Jump to content

  • Curse Sites


Member Since 20 Aug 2009
Offline Last Active Nov 12 2014 09:21 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Where did Blizzard go wrong with D3 and what A.Net could learn from it.

12 November 2014 - 07:55 PM

GW2 seems to be aligning itself towards right path w/ Living story season 2 - part 2.

It's not wise to compare D3 and GW2.They are fundamentally different but, both the games are suffering from certain stale elements. The difference between Blizzard and ANET is that Blizzard identfied the crippling issue with their game (RMAH) and was not afraid to axe the entire thing. Heckthey went after the entire forest in order to cut down one tree. That said, GW2 does not suffer from crippling issues like RMAH. It suffers from the lack of creative direction that meets both revenue targets and player satisfaction.

In Topic: Logged on after 6+ months.. ran level 50 Fractals

03 November 2014 - 06:32 PM

View PostKatsumi Kei, on 03 November 2014 - 05:03 PM, said:

I ate an apple today. It was delicious.

Related Trivia: It was yellow.

Golden Delicious?

You already started a dialogue.. even if it may not be relevant dialogue. I must eat apples too.. one apple a day keeps the trolls away.

That said, sharing experiences on the forum is sometimes done to hear other's experiences... relevant ones, for that matter.

In Topic: Is GW2 dead now or is it just the forums?

15 October 2014 - 04:26 PM

If the content  developers offer you only the content that you had done 1000+ times so far, the game is probably dead to you. But, you have a lot of content to explore and things to do, the game is not dead to you.

In video games, death is perception, not a reality.

In Topic: Blizzard improving on ANET's Concepts

04 September 2014 - 07:43 PM

View Postdraxynnic, on 29 August 2014 - 01:27 AM, said:

Taking other people's ideas and improving on them has basically been Blizzard's modus operandi basically since the innovations in Warcraft 3 faced a less than universally enthusiastic response and they moved on to WoW. There was even a quote floating around a few years ago, although they might deny it now, along the lines of not being in the business of innovation but of refinement.

However, they are very good at refinement. Which is one reason why competing too directly with them never works - if your ideas are compatible with their own, they'll take them, refine them, and put them in their own game.

You hit the mark right there. Refinement.

One thing that I did not mention in the OP is that Blizzard took steps back when they realized their original business model simply did not work and alienated a huge section of the playerbase. They launched Auction House and then removed it. May be their approach was too drastic to completely eliminate trade from the game, but, from certain perspectives, it makes sense - What you find is yours and you can share it with others who took part in your adventure. It does put certain restrictions, but, overall, I like it from philosophical standpoint.

I wish ANET looked back at their mistakes/failed implementations and said, "Hey, we ♥♥♥♥ed up but, we will fix it." Hopefully, they will.

In Topic: Proposal to pause Living Story for more content patches

13 May 2014 - 08:17 PM

View PostMordakai, on 13 May 2014 - 11:35 AM, said:

I would rather have 6 months of minimal updates, and then get a full expansion.  I don't mind paying for it.

This trickle of temporary content called the Living Story is a failure IMO.

I do not believe I will buy a GW2:xpac if it were released with the base game as it stands today.

ANET can use the LS vehicle to progress the game by creating new permanent content every quarter or so. If I were them, I'd have used gemstore to sell content updates time to time like GW bonus mission pack. I'd open up an area in far shiverpeaks, add events and temporary dungeon access but, sell the permanent dungeon access for 400 gems instead of selling fluffy hats for the same price. I know there are people who like fluffy hats but, I'd rather pay for the content and not the fluff.