though I suppose that would be one way to do it). A quest with some light phasing would work well here to deliver story.
All that being said, I very much prefer story being delivered in "book" format (not sure what to call it, but basically the way it's written on the blog), I find it to be far superior to what they could do with it in game, I just feel that as a game the story should actually be contained within it.

#2203029 Consortium is Nexon/NCSoft?

Posted Loperdos on 17 May 2013 - 03:28 PM

View PostEl Duderino, on 17 May 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

Wow. That is eye opening. And it was written in November 2012! Funny how nothing has changed and all the predictions have come true!

That was certainly an interesting read....summary: Nexon = Asian EA. Lets all pray to God, or Cthulu or the great purple unicorn in the sky, or whatever you believe in that Valve stands up to Nexon and tells them to gtfo.

Off-topic: @ElDuderino - I like the avatar change, looks pretty cool!

#2202665 On Lottery (RNG) Boxes

Posted Draino on 16 May 2013 - 08:10 PM

People are free to make choices. In lots of ways, vendors are free to supply the goods chosen. So far as I know, no laws are being broken here.

But there's a catch...a person looks at the populace surrounding them, and identifies a pathological tendency or need. The person identifies that supplying that need will generate a good return, and so goes into business selling the desired good or service. The person identifies that the damage is directly done by the user, to the user, and thus refuses ethical responsibility. I'm certain you can think of tag names for this type of business enterprise; some are illegal, some legal, some straddle the line.

So, is the bookie responsible for the hungry children in Jed Gamblingaddict's house? Not directly. But the question still hangs: is it a good thing for the bookie be enabling Jed's problem, for profit?

If the bookie isn't breaking the law, fine, let's remain civil to him, but I will think less of him for exploiting a common weakness in his neighbor, when his intelligence and industry could be directed to earning profit in a way that is not exploitative or injurious. Pandering is not a social good, and it is not ethically blameless, even if it is legally so.

So the plethora of MMO companies doing this cash-for-a-chance biz are allowed to do it, I suppose; I just don't have to admire them for it, and it makes me more inclined to reduce or remove any trade I give them.

It's funny: I never thought I'd miss the subscription model.

#2202377 On Lottery (RNG) Boxes

Posted El Duderino on 15 May 2013 - 10:41 PM

View Postdannywolt, on 15 May 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

I agree that the GW1 model was great, but I'm not entirely convinced that a game developer with 300+ employees can continue (or be permitted by NCsoft) to provide monthly free content without a constant source of revenue. Regardless of what the ideal situation would be, NCsoft wants a profit from GW2 so relying solely on box sales is not an option.

But, there are plenty of profits to be made without RNG style lockboxes. The whole cash shop is still there to be used. I don't see how it is either have the RNG boxes or don't have any profits. Surely, that is not what you are saying.

#2202319 On Lottery (RNG) Boxes

Posted MazingerZ on 15 May 2013 - 07:32 PM

Posted to GW2 Forums, I don't expect it to last.  Please comment there as well.

TLDR: Points are boiled down here, but I encourage you to ready the body.

The Right to Make Money

No one is arguing against any individual or company’s right to make money.  What is generally a point of contention is how that money is made.  If oil was a clean, safe resource to produce, with absolutely no environmental impacts and operated in more of an open market than say, OPEC, there would be very few people who could complain about how they do business.  If the market crash had not occurred due to irresponsible lending and selling of securities, no one would have an issue with how much money the banking industry makes.

What this piece attempts to do is describe how poorly these practices are for consumers (ie: you) not just in terms of yourself, but for the game as a whole, and your fellow players.

More Money than a Flat Rate?

The product could in theory be sold on the  Cash Shop for a flat rate, especially if they are already being offered for a limited time.  The question becomes, why not?

There are various reasons.  The return on investment (ROI) of the lottery boxes is higher than that of a flat rate.  The cost of a flat rate in order to equal the return that the lottery boxes provide, a flat rate would appear to be too expensive, with too large of a price tag to pay in one expense.  This goes towards the wedge of individual experience, further below.

If it were a flat rate, you could determine whether you liked the product enough for it to be worth the flat rate quoted.  Or you could consider the product to be worth no money at all, at which point the company has lost your sale and has to make up the difference from a user who wants the product.

The drop rates are unknown until someone bothers to invest and do the research, either by grinding a lot of boxes or buying them outright, the latter of which is a net-positive for the company.  And by the time the results are recorded and posted, the company has already seen sales from consumers assuming that the drop rate cannot be that bad.

The Wedges of "Individual Experience" and "Personal Responsibility"

Divisiveness is the greatest weapon of any entity against a collective to shield from its greatest weakness. You want the populace to be split on issues because if a high percentage of the body every aligns itself against you, you will feel its effects.

The randomness of these boxes creates a variable experience.  However unlikely it is, it is possible for a lucky person to get the products he needs by opening a mere ten boxes.  Suddenly, his experience is “this is the best thing EVER.”  For another individual, they could open box upon box upon box and spend a large amount of money without getting a single claim ticket.

Since experiences vary, its harder to reach a consensus on drop rates.  There will be people satisfied with their experience and others who feel as if its unfair.  Some will be accused of merely being “unlucky.”  Some will engage ad hominem, attacking other consumers for buying so many boxes irresponsibly, despite that being the intent of the company.  Strife ensues and its much harder to direct blame against one specific entity as the customers squabble amongst one another.

It is therefore much harder to get consensus on implementation than if the product had a flat rate.

They benefit from these wedges to keep their customer-base from coming to a consensus on anything, even as far as debate the value of the implementation instead of the value of the product being offered for the price.

Instilling Urgency Artificially: Limited-Time Offers

If you could just grind these out through normal activity (gameplay), there are always going to be those who stick with the grind over the shortcut of buying the product outright.  So to convert even a tiny percentage of those people (a net positive for the company), the company has a limited time offer on the product.  That is greed.  The limited time offer on the product is nothing more than a trick, to artificially give a sense of urgency.

In games like Tribes: Ascend everyone can get access to everything.  If just takes time.  You can choose to grind it out or you can buy it outright.  There is no limited time offer.  There are sales to incentivize a period where you would like to see more income, but a gun in Tribes: Ascend is never going to disappear because you did not buy it this month. It is a psychological trick meant to make you spend more money, and is an anti-consumer practice.

This operates much like the Disney Vault, in which Disney only releases a movie for a limited time every seven years or so on home media.  This increases the scarcity of the movie and instills urgency to purchase the movie when it eventually becomes available.

Worse than Gambling

Gambling can be viewed as an experience. You play the game and the money is the barrier for playing the game, with more money as a reward for winning.  One usually goes in knowing that you will likely lose money, but there's also a chance you could come out of ahead.  It can get impersonal, such as with video poker machines or slot machines, but generally, it's an experience at playing a game of chance.

Common wisdom is that the results are stacked in the house's favor, and there is generally a poor outlook on people who think they can regularly come out ahead by playing, or in other words, playing to win.

Or going to a Dave & Buster’s (or Chuck E. Cheese’s).  Sure, you may be attempting to win tickets for a particular prize, but you are usually paying as much for the experience of playing the games themselves.  You get the experience.  It is a poor value and poor sense to play at these places just to win tickets and win prizes, especially without a particularly good run of luck, you would end up buying the prize outright than trying to win it with tickets.

But these lottery boxes are different.  You are not paying to gamble for the experience, generally.  There is actually no experience, or at least less of one.  The similarity is very much like buying a box of cereal you hate because it has an item you really want.  At that point, you are just ripping open the box, pouring out the cereal for the product and potentially getting nothing for your trouble.  Rinse and repeat ad nauseum until the limited time offer (artificially created sense of urgency) expires or you get the prize you want.

The Company’s Gamble

The company has its own gamble going.

It is relying on the obfuscated nature of its game of chance, with its accompanying ability to change the odds at their leisure, to keep its customer base arguing and speculating over the factual details as much as the subjective details.  If you knew all the details, it would be much easier to base an argument for (or against) purchasing the product outright and there would be less coloring and argument from individual experiences.

It is relying on the artificial sense of urgency to push people into buying the product without spending a lot of time thinking about it, as well as pushing those who attempted grind it out to ultimately buy into the lottery boxes from the Cash Shop at the eleventh hour.

It is relying on human nature.  There are people out there who are gullible, naive, have little foresight and in some cases, an addiction to gambling.  These people with a clinical lack of self-control who will hand over money to engage in this process in hopes of getting the rush of a win.

Defending the Indefensible

The fact of the matter is that there will always be people attempting to defend these practices.  Usually, the sum of the arguments is that the company has a right to make money.  But why?  Why are these practices worthy of money?  And why do these people, who can only benefit as a consumer if these practices were revised to be less abusive, defend them?  Why implement these practices over a flat rate, offered through the Cash Shop, unless this lottery box implementation makes more money.

I tend to look towards a rather quotable piece of TotalBiscuit:

What the hell happened to gamers looking out for each other?  When did that suddenly fall by the wayside in favor of being an unemployed PR representative for a company that has been milking you for money?  When did this happen? Was this with the advent of the Internet?  Is this a recent thing?  I can’t exactly pinpoint when it happened, but fanboy culture has gotten to the point of being actively detrimental to video games.  It benefits nobody whatsoever other than the companies in question.

It’s wonderful that they’ve got a small little army of people that are willing to actively suppress dissent.  Actively lie about the game.  Actively try to character assassinate people.  Engage in ad hominems.  Slam them over social networks.  Downvote videos.  Lie in the comments section.  It’s wonderful if they’re willing to do that, if you happen to be [the company] or any other company that has people like that.  It’s terrible for the rest of us.  It’s really really bad.

Gamers don’t look out for each other anymore.  And that’s really depressing.  The last thing that should be happening is gamers actively trying to mislead other gamers because they want to feel better about their purchase.  Or because they want more players in their game, even though the game is clearly not up to spec.  Where do you get off doing that?  That is morally bankrupt.  That is ethically unsound in the worst possible way.  It sucks, and you suck for doing it.

People who defend these practices want the games they play to succeed regardless of how the company in question behaves, because they have some investment.  They either want the game to have more players, be more successful so it will stick around for a long time, get more development, release expansions, etc, etc.

TLDR: Ultimately, it boils down to the idea that the lottery boxes offer a better return on investment than just simply slapping a flat rate on the product.  It adds nothing to the product itself and is just a method for increasing profits, without doing anything.  It is a form of predation on consumers, it should not be tolerated, but there will always be people willing to defend a company’s decision either out of apathy, a belief it does not nor will ever affect them or some other selfish reason.

Edit: I lost a ton of formatting moving from Google Docs, and I'm adding it back in.